AHC: Save Alien 3 (and the franchise)

[Tom_B]

Doesn't having the whole thing take place on a prison planet kind of lower the stakes from the previous movies, though?

Maybe if Weyland Corporation itself had more presence (beyond one mustache-twirler in a suit, AIR) so the biggest felt threat wasn't just a question of killing the monsters but thwarting a evil company that was clearly an existential threat to Earth and the human race -- or in other words, fighting an army of soldiers and robots on top of xenomorphs. How does that sound?

Sounds like you want to morph the Aliens franchise into an early Resident Evil.

Actually I have an idea that goes partially in that direction. Ripley, Newt, Hicks and what's left of Bishop make it back home. No stowaway alien. Because of the events of the last film "the authorities" launch an investigation of the evil Umbre---oops I mean Weyland-Yutani Corp. It looks like film is going to be a political thriller. Maybe Hicks is murdered.

Then it takes a twist

Starships leave an ion trail behind that can be followed if one has extremely sensitive instrument. A ship has followed Sulaco home.

It's the space jockeys

 

[John Fredrick Parker]

Sounds like you want to morph the Aliens franchise into an early Resident Evil.

Hey, I'm just trying to find a way to keep (steadily) raising the stakes. And it's not like Weyland wasn't already established as an "evil corporation" (hell, Umbrella doesn't come close to owning that brand).

Starships leave an ion trail behind that can be followed if one has extremely sensitive instrument. A ship has followed Sulaco home.

It's the space jockeys

Hm, if the series is going to introduce the engineers this early, they should probably be something subtler than invading the Earth (gotta leave something for the sequels).

 

[usertron2020]

Yeah, that's a huge one; at the very least, Newt has to live <snip>

Don't kill off Newt, Hicks and Bishop.

Killing that cute little poppet Newt after everything she's already seen and been through?

Killing Bishop after he saves Ripley and Newt?

Killing Hicks after he has been leading the survivors through most of Aliens?

Killing RIPLEY after her personal war for survival in Alien & Aliens? I mean, WTF? What was the whole point of the first two movies if it all ends in death for every last possible protagonist, and only the antagonists survive (the evil corporation and their worthless minions)?

Where the HELL did the writers of Alien^3 get their start? Writing "Crisis on Infinite Earths" for DC Comics!?

 

[loneranger]

I came up with this a little while back. There are some flaws but it was mainly just for fun. Obviously getting Ripley involved in the plot would be a necessity and I feel like Parker and Fredericks are redundant but I imagine them as so different I cannot imagine how to weld them. Maybe it would be wiser to take Weyland-Yutani and Fredericks out entirely but that may or may not be heresy.

Having been inspired by ColeMercury and his own infoboxes regarding alternate movies, I cooked up one of my own for some fun. This one basically revolves around the idea that the earlier drafts of the third Alien movie are the ones the end up getting used for the film. In particular, the two scripts by Gibson and Red, which are melded together in the final draft of the script.

Cast -
Michael Biehn as Cpl. Dwayne Hicks
Lance Henriksen as Bishop
Stephen Lang as Mr. Fredericks
Charles S. Dutton as Administrator Dillon
Eric Stoltz as Cpl. Marcus Parker
Sigourney Weaver as Ellen Ripley
---

The movie basically revolves around the surviving crew of the Sulaco as they land on Anchorpoint, a small space town station run by the militaristic UPP (a socialistic entity, separate from Earth). The four survivors (Hicks, Bishop, Ripley, and Newt) are put into separate holding cells and separately examined. The ship, meanwhile, is investigated by a team of UPP soldiers, who are eventually attacked by an alien facehugger, which then proceeds to lay an egg in one of the soldiers. Meanwhile, Mr. Fredericks arrives on the base as a representative for Weyland-Yutani, to help the investigation of the ship, and to take back the Sulaco survivors. His presence is clearly a tenuous one, as the socialistic UPP obviously is not comfortable with corporatists just running around on the colony. Perfect timing, as this is just when Corporal Hicks breaks out of his cell upon realizing that there is an alien on the run. He manages to disappear into the colony's citizens, and the furious Administrator Dillon demands that Mr. Parker find the man and bring him in before he "corrupts" any of the citizens. With this in mind, Mr. Fredericks gets together a team of the socialist soldiers to find him. The team is led by one corporatist hating, but honorable man, by the name of Marcus Parker. Parker leads the search for the escaped Hicks, who eventually finds and rescues Bishop, who was in the process of being repaired and reprogrammed by the socialists. All this time, the aliens begin attacked throughout the colony, steadily gaining numbers. By the end of the movie, there is a three way showdown between the socialists, the Sulaco survivors, and the aliens. Eventually, the menace is defeated, and Hicks allows himself to be taken in by Parker after the two team up against the aliens. Parker then ends up shooting Fredericks after he attempts to kill Hicks and the others for "knowing too much".

 

[lionhead]

I don't understand all this hate towards Alien 3.

If they had let Hicks and Newt survive all they can do are the same things they did in Aliens, hicks even less because of his injuries. I think the point of the movies is that Ripley is the only one who knows, the only one smart about it. She is the leader against the alien threat. For that, she has to be alone. Can't have her support a family.

What i find most important about the alien movies is Ripley, nothing more. A clean slate at the start of every movie is what makes them individually good as all 3 movies show the aliens differently and shows the means to kill it/them differently. Alien 4 went a bit overboard on that, but still better. Mainly because Ripley is so cool, and, Ron Perlman.

Bishop was destroyed in Aliens, no need to bash Alien 3 about that. Took it from Alien 1 to hook up the pieces and ask it for help one more time. What i found quite nice in Alien 3 was that Bishop's maker arrived, connecting the dots a bit about what the corporation is and does. Still don't have a clue why Aaron strikes him with the wrench though, there was no reason for him to change his mind.

I liked all the prisoner characters too, how can you not like the prisoners?

and Ripley dying like that wasn't so bad i think, gave a good plot for 4. She accepts her fate and dies knowing the corporation won't have their prize.

 

[DoomBunny]

I liked all the prisoner characters too, how can you not like the prisoners?

Because they were underdeveloped 2D wastes of screentime who were pretty much identical to each other with a couple of exceptions?

and Ripley dying like that wasn't so bad i think, gave a good plot for 4.

Alien Resurrection is the living incarnation of flogging a dead horse. It even brings the horse back from the dead so it can be flogged more.

 

[Imladrik]

I think you guys don't get the point of the Alien Franchise. Everyone dies. Every fucking one. Actually Alien^3 is quite good in it's own right, and maybe better in claustrophobia that Alien, and the characters are actually more devellopped than in Alien. Alien Ressurection had problems, but mainly due to the studios.

 

[Mister Abbadon]

The biggest problem Alien^3 has is that its trying to look like Aliens but at the end of the day it is too much like Alien, though not pulled of as well as Alien. The biggest quality of Aliens was that it broke new ground from Alien. Alien^3 did not. And the character problems stated before. Ultimately its problem was that it stagnated

 

[lionhead]

The biggest problem Alien^3 has is that its trying to look like Aliens but at the end of the day it is too much like Alien, though not pulled of as well as Alien. The biggest quality of Aliens was that it broke new ground from Alien. Alien^3 did not. And the character problems stated before. Ultimately its problem was that it stagnated

How did it try to look like Aliens? How?

@DoomBunny: Yeah, they were all prisoners. Imagine that? Kinda like those marines in Aliens who were all pretty much the same. Not a good argument.

 

[John Fredrick Parker]

@DoomBunny: Yeah, they were all prisoners. Imagine that? Kinda like those marines in Aliens who were all pretty much the same. Not a good argument.

WHAT? Vasquez, Hudson, Hicks, Lt. Gorman, the Sarge, the rest, BISHOP? All the same? Have you even seen Aliens?

 

[DoomBunny]

@DoomBunny: Yeah, they were all prisoners. Imagine that? Kinda like those marines in Aliens who were all pretty much the same. Not a good argument.

The Marines had far more variation, and were far more interesting. Even in the short time they were on screen before most died horrifically, they were all at least named and given some development. None of the prisoners really got that, hell, the only characters that actually got developed at all were the preacher (who was just awful), the doctor (who died 5 seconds later) and the second in command (who's development was limited to "I'm a moron").

 

[elyski]

Well from what I read Ridely Scott would've gladly directed Alien 3 if he hadn't been working on several other projects at the time. If Scott were to direct the film it would've been much better.

It might've also gone better had most of the original ideas not been scrapped. The original script of William Gibson had the Sulaco drift into space controlled by a marxist civilization, and it also touches on other interesting concepts such as the Weyland-Yutani corporation genetically modifying and experimenting on the aliens, as well as some aliens exhibiting an airborne viral contagion that infects humans, probably given to them as part of the Weyland Yutani corporation's testing. And while the script submitted by Gibson is very action oriented, in my opinion it is by far superior to the Alien 3 we ended up with.

(For anybody who wants to read Gibson's script here's a link to it.) http://www.awesomefilm.com/script/Alien3.txt

 

[John Farson]

For my part, before deciding how to continue the Alien movies - if a third film absolutely HAS to be made ("YES!" say the Hollywood folks - dollars dollars dollars!!!) - then it first has to be decided when the setting would be.

If it takes place right after the events of Aliens, and if it is thought that Carrie Henn should ideally reprise her role as Newt, then the decision to start pre-production (coming up with the script and stuff) has to be made as soon as possible, pretty much right after it's seen that Aliens is a hit. It should be set for release in 1988, or 1989 at the latest, accounting for Henn's age. The example I'm thinking of here is Predator 2, which came out three years after the original film. OTOH, no one of the original cast reprised their roles in the sequel, so maybe that's not the ideal example. The risk here, of course, is that a hurried schedule might be detrimental to the film's quality. The plot could largely follow the actual Alien 3, but with the variations that others here have already elaborated on. Newt being bald would be an interesting look...

My preference would be for the alt-Alien 3 to take place after a time skip, the same way Aliens occurred after a long time skip from Alien. Here, Newt could be portrayed as a teen or a woman in her early 20s. The plot could vary from Aliens threatening to overrun Earth (like in the Dark Horse comic miniseries, maybe a kind of "Dawn of the Dead meets Aliens") to an early version of Prometheus (with Ripley and Newt along as "experts" due to their virtue of having survived the earlier encounters). If it came out in 1993 it might provide interesting competition to Jurassic Park.

 

[Mister Abbadon]

How did it try to look like Aliens? How?

@DoomBunny: Yeah, they were all prisoners. Imagine that? Kinda like those marines in Aliens who were all pretty much the same. Not a good argument.

I felt like it was trying to be fast paced, and action driven rather than the slow tension that was in Alien. It didn't help that the Xenomorph In 3 looked like crap. Alien had little music and very long scenes, 3 had a lot of chasing and running when the Xenomorph was around, but as a whole the film still felt underwhelming.

 

[Glenn239]

Doesn't having the whole thing take place on a prison planet kind of lower the stakes from the previous movies, though?

I kinda liked the choice of a semi-abandonded planet, because this allowed a difference sort of scenario than the previous ones. I can picture the story being that the alien is in the prison, so the surviving prisoners flee the compound and are hunted in the open as they make their way to a sanctuary. Sort of like Predator.

Also, wasn't Winona Rider in Aliens 3? Where was the make out scene between her and Sigorney Weaver?

 

[Mr. Magi]

All you need is for someone to pitch a goddamn good idea. Unfortunately, no one really did. Well, Renny Harlin's idea wasn't bad but I don't really trust Renny Harlin to make particularly intelligent films.

Last I checked Alien 3 went through twenty or so scripts and six directors, many of these changes being due to executive meddling. So, lessening Brandywine Production's interference would have a good chance of improving the quality. I say this since a non-interfering studio would ensure that there would be a unified idea and script at the very least.

Other than that, there's a basic formula the 2 good Alien films followed, either of these options could make a good film, though it would be hard to top the existing with either, Aliens in particular with the second option:

1) Make an Alien movie, this involves lots of tension, an unprepared crew and a few Aliens at most, gradually picking off the crew. Critically important is keeping what made Alien so good, that the monster is hiding in many many frames, and yet the viewer cannot find it during his/her first viewing.

2) Make an Aliens movie, this involves a lot of explosions and action, with some good bug slaughtering fun. There's still tension and horror aspects, but it's really focused around the heroes trying to beat the Aliens.

Yeah, Alien 3 tried to do both, and it didn't work out so well. It should have probably stuck with its main choice, the slower, more tense Alien style. The more active scenes sort of threw off the general pace. It still worked to an extent, but the shift did feel a tad awkward at times.

Have 'em crash land on the planet, but all three survive from the second movie. None of this dead on arrival nonsense. Then have the situation spin out of control as the alien takes over the colony, but avoid the crap like that dude who gets killed in the middle of the cafeteria when the alien comes down from the ceiling.

Actually, that could've been a good plot element. Not the ceiling kill mind you, that was just a cheap way to have everyone learn that there is a Xeno. I mean a major theme of the movie could've been the idea that the alien is out there doing terrible things, but news about it is suppressed by the authorities. That being done in a more effective manner could add a nice spin to the horror style 3 was going for.

Also avoid murdering the only character you've developed as soon as he's actually done some developing. I mean, he dies quite literally straight after developing.

Yeah, the doctor shouldn't have died like that. I thought it was probably the stupidest moment in the film. Every bit of build up for him was rendered pointless when he was killed.

Doesn't having the whole thing take place on a prison planet kind of lower the stakes from the previous movies, though?

Maybe if Weyland Corporation itself had more presence (beyond one mustache-twirler in a suit, AIR) so the biggest felt threat wasn't just a question of killing the monsters but thwarting a evil company that was clearly an existential threat to Earth and the human race -- or in other words, fighting an army of soldiers and robots on top of xenomorphs. How does that sound?

Isn't that a big complaint that people have over the newer games? You know, that the monsters are now playing second fiddle to corporate evil?

Don't kill off Newt, Hicks and Bishop. Have the Alien be a Queen. Since it's supposed to be a prison planet, actually make it a prison planet. There should be guards with actual weapons, and I'm sure prisoners in the future have their own make-shift ones just like prisoners today do.

That would be a good setting for a more action oriented version. Plus it would be pretty sweet to see the actual fall of the planet to the alien threat, something we missed in Aliens.

Actually I have an idea that goes partially in that direction. Ripley, Newt, Hicks and what's left of Bishop make it back home. No stowaway alien. Because of the events of the last film "the authorities" launch an investigation of the evil Umbre---oops I mean Weyland-Yutani Corp. It looks like film is going to be a political thriller. Maybe Hicks is murdered.

Then it takes a twist

Starships leave an ion trail behind that can be followed if one has extremely sensitive instrument. A ship has followed Sulaco home.

It's the space jockeys

I likely would've disliked the movie far more if that's the case, mainly because the quickest way for me to lose interest in anything is the word "thriller".

Hm, if the series is going to introduce the engineers this early, they should probably be something subtler than invading the Earth (gotta leave something for the sequels).

Why am I imagining Roland Emmerich doing the effects for the Jockey invasion of Earth?

 

[AdanALW]

coincidentially watched Alien 3 again just yesterday. I rather like it. But it dwarves under Aliens. They needed to keep showing a lot of Xenomorphs instead of going back to 1. Well, at least they fixed that in Alien 4, which was better then 3 or 1.

I actually liked it too. I believe David Fintcher of Seven, Zodiac, Fight Club fame directed Alien 3. I think the ending, while a downer, was the right move for the story. It wasn't as good as the other two, but I would add that I REALLY liked Prometheus, although not without its flaws. I think Scott has taken some cues form Lovecraft there, and injected into the franchise a much needed deepness in themes. The first movie is essentially just a haunted house movie in space. But Prometheus attempted larger question, much like Scott's other sci-fi classic Blade Runner.

 

[AdanALW]

I kinda liked the choice of a semi-abandonded planet, because this allowed a difference sort of scenario than the previous ones. I can picture the story being that the alien is in the prison, so the surviving prisoners flee the compound and are hunted in the open as they make their way to a sanctuary. Sort of like Predator.

Also, wasn't Winona Rider in Aliens 3? Where was the make out scene between her and Sigorney Weaver?

That was the fourth one, Resurrection. That was the worst, not counting the Aliens vs Predator movies. It had a great premise in my opinion, with the cloning gone wrong (big fan of genetics in sci-fi), but it wasn't executed well at all.

 

[DoomBunny]

I actually liked it too. I believe David Fintcher of Seven, Zodiac, Fight Club fame directed Alien 3. I think the ending, while a downer, was the right move for the story. It wasn't as good as the other two, but I would add that I REALLY liked Prometheus, although not without its flaws. I think Scott has taken some cues form Lovecraft there, and injected into the franchise a much needed deepness in themes. The first movie is essentially just a haunted house movie in space. But Prometheus attempted larger question, much like Scott's other sci-fi classic Blade Runner.

Did you just compare Prometheus to Blade Runner...?

 

[ColeMercury]

I think you guys don't get the point of the Alien Franchise. Everyone dies. Every fucking one.

At this point, there was no "Alien Franchise". There were two movies: the original, in which there was one survivor, and the sequel, in which there were four survivors. The number of survivors in both cases is related to the style of film on which each movie is modelled: the original is like a slasher film, while the sequel is like an action shoot-em-up. The idea that "everyone dies in the Alien Franchise" wasn't really established until... well, until Alien3.

And regarding the killing-off of Hicks, Newt and (to a lesser extent) Bishop, there's a quote from writer-director Nicholas Meyer about the death of Spock that comes to mind: "It's not about if you kill them off, it's whether you kill them well." If those characters were to die in the course of the story of the third film, then that's fair enough. But instead, they were killed before the movie even started. That's why people say the beginning of Alien3 invalidates the ending of Aliens: not just because Hicks and Newt die, but because their only function in the story is to die. In practical terms, Ripley could've fled LV426 with Bishop in the second dropship rather than go back to rescue Newt (and could've let that acid kill Hicks for good measure) and the end result would be exactly the same.

I actually liked it too. I believe David Fintcher of Seven, Zodiac, Fight Club fame directed Alien 3. I think the ending, while a downer, was the right move for the story.

Believe it or not, I actually like Alien3 for what it is (or at least I like the Assembly Cut, though I think the Theatrical Cut's version of the funeral scene is much better). I think the story could've been an excellent sequel if it came directly after Alien. But it doesn't.