Alien³

I'm putting this film a little below Scott's original opus. Fincher's a talent, there's no denying that. Unfortunately, the third installment of the series was reportedly treated by the studio as unwanted, so it was a problem to fit it into the budget at all (which is visible in places). Yet, after Cameron's spectacularly militant shootout, this psychological play is literally a revelation in a completely repulsive space crime environment for the worst offenders. The creeping terror is trickier than ever, guns are scarce, and Ripley has to fight on two fronts -- a hungry intruder and creepy "roommates". Maybe the third film is something else entirely than what was expected, but in hindsight, I like it more than Cameron's contribution to the Alien family. (01/27/2004)

The Alien franchise is remarkable for the fact that every director has made his mark on his episode. Scott's imagination and Cameron's belligerence have been replaced by the heavy blanket of depression master David Fincher. Welcome to the bleak world of ex-convicts from which there is no escape. The third episode is not worse than the previous two, it’s just different. (04/12/2003)

A hesitant chapter of the Alien mythology that significantly undermines the efforts of the producers. In their edit, the film is a play on effects that throws Ripley in the path of a bunch of tough guys (as in Aliens) in a depressingly themed environment (as in Alien). Though David Fincher didn't supervise the special edition, a surprisingly more sophisticated version was created according to his original notes, with more references in the dialogue to the previous installments, explorations of the gloomy planet... and the alien does not hatch from a dog. Nevertheless, I don't particularly like the third image in the Alien mosaic. The strange supporting characters, an unnecessary religious subtext, and downright bad special effects cannot be overshadowed even by the powerful ending. (04/21/2005)

Fincher's feature debut was clearly plagued by the studio's pansy wallet and promotion, which is quite visible even years after the film managed to reclaim its well-deserved reputation. Regardless, this goes hand in hand with the trend for each director to approach it radically differently, which is also done here to great effect. The atmosphere of a penal colony, where nothing works, is definitely something to behold, especially when you look at the local population, who have clearly done a number of unpleasant things in their lives. As an added bonus, there’s also decent Goldenthal music, great camera tricks with the FPS look, and a cut-out Ellen Ripley. 4 ½. (The rest I leave to the possibilities of the expanded edition.) (05/28/2009)

As an audio-visually powerful, toned-down, existential drama about seeking forgiveness and God in a God-forsaken place, this movie is excellent, but half way through it’s like out of nowhere Fincher remembers (or more likely the producers forced him to remember) that he is filming the new Alien and not a sci-fi adaptation of something by Dostoyevsky. So, all of a sudden he forgets about everything that came before and then launches into an absolutely regular, uninventive kill-fest that loses all of the atmosphere built up in the first half. And this goes for both the regular version and the director’s cut, which is the better of the two, but just a better version of the same and not “something completely different" as many reviewers suggest. (01/13/2010)