Retrospective - Alien 3

ALIEN 3

The original title of this article was 'Most Hated Sequel' - a status that Alien 3 has held onto since the first time I saw it. I remember my unpleasant reaction to the film clearly, and my subsequent decision to forget I'd ever seen it. But many years have passed, and having purchased the Alien Anthology on Bluray, I decided to revisit the Special Edition (Assembly Cut) of Alien 3 and see if time has altered my opinion of the film.

What The Film Got Right
David Fincher's Alien 3 isn't universally hated. There are many who would defend it to the bitter end, and I will admit that it does have redeeming features - particularly in the Assembly Cut, which is far superior to the theatrical version of the film.
Visually the film is quite striking - possibly the best looking film in the series - and the music score by composer Elliot Goldenthal is highly under-appreciated, perhaps being the most genuinely moving and memorable element of the movie. The film itself can feel very emotionally inaccessible (or overwhelming for some), and Goldenthal's music is the element that elevates it to another level and emphasises those key emotional beats. In fact, it fits the film like a glove, and while I can't motivate myself to sit through the gruelling experience of Alien 3 on anything but the rarest of occasions, I listen to the music frequently. Odd.

Music by Elliot Goldenthal written for the film's finale

Another thing that Alien 3 at least attempted to get right was taking the franchise back to basics by including a lone alien antagonist. It's still a bit formulaic and not quite different enough from its predecessors, but at least it avoided pitting an army of aliens against an army of marines, which most assumed would be the inevitable amplification of the series after James Cameron's Aliens. Admittedly, an all out battle between aliens and marines sounds like a good idea until you realise the franchise would have been quickly watered down into an action cliche with monsters in it (I guess that sort of happened in 1997 anyway with Alien Resurrection). The Alien series isn't supposed to be about 'fighting aliens,' and Alien 3 did well to steer clear of depicting an all out alien war, which was most definitely considered as an option during the film's planning.
While taking the opposite approach, Alien 3 went too far in its exploration of the darker tones of the series, and the result is an unbearably dystopian sci-fi film that all but invalidates everything that happened in the previous movie. But more on that later.
There are also some interesting concepts in the film, such as Ripley being 'violated' and impregnated by the alien facehugger and then finding herself surrounded by rapists and murderers on Furia 161. These inmates have the opportunity to redeem themselves in her eyes and show their inner decency, and this concept is carried for a little while, but ultimately wasted.
Also nice is the use of religious iconography. The prisoners have accepted God in an attempt to put their shady pasts behind them. Ripley is the female temptation in their midst, and Dillon is their preacher. The alien represents evil in the shape of a demon, and they are lambs to the slaughter (the choir in Goldenthal's score sings 'Agnus Dei' which in latin means lamb of God). Inmate Golic even begins to worship the alien like some kind of religious figure, freeing it from containment in the Assembly Cut and asking what it wants of him. These are all interesting ideas.

This picture sums up Alien 3 nicely

The film is in some regards quite stylistically unique. From beginning to end, it's steeped in a feeling of sheer hopelessness (perhaps embodying the feelings of director and crew during the film's troubled production) that no other film has quite managed to capture, which is at once both an incredible achievement and its ultimate undoing. If you want to be utterly emotionally exhausted by a film, Alien 3 is a fine choice, but your average cinema-goer doesn't want that kind of experience, especially when the film is deciding the fate of characters they've already invested themselves in. The viewer is bombarded with one depressing revelation after another, and after a while it becomes a little too much. The only redemption to be had in Alien 3 is by the act of self sacrifice.


Where Did The Alien Come From?
The alien in this movie comes from a lazy place known as 'plot convenience.' In the opening sequence, we find an alien egg is stowed away in the interior of the Sulaco. 'What?' you say. 'But the only way that egg could have gotten there is if the Alien Queen left it during the final confrontation in Aliens. But according to that movie, the Queen herself doesn't lay the eggs, they come from a giant ovipositor that she nests with. She certainly wasn't carrying that in her pocket when she boarded the Sulaco.' Yes, this means there's no logical explanation for the egg at the beginning of Alien 3, right?

How did you get in here?

According to the two previous films in the Alien series, a facehugger lays one infant alien in its host, then falls off and dies.
As for the theatrical release of Alien 3, the facehugger attaches itself to Ripley and impregnates her with an infant Alien Queen, then goes on to lay another in the dog on planet Fiorina
In the far superior Assembly Cut, we are told that a 'Queen Facehugger' lays the embryo in Ripley and then in an Ox on 'Fury' 161, sort of justfying its questionable ability to infect more than one host. But if you look very closely in this version there are now two distinctly different facehuggers involved - a regular one on the Sulaco, and the Queen Facehugger in the scene with the Ox. Now how do you suppose two Alien eggs got aboard? This clearly demonstrates the lack of coherency at this point in the production - the explanation we are given conflicts directly with what we see onscreen. The flawed opening act opposes the established concepts of the series in favour of a forced and convenient way to propel the third film forward. Even if you accept the explanations given, it's still all very vague and...convenient.

The blame for these oversights can't be directed at anyone in particular. Almost every Alien 3 script penned by various writers between 1988 and 1992 forcefully introduces the concept of an egg hidden away on the Sulaco, and each and every one of those scripts fails to give a rational explanation for it being there. Fox's desperation to get a sequel produced is evident, even at the expense of basic continuity.



Killing Major Characters During The Opening Credits
Within the first ten minutes of Alien 3, Newt is dead. The little girl that Ripley risked everything to save in the previous movie is gone, and the entire third act of Aliens becomes redundant. The audience is alienated as major characters are eliminated from the story to conveniently turn the focus back to Ripley, whom the producers deem to be the indispensable element of the franchise. Later in the film, we even see Newt being dissected on an autopsy table, as if killing her wasn't enough to disgust fans. Even now, watching this and already knowing what happens, the opening scenes are still pretty harsh to watch if you're a fan of the first two entries in the series.

Newt's drowned body in the EEV, very briefly seen during the theatrical cut

Oh and Hicks, the marine who outlasted his entire platoon in Aliens? The only glimpse we get of him is of his mangled corpse in the escape craft wreckage. His head was pulverised by a falling 'safety beam.' I can just envision the conversation that took place now.

Producer: Hicks is not in the script. He died. At least that's one less actor's salary we have to pay.
Prop Artist: But surely he needs to be dead in the escape vehicle at the beginning, otherwise people will wonder where he went?
Producer: We'll smash his head off then, so we don't have to pay Michael Biehn for the use of his likeness.


The insulting thing is, Michael Biehn wasn't even invited to reprise his role. He was simply informed that he wasn't wanted for the sequel. This revelation was 'heartbreaking' to the actor as he'd just assumed that such well developed characters as Hicks and Newt would return.
'It's a slap in the face for fans and myself,' said James Cameron when he learned of the demise of the characters that he had lovingly written and directed for Aliens. Sci-fi novelist Alan Dean Foster - who also novelised Alien and Aliens - was so enraged by the deaths of these characters that he attempted to 'adjust' the course of events in the novelisation, but was subsequently forbidden from doing so by Fox.
At least Bishop (Lance Henriksen) got to make a cameo appearance, if that's any consolation?

Hey look Bishop made it...sort of

One might assume that it was Fincher or screenwriters David Giler and Walter Hill who were responsible for so insensitively killing off these major characters. But in fact New Zealand filmmaker Vincent Ward, who was director of Alien 3 for a length of time during the post-production stages, had written the first version of the story to outright kill Hicks and Newt. His story was to have taken place on a giant wooden planet inhabited by monks, and while this concept was abandoned, many elements from his story were adopted by the final draft of the screenplay, including the overall story structure and characterisation. The religious inclinations of Ward's monks would also be adopted by the inmates of 'Fury' 161.

"One of the first things I wanted to do was kill her off. She kind of annoyed me" - Vincent Ward speaking of Newt's character, 1990

By the time Giler and Hill took over screenwriting duties and merged the various screenplay ideas together, the core concept of the film was already way into post-production and their ability to mould the story to any great degree was limited. The fates of Hicks and Newt were sealed.

Hicks was quite a major character in the previous film. Honest.

Killing New Major Characters For No Reason
As if the 'slap in the face' of Hicks and Newt's death wasn't enough for you all, the film spends a good while introducing Charles Dance's new character Clemens. Don't worry, Clemens isn't a rapist or murderer like everyone else around these parts. He's just a disgraced doctor - absolutely nothing to worry about there. But despite everything, we start to take a liking to Clemens. He's compassionate about Ripley's predicament, and he's always around to hold her hand or keep a watchful eye over her. There is that awkward and utterly random sex scene between them in the theatrical cut, apparently included because one of the producers suggested it was about time Ripley had a man (idiots). But despite that, Clemens quickly becomes a real character among the mob of indiscernible angry bald men. We even think he may be able to redeem this film to some degree, as he's another potential companion for Ripley (as Hicks was) and he's displaying traits that suggest he's fundamentally good and...oh wait, he's just had his brain splattered up the curtain for no apparent reason whatsoever. Wow, this film is doing a fine job of winning me over.
The other character to get some real screen time is Dillon, played by Charles S. Dutton. He's a rapist apparently, but regardless of this he claims to have found God, and offers Ripley a degree of protection. In the final act, he gets killed too.
There's definitely a clearly defined message in Alien 3 - that being good, honest and just in this universe means certain gory death. The alien becomes a figurative representation of sin, and in facing up to your sins you're squaring yourself up against the alien, which never ends well. Not exactly uplifting material.

If people look this happy in Alien 3, someone is surely about to die

Giving Ripley's Character An Anticlimactic Resolution
Cue the most beautiful music in the Alien series, a vat of bubbling molten metal not unlike that from the conclusion of Terminator 2, and a heroine ready to sacrifice herself for the good of mankind. It's the recipe for the ultimate finale to a turbulent trilogy. So why do I not care?
Well first of all, Ripley's character already had resolution at the end of Aliens, and if I'm honest I really prefer that conclusion to the Alien saga. In that sense, Alien 3 felt like an unnecessary continuation of a story that was already told to its natural finish.
Still, Ripley's sendoff at the end of Alien 3 could have been spectacular, but it seems the writers decided to eliminate all emotional vices from the get-go. Think about it. Ripley is standing over a pot of molten metal. Newt is dead, Hicks is dead, Clemens is dead (perhaps not so important), Bishop is in parts somewhere, she's got nothing on Earth to go back to, the Weyland Yutani guys are there trying to get their grubby hands on the alien which, as it happens, is just about to pop out of her chest. Bishop 2 (or Charles Weyland if you prefer) is telling her she can 'still have a life,' yet as soon as she steps onto the gantry above the vat of metal, her decision is justified when he reveals his motivations are not for her safety. If you add that all up, I think anyone would jump to their death under those circumstances. There's little to no emotional conflict in the scene.
On speaking of his disappointment with the story, author Alan Dean Foster suggested they could have kept Newt alive for the duration of the film - perhaps in stasis or in a limited role - and used her to create conflict in that final scene as Ripley decides between death, and Newt, and ultimately decides to jump into the lead to ensure a safer future for the child. It's perhaps the bright spark of hope the film needed to justify all the pain the characters go through.

Despite the failings of Alien 3, Director David Fincher has more than proven himself in the years since with such films as Fight Club, Seven and Zodiac, and despite severe pressure from interfering studio execs during Alien 3's production, early hints of his distinctive style are evident in that film too. Whether his stylistic influence was responsible for the overwhelmingly depressing tone of Alien 3 is debatable (Fox execs seem to think his 'artsy' and non-commercially friendly approach ruined the movie), but in honesty the faults of the film lie with the writers. Vincent Ward decided to kill Hicks and Newt - a decision which was to divide the entire fanbase - and a variety of writers were responsible for the implausible opening with its magically appearing alien egg. Fincher's job was merely to come in and pick up the pieces, and make the best film he possibly could with an array of pre-conceived ingredients. It's fair to say that for his first directing job, Alien 3 must have been a bitter experience.
He's since distanced himself from the franchise entirely, stating his dislike of Alien 3 and refusing to partake in any of its subsequent digital re-releases. In addition to this, he's also refused to work on any sequels or sci-fi films in the intervening years - a sure sign of the impact such a troubled production has had on his views of film making.

Director Fincher on the set of Alien 3 at the age of 28

The popular opinion is that Fincher was chosen particularly because he was young and inexperienced at the time, and the producers wanted someone they could control. It backfired in their faces when he turned out to have his own strong vision for Alien 3, and their constant interference caused huge conflicts on the set. One famous quote jokingly suggests there were more producers on the set than actors.
The problem was, from the moment of its conception to the last day of production, each and every person involved had a different idea of what Alien 3 should be. Nobody could agree on a single concept, and no single person was allowed to pursue their creative vision. It's an assortment of ideas all merged together into one inconsistent final product, unlike Alien and Aliens, where the respective directors were allowed more creative freedom. Fincher never had that luxury.
Although responsibility ultimately lies with numerous conflicting parties, it's pretty evident that it was greed on the part of Fox that made this sequel what it is. The script was still in development when principal photography had begun, two directors were fired before Fincher himself was shoehorned into the role (who himself was fired as the film went into the edit room). A release date had even been announced before a final decision was made on a director or a story. The now famous teaser trailer, released far ahead of schedule to secure an audience and push the production forward, depicts a different scenario entirely, with the narrator stating 'on Earth, everyone can hear you scream.' Going into production, Alien 3 had no idea what it was or where it was going - its producers only knew that they wanted to make a large amount of money with the franchise name.

"As a studio we set out to make a release date, not a movie" - Jon Landau, Ex 20th Century Fox producer

Having watched the film again I can conclude that Alien 3 is still a terrible sequel. Not only did it fail to do justice to its predecessors, but it also did a narrative U-turn that directly opposed the expectations of 90% of its audiences. The elimination of some of my favourite characters is still unforgivable, and I can only wonder what this film could have been if creativity had been the focus rather than money. Watched as a continuation of James Cameron's Aliens, Alien 3 is hard to stomach as it shows blatant disregard for continuing characters and the established logic of the series. But watched individually and judged on its own merits, it's a well executed film that is intriguing, darkly atmospheric and beautifully shot. It presents some interesting ideas that simmer under an oppressively dark atmosphere, and it clearly wears the damaging marks of an overcomplicated and tense production schedule on its shoulders.
And therein lies the problem. Alien 3 is not actually a bad film, it's just an awful sequel - probably being the reason I'm still writing articles about it 19 years after its release. I can't write it off because there are elements of it that I thoroughly enjoy, and if the writers hadn't taken such liberties with characters and story, I might actually recommend it as an intriguing slice of dystopian sci-fi. The Assembly Cut (Special Edition on DVD or Bluray) is the version to watch, being as close to Fincher's envisioned final cut as we're likely to see. This version adds some enlightening scenes and removes some unnecessary ones, and is clearly a more engaging viewing experience.

Releasing trailers for a film that still doesn't have a script is always fun

Fact: David Twohy wrote an early draft of Alien 3 which featured the prison planet 'Fury' 161, but no sign of Ellen Ripley. It was the accepted screenplay for a length of time until Fox gradually moved to another director (Vincent Ward) and another concept. While Twohy's script was abandoned, elements of it were retained in the final screenplay, and the concept itself was later rewritten and made into sci-fi/alien/thriller Pitch Black featuring Riddick, a Furian criminal.

Fact: The original concept for Alien 4 was to claim that Alien 3 had been Ripley's bad dream during hyper sleep in an attempt to appease the fans.

Alan Wake's American Nightmare is a sequel

First off, let me just say the quantity of reviewers who've published articles on Alan Wake's American Nightmare and have no idea what they're talking about is astonishing. In almost every article I've read, American Nightmare is described as being a 'spin-off and not a direct continuation of the narrative in the original game.' Others have made direct complaints about 'wanting to see what happened to Alan Wake after the conclusion of the first game' and feeling disappointed that the new game was unrelated. For anyone who's actually paid attention, this is simply not true.

I'll attempt to explain this in spoiler-less fashion, as the story of the original Alan Wake is fantastic and I highly recommend playing it through if you haven't already, particularly if you're a fan of survival horror or the works of such writers as Stephen King. The narrative of the original game ends with a measure of resolution in that Alan has won the battle against the dark presence, but not without sacrifice. Two special DLC episodes, The Signal and The Writer, were released shortly after to directly continue this core storyline, with Alan trapped in the dark place (under the lake apparently) and the true influence of his writing skill allowing him to begin shaping the world around him. The conclusion of the second DLC is a tense cliffhanger. Alan finds his Doppelganger, Mr. Scratch, and begins writing a new story called 'The Return' on his typewriter in order to literally write himself out of the horrific scenario of Bright Falls. Most gamers assumed at this point that Remedy would release a third DLC called 'The Return' to wrap up the story entirely, and to show how Alan Wake would go on to escape from the dark place. The role of Mr. Scratch - the cynical and self destructive copy of the titular character - was at that point uncertain.

In Alan Wake's American Nightmare, Night Springs is the place in which Wake finds himself after writing his way out of Bright Falls. Evidence to support this theory? Read on.
Firstly, and most obviously, Mr. Scratch - Alan Wake's identical but evil twin, spawned at the conclusion of The Writer DLC - is the primary villain in American Nightmare, wreaking havoc everywhere he goes and leaving Wake cryptic messages via TVs throughout the game's 3 distinct areas. If you played The Writer DLC, then you'll remember that possessed television sets spouting insanity were the order of business, but this time Mr. Scratch has gained full control of his maniacal personality and the messages come through fast and clear. Direct story continuation? Check.
Also, at the very start of American Nightmare, as Alan regains consciousness following the opening live-action video cut scene, look to your right. You'll see the cabin from Cauldron Lake slowly slipping beneath the water as a last reminder of the reality that was Bright Falls. This is the stepping point between The Writer DLC and American Nightmare, as Wake writes himself into the new story we see a glimpse of what's left from his last manuscript.
Thirdly, if you simply play through, collect and actually read the manuscripts dotted about the 3 areas of the new game, then it's clearly explained on a number of occasions that Wake is still trying to reach Claire and events in Bright Falls are referenced many times - both written and in dialogue - as having previously occurred. I can't believe that, after all the reviews I've read, I seem to be the only one to have come to this conclusion.

Despite popular belief, American Nightmare is effectively Alan Wake 2, slimmed down for an Xbox Live Arcade release and written in such a way that newcomers won't feel lost without an existing knowledge of the franchise. But for those who are paying attention, details confirming its status as a sequel to the original game are clearly there. One possible reason that so many reviewers are describing the game so erroneously is that they simply haven't played The Signal and The Writer DLC. Without that additional content to bridge the gap between AW and American Nightmare, I can see why someone might come to such a misleading conclusion.

So to anyone reading this rather than any of the mainstream articles on high profile gaming sites, American Nightmare is definitely worth getting. It plays very similarly to the original title, and there are a number of subtle improvements here and there. A broader range of weapons creates a fast paced and action oriented atmosphere when compared to its predecessor, and the change of setting to Arizona is welcomed after many hours spent trawling through mountains and forests. There is more of an emphasis on free roaming in each of the three game areas, and an arcade survival mode with numerous maps makes for a welcome and enjoyable addition. Overall, it might feel slightly lightweight when compared to a full retail title, but it's probably the best game available on the Xbox Live Arcade at present.
But most importantly, American Nightmare continues where we left off in Alan Wake: The Writer, and such a finely written story deserves to be followed to its conclusion.