Alien³

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)

The first time in this cult franchise we have two key elements playing the main role. The first one is undoubtedly the Alien itself, and the second is the depressing and oppressive setting along with the morality and psychological profiles of the convicts – serial killers, violent criminals, pedophiles. David Fincher doesn't waste anything in his debut and his camera escapades (the Alien’s POV) are already a signature. Unfortunately, the monster is again only one and also annoyingly computer-generated when shown in full. Compared to the second installment, there is a slight downgrade, but the atmosphere is brilliantly depressing, and the play with lights is amazing. For example, the lighting of the background during the autopsy is worth mentioning. The emphasized faces alternating with short shots of the scalpel's sharp macro details are incredibly suggestive. Likewise, the prisoners have very well written characters, and the ending, as presented by Fincher, is not particularly surprising. Definitely a progressive and the most peculiar Alien. (11/01/2003)

After the phenomenal success of Cameron's Aliens, it was clear that we would be getting a third installment, and it was only a matter of time before it was made. However, as it sometimes happens, the third Alien sequel was a victim of confusion in the production studio, the story was passed from hand to hand, rejected scripts filled entire drawers, and many directors were approached. For the film to be made in the end, Sigourney Weaver had to step in as a co-producer, as the funds for running her theater activities were running out. But this only brought more people, who all had their say, so the film certainly didn't come easily. The choice of director eventually fell on David Fincher - not so much because he was considered a great talent, but rather because he was appropriately cheap as a starting director. Money was saved on the set design, and it can be seen in the film despite all of Fincher's efforts. Alien 3 is not a blockbuster where a huge budget is visible, but rather an intimate film that has to make up for what is missing in set design with cleverness. And surprisingly, it succeeds, because Fincher is truly skilled. He replaced bombastic special effects with clever editing and sophisticated camera shots. The film also certainly has atmosphere, but it is fundamentally different from what Cameron or Scott served their viewers. When Fincher lacks money, he uses a pessimistic gloom and play of shadows. It is not an action war drama like Cameron's films, but Fincher can perfectly evoke a gloomy mood, tension, and a horror premonition of impending doom. I hesitated between four and five stars, but the positive ultimately prevailed. The film is slightly weaker than the previous two, but the difference is minimal considering the circumstances under which the film was made. Its release in the United States was a big flop, fans couldn't get over the deaths of little Newt and Ripley at the end of the film, and they were expecting entertainment of a different kind after the previous action-packed chaos. The third installment of Alien is primarily a case of clever filmmaking, good performances, and a horror atmosphere of which even much more experienced directors would not be ashamed. Overall impression: 90%. (12/09/2007)

The subject is fine, Sigourney Weaver is great as always, the magic with the camera and its lenses in the tunnels of the prison labyrinth is perfect, and the film has Fincher’s typically bold and depressing creative signature. But that somehow doesn’t bring the film to the level of which Fincher is usually capable and which would have helped Alien3 to be as impressive as its predecessor. (05/27/2002)

The first one was (and still is) a formidable claustrophobic machine for mining nerve-wracking atmosphere and suspense; the second one is a militant feast in honour of the most terrifying monsters in modern cinematic history that doesn't let us get away from aliens in the right sense of the word. The third one wants to take something from each by using a single bloodthirsty monster and involving a group of seemingly twisted characters, setting the action in the vast, depressing labyrinth of a prison where life as a symbol no longer has any intrinsic value. The cast is once again perfect and the characters are quite diverse, and it’s not possible to guess who will end up as a bloody spot on the wall and with whom the script has longer-term plans. And as for Fincher's debut, it's a well-known fact that the studio tried to repeatedly rape and control his work, which is unfortunately noticeable: the depressive barrage is at times on a similar level to its predecessors, but partly due to the very choice and nature of the setting, where even a brain-dead would get depressed; and on the other hand, it has a rather fading tendency: the performance of the intruder, like in the first one, is based on suggestiveness, but fails to generate intense flamboyance during its advances (also due to his strange digital form), and mostly doesn't even act as a highlight of the film – that would be the skilful subjective camera work, the effective soundtrack and the already mentioned actors, led by the excellent Weaver, who is more dominant from part to part. It's worth watching, it doesn't offend or fail, but it still makes me sad to think that there could have been a pure Fincher version that would have shown his narrative genius and fulfilled the potential of a great subject into something grander and more distinctive. (03/22/2017)