Movie World War Z 2

Messages
135
Alien 3 was hell on earth and like it was pointed out before, the mere fact the film exist as it is (a great film in my opinion) is nothing short of a miracle. In 1992, it looked like nothing that was done before. From the opening with those disolve bridging Aliens to Fincher film, the ending, the cast, Goldenthal score, the only downside are the few CG shots of the xenomorphs. Otherwise it's a ballsy sequel made by someone who was adamant on doing things his way. I'll take Alien 3 over Prometheus any day of the week.
 
Messages
1,644
Eh, Alien 3 walks a line between ballsy and pointlessly dark, and it crosses over it in the first five minutes.
 
Messages
135
In the first five minutes, they strip Ellen away from everything she cares about. It's a risky move toward the audience who cared for Hicks and Newt but it's a demonstration for the audience that anything can happen. Heck, even Ripley might get killed...
 
Messages
1,065
Hicks and Newt dying means Weaver has to carry a movie surrounded by a bunch of overactors.
 
Messages
1,065
Bland characters. I wanted the planet to explode so none of them could be in a possible fourth movie.
 
Messages
274
Am I the only person who doesn't hate Alien 3? I think it's a visually interesting piece.
There are certain aspects of the film I like (e.g. the cinematography, the score, Clemens, the set design), but overall I can't get past all the bad story decisions they made. I think Roger Ebert was right when he called it the best looking bad movie he had seen in a while.

Judging from this article on the Strange Shapes website, the production was a disaster from the word go; the real miracle was that Fincher managed to make a semi-coherent film given all the problems he faced. According to the article, they couldn't even figure out what the alien was supposed to look like at the start of shooting!

https://alienseries.wordpress.com/2016/12/02/alien-3-i-was-there/
 
Messages
549
Although I don't "love it", I think Alien 3 gets a bad rap, but I think I know why.

Alien is a great, kinda intimate horror. The Aliens sequel is very different to the first one, being an action/thriller/horror (almost war movie). However, despite being different, there's almost a natural, organic progression between the two. It feels right to go from this smaller film to one with a larger scope, easing away from the horror and moving into military action. It just works.

However, moving from Aliens to Alien 3 doesn't feel organic at all. It's jarring and unnatural. It almost seems to exist in a separate reality to the first two. I think it's a perfectly fine film in it's own right, but it doesn't sit well within the franchise. And it's hard not to judge it as part of the franchise. As an audience, we don't just forget the first two exist. We know them well and there is an expectation of continuity (in terms of the feel and tone). When we don't get that, it's hard to for most people to like the movie.
 
Messages
549
Has anyone got a title page for Mortal Kombat by Oren Uziel, just to give me an idea of what is and is not going out watermark free?
 
Messages
549
I'm not sure I buy David Fincher coming on to work on a sequel to someone else's movie. He's too big for that.

Yes, he did the third alien movie, but that was his first feature. He's way too big for this now.
 
Messages
1,065
Are Fincher and Pitt still friendly? As for Fincher doing someone else's sequel: Fincher will do what he wants.
 
Top