Rendező:
David FincherOperatőr:
Alex ThomsonZeneszerző:
Elliot GoldenthalSzereplők:
Sigourney Weaver, Charles S. Dutton, Charles Dance, Paul McGann, Brian Glover, Ralph Brown, Danny Webb, Holt McCallany, Lance Henriksen (több)Streaming (4)
Tartalmak(1)
Bár Ellen Ripley sikeresen megmenekült, amikor űrhajója lezuhan a Fiorina 161 bolygón, a balesetet Newt és Bishop nem élik túl. A Fiorina 161-ről hamar kiderül, hogy a bolygó nem más, mint egy fegyenctelep, ahol a magukra hagyott rabokra van bízva, hogyan maradnak életben. Ripley-nek hamar rá kell jönnie arra, hogy bár társai meghaltak, nem ő maradt a hajó egyetlen utasa. Noha titokzatos útitársa gyilkos szándékkal érkezett, Ripley hamar rájön arra is, hogy nem a titokzatos idegen a legfélelmetesebb ellenfele. (SuperTV2)
(több)Recenziók (14)
The last 15 minutes was the first thing I saw of the Alien saga and now, after all those years the circle finally closes. Fincher’s (probably) depressed soul made its rather significant mark on this part and even though the story is a little slow in places, there is no shortage of nerve-wracking moments. P.S.: I have never had a bigger jump-scare moment than I did during the final credits.
()
A téma jó, Sigourney Weaver nagyszerű, mint mindig, a börtönlabirintus alagútjaiban tökéletes a varázslat a kamerával és annak lencséivel, és a filmből nem hiányzik a határozott, tipikusan Fincher-féle nyomasztó szerzői töltet sem. Csakhogy ez utóbbit mintha nem sikerült volna olyan szintre hozni, amire Fincher általában képes, ami hozzásegítette volna a filmet ahhoz, hogy olyan lenyűgöző legyen, mint elődei.
()
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 Scott's imagination and Cameron's belligerence have been replaced by the heavy blanket of depression master David Fincher.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.
()
Alien is a unique film saga where each entry is different and each is excellent. Fincher’s third part is no exception.
()
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.)
()
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.
()
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.
()
A hesitant chapter of 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 way of a bunch of tough guys (a la Aliens) in a depressingly themed environment (a la Alien). Although Fincher didn't direct the special edit, according to his original notes, a surprisingly more sophisticated version was created, with more references to older installments in the dialogues, exploring the gloomy planet... and the alien does not hatch from a dog. Nevertheless, I don't particularly like the third image of the Alien mosaic. Strange supporting characters, unnecessary religious subtext, and downright bad tricks cannot overshadow even the strong ending.
()
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%.
()
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.
()
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.
()
In Alien 3, it is immediately obvious that someone else is sitting on the director's chair. While Ridley Scott is narrative and James Cameron is sweeping and megalomaniacal, David Fincher likes to shoot mainly in exteriors and focuses a lot on characters. The design of the monster is also noticeably different and I have to say that they way it’s handled annoyed me quite a bit at times, as did the overuse of "ceiling" scenes. In short, the first one was groundbreaking, the second was legendary, and third was unable keep the bar set as high, but I still don't want to say that it’s a dud.
()
Fincher proved his talent for atmospheric depressing renditions of anything and set the third installment in an utterly industrial setting full of filth and wasted lives. He added the absence of guns, a good dose of explicit violence, an excellent idea with the similarity of the alien to the hostiles, and brought the whole concept back to the first installment, making the third installment the best of the series.
()
David Fincher had a hell of a time with his third Alien – following up on basically Scott's and Cameron's then-already alien classics was next to impossible ("some sucker Fincher, who made music videos, wants to make a sequel to Alien...") I certainly wouldn't consider the third Alien to be a "typical Fincher film", although the camera tweaks and that sleepy-depressed atmosphere are already there. Even so, Fincher already confirmed his VIP status in the 1990s with two other immortal films, and he certainly has nothing to be ashamed of for this contribution to the Alien saga. It's certainly a "different" 5 stars than the first and second, but Fincher definitely deserves it for his debut.
()
Hirdetés