>>64522765 The assembly cut is pretty pointless DESU, and the added scene where the prisoner lets out the Alien again is pretty dumb. It was a mess of a movie to start with but that scene makes it even dumber.
This is a very personal and subjective question, so the simplest impartial consensus answer is: barely, if at all.
Having said that, I did watch the assembly cut for the first time a few months ago, so now at least I know what people were talking about. It's still a tedious and un-fun story and atmosphere, compared to the other two. The dramatis personae (condemned, violent criminals) are to me immediately and permanently unsympathetic. I don't enjoy watching prison programs on MSNBC on the weekends, either, I just flip past them. Even the men tasked with minding the prisoners are themselves literally stupid; only the doctor is of any interest as a character.
Still, as I indicated, the assembly cut does much to humanize this dreck, and explain their motivations a bit better. There's even a very nice set of an abbatoir which I hadn't seen before.
Alien^3 can be safely skipped, and is only for completists.
I'm gonna jump all over you and go full pedant: there is no such thing as a director's cut of Alien^3, because the director, Fincher, disowned the film and therefore did not want to be involved in cutting another version when he was approached years later, I believe when they started boxing the four films together for more cash. The task of making an "extended" (better) cut therefore fell to someone from his crew (a producer/writer/editor or somesuch), and I've read this part: Fincher gave his detached blessing-not-blessing, in principle (now I paraphrase): He as much as told this guy, "You can do what you want with it, I won't hate you or anything, it's all the same to me. EXCEPT. You may not call it a director's cut, because it isn't one."
That is the very reason why we use the phrase "assembly cut", to this day.
They're the same thing, the Director's Cut was just the version in the BluRay release where they'd cleaned up the visuals and audio so they didn't look as awful. There's no actual Director's Cut as Fincher washed his hands off the film after he finished it and refused to have anything more to do with it.
I'd like to repeat that if you're going to watch Alien 3 you should watch the Assembly/Director's Cut as it improves the film immensely. It doesn't even change the plot really, it just improves the pacing of the film and adds extra depth to some of the characters.
>>64524097 actually no they wernt Alien 3 was fucking magnificent.
It was a very gritty and dark end to a disturbing story where a woman was being brutally tortured throughour her life. There was some solace to Alien 3 it was bringing everything to a close, it was heavy but it's reality. You cant always have your Disney Star Wars endings and this is why Alien 3 to me is one of the best films ever made, it doesnt shy away to have that dark ending and make you feel the way it did.
Even if that were true, this great explanation of yours doesn't rescue the film at all in terms of its story or of some "logic" to the characters, so it's not a point worth making. Designing the story in this way, while keeping the other basic feature of the franchise that the audience is familiar with (put most of 'em through the meat grinder), just preps us to double-not-care about any of these fungible meats, thereby making the story... intentionally more boring, if we accept your premise.
When you intentionally make a large number of characters even /physically/ fungible, to the point that they're mostly Bad Bald Brits, plus all of the above, you have to consciously force yourself to like to movie as a contrarian.
In fact, in the assembly cut, Dillon's flesh out makes him personally slightly /less/ sympathetic, as the stupid convict mentality comes out in full: "fuck everybody else, we've got a nice shit-pile to wait on, here."
but Ripley has always been the main protagonist. Noticed how you never mentioned Hicks or Newt despite both being the main drivers of Ripley during Aliens?
It wasn't a smooth transition, but their deaths and the lack of (mostly) likable characters was simply a back to Alien move: a reminder that Ripley is and always has been the only protagonist of the series. At least in my head
If it had been a stand-alone movie I think your criticism would've had more weight, but as far as a closure to the series, I cannot think of any better way to have done it than the way it was done in Alien 3
>I cannot think of any better way to have done it (wrap the "trilogy") than the way it was done in Alien 3
This is an interesting back-and-forth and I want to keep it from devolving into shitposting, but I gotta tell you that line of yours makes me sad.
I even get what you're really talking about, and it isn't Muh Prison. Sure, killing Ripley off makes sense, I don't have a problem with that. But (being careful) brainstorming a personal preference goes something like this:
How about, um, say, we land in literally any other backwater. Say one that isn't one hundred percent all murderers and rapists and the idiots who watch them. Even the original convent idea could have been marginally better, exactly because we could care about 'em a bit before they get ground up.
at least one of the three of Hicks, Newt or Bishop survives, not in the interest of Muh Happy Ending, but to keep a meaningful character alive, who may yet stick it to the man later. Another major theme, cemented in Ripley's mind over the course of things, is to do just that, so a bit of the anti-capitalist rhetoric which was a nice subplot in the original.
To be a bit snarky, the ending didn't really succeed (RL), now did it? They still made the next film, and the spin-offs. :^)
>>64522762 No, the studio wanted to have Ripley be the focus and didn't want to spend too much money. Aliens On Earth was one of the original ideas, and would feature the xenomorph homeworld later on. Instead they killed off Newt and Hicks and went in the Monks In Space direction, then cheaped out even more and did Prisoners Who Are Also Kinda Monks And Also Bald Ripley.
>>64522697 The extended version (I have the anthology, buy that cause it has all the versions you'll need from the 4 movies) is 5/10. It's a rehash of Alien, and Resurrection does a better job of continuing the mythology. Any faggot who disagrees likes artfag film shit more than they like the Alien series/setting. I bet they don't even like the comics or games.
>>64525876 >And Gollic's arc was fine. It feels more like they wrote themselves in a corner and threw that dumb scene in to justify the need to have to fight the alien again. It also makes the victory in the end that much less deserved.
Compared to the theatrical release where the plan gets bunked and they instead immediately retreat and think up a plan b; it structures the story much better.
The other shorter bits adds more, sure. But does it REALLY improve it that much more? It still feels like a mess, just longer. In the end, the story just gets the job done in order to feed the good set design/concept and more alien violence.
>>64525698 That's general contrarian opinions. Why do you think reddit cross-posters shitpost here and want to make this place anti-reddit? Have you not noticed how the SW prequels have been starting to get praised recently? Or how 4chan has gradually started to get more conservative? It's the redditors venting their pent-up frustrations and hive-mind mentality, as well as post-newfag newfags who don't remember 4chan when it was more liberal than reddit.
In the early 90's I was big into comic books, and I remember having the Alien 3 dark horse comics, which followed the script rather than a direct adaptation of the movie, and I remember being confused because there were a lot of character moments in the comic that I didn't remember seeing in the movie. When I finally learned about the behind the scenes trouble, and saw the work print cut, it all made sense.
So maybe I'm just filling in the gaps without realizing it.
But the alien getting out again does help to sell the point that there is no winning for Ripley. Which we see at the end. The end of the assembly cut is better than theatrical as well. It's just an alternate scene, but it works better without the chest burster coming out of her stomach before she hits the molten lead.
>>64526098 I read the comics where it's Not-Newt and Not-Hicks dealing with xenos on earth and their homeworld and I got even more disappointed with Alien 3. That could have been the 3rd movie, man. Maybe even have seen an engineer.
Alien 3 is a let down on multiple levels: visually, thematically, story-wise, scope-wise, sequel-wise. Only thing it did good was acting and that's it. Imagine if you went from Terminator 1 to Terminator 2 and finished it with a direct-to-video low-budget version of Terminator 3. Terminator 3, Spiderman 3, and Iron Man 3 combined cannot top the disappointment that was Alien 3.
This is one of several possible retorts to my whole thing, which basically amounts to I-Hate-Criminals-Therefore-Alien^3-Sucks. To be perfectly clear, I unironically stand by my judgement. And don't flatter yourself that the above is some sort of moralfaggotry, as the analysis gets more basic than that. If anything, my objections are aesthetic since in my view the story choices lead to a shit movie.
But your thing is disingenuous in several ways. First, these characters are not in "jail", or the county lockup for a weekend barfight. They are lifers in an inescapable prison, and they are where they are because they're the worst of the worst of the worst. This is made perfectly clear right at the top. With the exception of the doctor, none of them even did anything /interesting/, (I've looked into the character's back stories a bit), they simply killed and raped, oh maybe one or two simply had drug charges, but they were the exceptions, and it certainly was never discussed in the film itself so that's beside the point. The point is that they're all /boring, uninteresting losers who all look alike/. So your thing about how I "just" hate criminals doesn't work. I hate /boring dumb/ criminal characters, the more when they comprise the bulk of a cast. The group are not embezzlers, robbers, druggies. The /group/ are /dumb/ rapists and murderers. Give me something like a Lecter, ffs.
I'm not a penologist, I'm a guy who wants to watch an interesting, entertaining movie. I learned the word "penologist" by watching an interesting, entertaining movie about some other hardened criminals. You can make those, as long as the story and characters are interesting, and entertaining. The movie is called Heat, and the characters are all different and have different skills and weaknesses and three dimensions and stuff, which these /boring, uninteresting losers/ don't.
Last, the projection is cute. Condolences on the family member who got locked up, maybe.
>>64529956 The nature of the characters made them so indiscernible that I barely noticed they were missing after the alien killed them. Besides, there were just too many. I haven't counted but it has to have the highest kill count of all the movies.
>>64529956 >But your thing is disingenuous in several ways. First, these characters are not in "jail", or the county lockup for a weekend barfight. They are lifers in an inescapable prison, and they are where they are because they're the worst of the worst of the worst. This is made perfectly clear right at the top. With the exception of the doctor, none of them even did anything /interesting/, ... The point is that they're all /boring, uninteresting losers who all look alike/. So your thing about how I "just" hate criminals doesn't work. I hate /boring dumb/ criminal characters, the more when they comprise the bulk of a cast. The group are not embezzlers, robbers, druggies. The /group/ are /dumb/ rapists and murderers. Give me something like a Lecter, ffs.
Most of them are psychopaths and retards, thats why they did their crimes and why they ended up in jail, the guard who you deride as stupid is mentally retarded, how is that his fault?
You're too happy dismissing people because they fucked up in life or got fucked by life right from the outset, and in the context of entertainment its doubly retarded. Just because the joker is a murderous killer doesnt mean he isnt a fun character to watch, and theres dozens of other examples I can cite by why bother?
Talking about how you can make an interesting, entertaining movie about criminals is disingenuous because you just said you dismissed them as unsympathetic right off the bat simply BECAUSE THEY WERE CRIMINALS. If you just found them unentertaining or unsympathetic (and I'd argue that the movie makes no effort to make you sympathize with any of them except the doctor, and that this is intentional) as the movie progressed thats different, and thats a matter of taste, but if you disliked them simply because they are criminals is dumb.
And I dont have any family members or friends locked up, but nice try I guess.
Thread replies: 65 Thread images: 10
Thread DB ID: 367207
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at firstname.lastname@example.org with the post's information.