Alien 3: Assembly Cut

So in my last blog I finally caught up on the Predator movies I'd missed. I thought I was completely up-to-date on the theatrical Alien and Predator movies, but I realized I was still missing one thing.

Okay, so you know by now I hate Alien 3. In fact, you're probably sick of hearing about it. If so, skip this blog entry. I will be covering a lot of the same ground.

I dislike the movie for several reasons, but the biggest is the way it screws up its predecessor's ending. I believe Ripley and Newt earned their happy ending. My fondest wish for the franchise is a new movie that reveals Alien 3 and Resurrection were just nightmares Ripley had in hypersleep, and the new film could follow the adventures of an adult Newt.

Alien 3 has some plot holes right from the start, such as how/when did the queen xenomorph lay at least two eggs (without her egg sack, mind you) somewhere on the Sulaco? How did a facehugger get into Ripley's cryo tube and impregnate her without interrupting her cryosleep? The timing just doesn't work, and it feels like we're just supposed to accept it because "that's the plot of the film, deal with it."

Plus it sets up problems it doesn't fix. I've mentioned this in previous blogs, but I like happy endings. The job of a writer is to come up with a problem, then fix it. From the moment Ripley learns she's been impregnated, she's a walking corpse. The audience is supposed to wonder "how is she going to get out of this one?" And then it's the writer's job to come up with a solution we weren't expecting. Problem: Ripley's going to die. Solution: Ripley dies. Wow, that's sooooooo creative, writing team. I hope you all got raises.

Overall it just doesn't do anything interesting or new with the series. The first movie had one alien, the second escalated the conflict to an alien army, and Alien 3 is just the first movie all over again, but not as good.

But putting all my prejudices aside, is Alien 3 a good film? If you have no prior expectations from the Alien universe, is it a satisfying cinematic experience? Does it stand on its own as a solid film?

In my opinion, no. Not at all. It's dull, it's boring, the action is chaotic, the dialogue is bad, the sound quality sucks, and I don't care about the characters. It can't even pick a genre: It's not scary enough to be horror, and it doesn't have enough action to be an action movie.

Back when it was released in 1992, most people seemed to agree with my assessment. But in the years since, the new generation has been much kinder. I think there's a tendency for people to enjoy things more if they've always existed from their point of view.

It's like the Star Wars prequels. The people who grew up on the original trilogy found the prequels to be disappointing, but the kids who grew up with all six movies seem to love them. Same with Alien: To the new generation, there have always been at least four Alien movies, so they don't have the disappointment of waiting years for a sequel only to be let down.

It's the difference between what might have been, versus what's always been. When a new movie is announced, our imaginations are ignited. What's it going to be about? Do the marines find an alien homeworld and take the fight to them? Do the aliens make it to Earth? So many cool ideas. So when the actual sequel just rehashes the first movie's plot, it's a big letdown.

A couple of years before Alien 3, a company called Dark Horse released a series of Alien comics that explored a lot of cool ideas, some of which would have made for great cinema. Some of the comics even featured the survivors of the second movie in new adventures. But Alien 3 made those stories obsolete. I know comics are rarely considered canon, but I'd rather believe in those superior stories to the one presented by Alien 3.

One cool thing the early comics revealed is that xenomorph queens aren't born queens. They're like bees, in that the other aliens feed it royal jelly so that it grows into a queen. I like this explanation a lot more than Alien 3's "Ripley just happens to be impregnated with a queen."

I've heard some defend Alien 3 by saying it's the movie that established how horrific this world is: That there is no hope for you if you exist in the Alien universe. Personally I don't think that's a thing that needed to be established, but some people are into dismal universes. 

Even the director, David Fincher, hates the film. He didn't have enough creative control over the theatrical cut, and the final product didn't match his vision. Enter... the Assembly Cut. Also referred to as the Special Edition (well, it's more complicated than that, but I'll spare you), this director's cut was released in 2003, and more accurately depicts Fincher's original plan.

For years I heard that it's a much better film. It's beloved by many of the people who hated Alien 3's theatrical cut. So as much as I was loathe to load up that movie again, I decided I had to give it a chance. I knew it still kills off the survivors of Aliens, but I had to get past that and judge the movie on its own merits. It was finally time to give this movie the chance it deserved. 

So... did I like it?

Well... it is a much better film. The editing is more cohesive. The characters have more depth, and are no longer just interchangeable bald guys. The extra footage does add to the story. The sound quality is a lot better. Now that I can actually hear the dialogue, the plot even makes more sense. Other than my prejudices about the deaths, it's actually... not too bad.

It still has flaws. While the practical effects on the xeno's close-ups are some of the best in the series, the CGI long shots are downright cartoonish. I mean, "takes me right out of the film" goofy. There's more and more of these shots toward the end of the film, and those shots made me laugh out loud in scenes that were supposed to be filled with tension. Seriously, they could have edited in the sprites from the SNES game and it would have looked better.

With most of the characters being violent criminals, it's hard to really care when they get killed. At no point was I emotionally invested in anyone but Ripley. It actually has a decent cast, and most of them do a great job, but I just didn't care whenever they died. I wish there could have been more than one female character in the movie, but that wouldn't have worked with the plot. 

The bottom line is, the Assembly Cut is a much better cut of the film. It almost feels like a real movie instead of a rushed cash grab. The Assembly Cut is a lot like Highlander 2's Renegade Version. It polishes a turd until it's almost pleasant to look at.

But we didn't make a Love Connection today. My prejudices still stand - they shouldn't have undone the previous movie, and it still doesn't do anything creative with the franchise. This is definitely the cut to watch if you want to see it, but for me, the timeline ends after Aliens.

Note that there's also alternate cuts of Alien, Aliens, and Resurrection. The only one I've yet to see is Resurrection, but I'm told it's not that dramatic a difference (except for the ending). If I ever watch Resurrection again, I'll be sure to watch the alternate cut for completeness sake.

Here's my updated version of my ranking of the Alien/Predator movies, with alternate cuts included. 

1a. Aliens (1986) Special Edition
1b. Aliens (1986)
2a. Alien (1979)
2b. Alien (1979) Director's Cut
3. Prey (2022)
4. Alien: Romulus (2024)
5. Predators (2010)
6. Predator (1987)
7. Predator 2 (1990)
8. Alien vs. Predator (2004)
9. Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem (2007)
10. Alien Resurrection (1997)
11. Prometheus (2012)
12. Alien: Covenant (2017)
13. The Predator (2018) 
14a. Alien 3: Assembly Cut (2003)
14b. Alien 3 (1992) 

Prey

Prey is the best Predator movie, and it's not even close. It succeeds on every level - the cinematography, the creature design, the story, all of it. It's just a beautiful movie from start to finish. Heck, it would have been an excellent film even without the Predator in it. They could have replaced the Yautja with a big bear or something, and it still would have been a good coming-of-age warrior's tale.

You know what, I'll go even farther - this is the only good Predator film. Which is not to say the others are bad, but even the best ones are generally "good for a sci-fi popcorn-muncher" or "good for a macho action/horror film." But Prey has no "good for x" qualifiers, it's just good cinema. What "The Dark Knight" did for superhero films, Prey does for Predator movies. It brings legitimacy to the genre.

But wait, no, I'm not done yet. I'll even say something that's going to shock some of my friends out of their shoes. Prey is a better movie than Aliens. No, I mean it. I love Aliens, and it's still my favorite film. And as you'll see at the bottom of this blog entry, I still rank Aliens number one. 

But if I'm going to be truly objective here, Prey is serious cinema in a way that Aliens is not. Rather than just keep the audience entertained with blood-pumping action and quotable quips, Prey does something rarely seen in either series. It's art. Every frame would look good on your wall. The Yautja has never looked better, the pacing is good, the camera angles, even the lighting.

Oh man, the lighting. That's a whole other rant. Movies are too dark these days. I hate directors who think we need realistic lighting. There's a story about filming LotR: The Two Towers where somebody asked the director where the light was coming from, since the battle was at night. He replied, "The same place the music is coming from." People have to remember that these are movies, and movies are more fun when we can see them. Prey has a few scenes set at night, and all of them are well-lit.

If I have one complaint about Prey, it's that some of the animals look obviously CGI. But they still look fantastic, and the CGI-ness actually helps me, because there's a lot of animal gore that would bother me if it looked too real.

When I started typing this review, I decided I'd update my ranking of the Aliens/Predator movies. I wrote the last one before I saw Alien: Romulus, so it needed updating anyway. In typing out the new list, I remembered I still hadn't seen The Predator (2018). I was planning to skip it entirely since it was so poorly reviewed. But then I decided I'd get it out of the way so I could rank it.

It's not as bad as I thought it would be, but it's definitely not good. The dialogue is often painful, and it has a lot of shallow comedy that feels out-of-place in a Predator film. The acting is ridiculous, like Power Rangers quality. The tone is uneven, and the climax is downright goofy. But it's got some fun action scenes, and overall it's still more entertaining than Alien 3.

And in related news, I've watched the first three episodes of Alien: Earth and I'm loving it so far. I'll blog more about it once it's finished. 

Ranking the Alien/Predator movies: 

1. Aliens (1986)
2. Alien (1979)
3. Prey (2022)
4. Alien: Romulus (2024)
5. Predators (2010)
6. Predator (1987)
7. Predator 2 (1990)
8. Alien vs. Predator (2004)
9. Aliens vs. Predator: Requiem (2007)
10. Alien Resurrection (1997)
11. Prometheus (2012)
12. Alien: Covenant (2017)
13. The Predator (2018) 
999. Alien 3 (1992) 

The Naked Gun (2025)

I'm a sucker for parody movies, but a lot of them are really lazy. My favorites are Airplane!, Airplane 2: The Sequel, and Top Secret. I also enjoy Hot Shots and a couple of entries in the Scary Movie series. But that "(Something) Movie" series went seriously downhill, and the later films were just compilations of weak references and fart jokes.

The Naked Gun also ranked among my favorites. Hardly anybody remembers that Police Squad was originally a TV series, a show I remember with great fondness. The Naked Gun sequels weren't quite as good as the first, but they all had their moments.

The 2025 movie makes a passable effort at capturing the feel of its predecessors. The humor is a little uneven. At times it lifts jokes right out of Police Squad, other times the humor feels closer to Austin Powers. And occasionally the plot almost verges on serious, at least briefly. 

There's a lot of mood whiplash there, and it doesn't keep up the "laugh-a-minute" pace of the older movies. And, sadly, there are a couple of fart jokes. But it's still pretty decent, and one of the better silly comedies to come out in the last decade.

One casting quibble - The big bad guy is a tech mogul played by Danny Huston. Meanwhile, his henchman is played by Kevin Durand. Durand is often said to look a bit like Elon Musk. I can't help but wonder if it would have been funnier to have Durand play the tech billionaire, and really play up the Musk references. Heck, electric cars already play a big role in the plot. With as much as the previous Naked Gun movies made jabs at celebrities, I'm surprised this didn't occur to anybody. It just feels like a missed opportunity, but oh well.

While the new movie doesn't quite match the level of zaniness of the originals, this is a worthy continuation of the series. This is, for the most part, my kind of humor. It's a great homage, but I really miss Leslie Nielsen.

Fantastic Four: First Steps

I wish it was higher praise to say this, but this is the best Fantastic Four movie yet. It's sad that it's so hard to translate F4 to film, but I think it's because the entire concept feels so cheesy and retro. The 2005 movie was so light-hearted it was hard to take seriously, while the 2015 film tried to lean into the body horror aspect and failed miserably.

Okay, I actually like the 2005 movie, sue me. The 2007 sequel was a bit of a letdown, but I think the 2005 film was a great representation of the team. Still, it can't hold a candle to 2025's First Steps.

There's a lot of reasons the new movie succeeds, but for me, the biggest factor is that they set it in an alternate universe. By making the entire world a cheesy, zeerust-themed retrofuture, the team feels like a natural part of their world.

Rise of the Silver Surfer tried to play it safe with Galactus, because they thought a mile-high guy in a purple helmet would look silly. In First Steps, they give us a world where Galactus looks no goofier than any of F4's other villains.

We've all seen movies set in the 50's, where the set designers went to great lengths to make sure the cars and outfits were period accurate. First Steps faced the same challenge, but even more so because the world depicted is such a hodge-podge of eras. They picked a unique visual style and committed themselves to it, and it feels consistent throughout the film.

I like the way their powers are depicted, especially Reed's. Watching him swing through town like Spider-Man looks way better than you'd think.

I do feel the movie had some pacing problems, and I'm still not 100% sold on the cast. Johnny especially felt sort of bland. Some better banter might have livened things up a bit. But that's a small quibble; overall it's a Fantastic film that makes up for some of the misfires in the past.

Superman (2025)

Well, that was just fantastic. This is the Superman movie I've been waiting for since I was a kid.

I loved the first three Christopher Reeve movies growing up, but everything went downhill from there. Superman IV was obviously a poorly-edited rush job. Then there was a long wait until Superman Returns, which had some good ideas but wasted them. Then we have the DCEU, which decided to take the most colorful comic superhero and turn him into an angsty broody mess. Which is too bad, because I think Henry Cavill did great in the role. It's just that Zack Snyder had no understanding of the character.

But the new Superman movie is a love letter to the comics. (Spoilers incoming.) I'm so glad it didn't bog itself down with another origin story. Instead it just has an opening text that explains he's been Superman for about three years. It also includes a few other heroes such as Green Lantern, Mister Terrific, Hawkgirl, and a couple of surprises.

It has a great cast. I particularly loved Lois Lane. She looks like she stepped out of the animated series, and her voice reminds me a lot of Margot Kidder. I also thought Jimmy Olsen did a good job. I wasn't sold on David Corenswet's Superman when I saw the trailers, but now that I've seen it in context, he does a great job. His Clark and Superman actually look and sound different, which is critical for a Superman actor. I mean, okay, maybe he wasn't as good at it as Reeve, but he was definitely a better Clark than Cavill.

But a good hero needs a good villain, and Lex Luthor does not disappoint. Not to dis on Gene Hackman or other past Luthors, but this is the grandiose Lex that Superman deserves. I mean, Hackman's Lex, while well-performed, was basically a greedy land developer. Kevin Spacey is persona non grata, and Jesse Eisenberg brought great shame to the DC universe. There were some really good Luthors on TV (live and animated), but I'm going to stick to movies here.

I can't say Nicholas Hoult is the perfect Lex. He did a decent job, but some of his megalomaniacal speeches fell a little flat. But that's okay, his actions spoke louder than words. His evil comes across in a way that I don't feel we've seen on-screen before, and he really shows us how money can be a superpower.

The elephant in the room: A lot of people (particularly former Superman Dean Cain) are complaining that the movie is too "woke". Of course, you know me, I'm all for woke. But even if I wasn't, I honestly don't see how this movie is more woke than any of the previous Superman movies.

Batman v Superman

Some are saying it's because it has a strong pro-immigrant message. Again, that didn't hit me as a major theme in the movie. There is a subplot where Luthor turns public opinion against Superman, and the fact that he's an alien is one of the bigger factors there. But this is an idea that was already explored in the Henry Cavill movies.

The only difference is that "woke" is currently the big buzzword that red hats like to use to decry anything that promotes common decency. So if you're conservative and avoiding this movie because Fox News told you to, I promise you're being lied to (as usual). The new Superman movie is no more woke than the previous ones, and if you like those you'll love this one.

Anyway, Superman (2025) is a fun, action-packed movie that feels like a comic book brought to life. Some filmmakers try to make comic heroes more realistic or gritty, others lean so far into the "comic book" aspect that the movies turn silly. But this movie gets it just right. It's silly enough to be fun, but real enough to keep you invested. Nothing's ever going to replace the Christopher Reeve movie in my heart, but damn if this doesn't come close.

Ranking the Superman Movies:

(Note, I'm just including movies where he's in the title. I'm excluding movies that just happen to include Superman, such as Justice League.) 

1. Superman (1978)

2. Superman (2025)

3. Superman II

4: Superman III

5: Superman Returns*

6: Man of Steel*

7: Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

9: Superman IV

* Note I had a hard time deciding which should be higher between 5 & 6. I think Man of Steel is a much stronger movie, but Superman Returns is actually fun. Even Man of Steel's action scenes feel lifeless and dull.

Jurassic World: Rebirth

So, up front: I think at this point most people know what to expect when they buy a ticket to see a Jurassic Park movie. First you're going to see people making bad decisions, followed shortly by people getting eaten by dinosaurs. Other than the first one, none of them are really "fine cinema," but more like theme park rides. And that's okay. It's the same reason you'd buy a ticket to see a Godzilla movie (again, other than the first one) or even why you might go see a wrestling match.

So does Rebirth deliver? Oh yes. This is my third favorite Jurassic Park/World movie. It has great special effects and lots of exciting action scenes. Definitely worth a watch if you're not a cinema snob.

The opening text informs us that most of the dinos from the previous movies have died out, and no longer wander all over the Earth, because they couldn't acclimate to modern Earth's climate conditions. About two scenes later, two of the main characters talk about how most of the dinos from the previous movies have died out, and no longer wander all over the Earth, because they couldn't acclimate to modern Earth's climate conditions. The very next scene shows us part of an educational cartoon which informs us that most of the dinos from the previous movies have died out, and no longer wander all over the Earth, because they couldn't acclimate to modern Earth's climate conditions. My takeaway from this is that most of the dinos from the previous movies have died out, and no longer wander all over the Earth, because they couldn't acclimate to modern Earth's climate conditions. Also, I'm not sure why the opening text was necessary.

Anyway, the remaining dinosaurs live in the tropical regions around the equator. The plot reminds me a bit of the Lost World, or perhaps Jurassic Park 3. The writers came up with a fairly decent excuse to get these characters to the dino island. Basically they need some fresh dino blood for medical research, to cure heart disease or something. And then they have to get back out.

But it takes a long time for them to get to the dino shores, I'm talking "Peter Jackson's King Kong" levels of lollygagging their way to the island. Along the way you get a lot of backstory for the main characters, which pretty much spoils which characters are going to die. Hint: If all you know about a character is their name, they're probably destined to be dino jerky. 

The tension in this movie is incredible. As the characters wander though the jungle, you're constantly hearing distant growls or seeing leaves move in the background. The jungle feels incredibly dangerous, like you could be attacked at any time from any direction.

The soundtrack bothered a little bit. There was one bit in the score that reminded me a little too much of the Jaws theme, and it played at similar times. But also the original Jurassic Park theme kind of got on my nerves now and then, and it's hard to explain why. They'd use it in the same way they did in the original, in scenes that show the majesty of the dinosaurs. I don't know, it just felt a little unearned. It kind of reminded me of that Ian Malcolm quote: "I'll tell you the problem with the scientific power that you're using here: it didn't require any discipline to attain it. You read what others had done and you took the next step." It almost feels like sacrilege to use the "awe and wonder" theme for a series that's long since turned into action schlock.

But these are minor quibbles. Overall it's a really fun movie that hits all the right beats, while still showing you enough new stuff to keep you interested. There's a few dinos in here that haven't been shown before, including the (Spoiler Alert) big bad mutant they face at the end. It kind of looks like the lovechild of a Rancor and the Cloverfield monster, and while it's not pretty to look at, it definitely does its job at being frightening.

I saw Rebirth in 3D. Not on purpose, mind you, that was just the earliest showing I could get so I did it. I don't usually see movies on opening weekend, either, but I had a coupon that made it just $7. The 3D was really good. It's probably been a good ten years since I've seen a 3D movie, and while the technology doesn't seem to have made any leaps forward, it did a good job of adding to the aforementioned tension. Several shots really stood out, such as one where they fire a needle towards the camera, as well as several jungle shots where something is chasing them in the background.

Overall I give this movie a thumbs up, maybe 3.5 out of 5 stars. It's not a masterpiece, but it's a worthy entry into the series.

My ranking of the Jurassic Park/World movies:
1. Jurassic Park
2. Jurassic World
3. Rebirth
4. Jurassic Park III
5. The Lost World
6. Dominion
7. Fallen Kingdom

Thunderbolts

Eh, it wasn't bad. Thunderbolts has some great fight scenes and snappy dialogue. Beyond that, it doesn't offer much.

Going in, I thought it was going to be Marvel's version of the Suicide Squad. But while there are some similarities - the team is composed of former criminals, after all - it's really not the same kind of movie.

Spoilers:

Picking up the story right after Captain America: Brave New World, Elaine from Seinfeld is about to lose her job, so she tries to tie up all her loose ends at once. She gives each of her secret operatives a mission to watch one of the others, and sends them all to the same location so they can fight it out in a deathtrap. Then they figure it out, and team up to stop her.

But of course that's not all. Because another one of Elaine's scrapped projects wakes up and becomes super-powerful, and becomes the main villain of the movie.

My issues with the movie are thus:

First of all, I don't really like any of the characters. Most of them are Temu versions of older heroes. Yelena is Dollar Tree Black Widow, while Red Guardian, John Walker, and yes, even Bucky are all discount Captain America. I guess Ghost is pretty original, but she has no personality whatsoever. She needs a catchphrase or a personality quirk or something to stand out.

I'm also a little bothered by how much homework this movie requires. You'll want to watch the Falcon/Winter Soldier Disney Plus series to know more about John Walker. You'll have to watch Ant-Man 2 to know Ghost. Yelena, Red Guardian, and Taskmaster all came from the Black Widow movie, which several of my friends skipped. I'm really glad they brought back these secondary characters, especially since they spent so much time introducing them. But since Endgame, a lot of viewers are starting to skip movies that don't look good, so they might not know these characters yet.

But I guess my biggest problem with the movie was the humor. You either find Red Guardian funny or you don't, and the script banks heavily on his antics. I find him more annoying than funny, honestly, so a lot of the humor fell flat for me.

Bigger Spoilers:

The Taskmaster thing. If you've paid any attention to people online, you know what I'm talking about. One half of the fanbase was already annoyed because she isn't like the Taskmaster from the comics. The other half is now annoyed because she gets killed off early in Thunderbolts. Seems like that would make the first half happy, since it leaves room for a new Taskmaster in later films. But really all it proves is you can't please everyone.

Personally I'm with the half that hated to see her get killed off. She was brainwashed when she was a villain, so she really didn't deserve such a fate. But like Suicide Squad, they probably wanted to kill off one character early so the audience feels like anyone can die.

Biggest Spoilers: 

Following Brave New World, this is the second MCU film in a row where the final confrontation comes down to talking to the villain. In fact, the Thunderbolts literally save the day through the power of hugs. Personally I'm okay with this. It's nice to occasionally see a climax that doesn't involve punching each other to death. But people are going to complain about the Disneyfication of the MCU.

Captain America: Brave New World

So I finally got around to watching the new Captain America movie. I have to say, it's much better than I was led to believe. I kept hearing people call it a "hot mess" without really explaining why.

It has a pretty straightforward plot. General Ross is now president; he's trying to be a better person while also covering up the sins of his past. The Leader (who Ross had once kept prisoner and exploited) brainwashes a bunch of people to make Ross look bad. One of the Leader's machinations turns Ross into a red Hulk, leading to the climax.

I wish I could put spoiler tags in the above paragraph, but what's the point? The trailers spoiled everything this time. 

I like that there's bad guys on both sides, and that the villain has a good reason to be angry. The best villains were always the ones who had a point, like Magneto or Killmonger.

The action scenes were great, as were the special effects. It has plot holes, but it's a comic book movie. Show me one MCU film that doesn't have plot holes. I wish there was a little less exposition - sometimes there was a little too much time between action scenes.

Two movies are required viewing to fully prepare for Brave New World: The Incredible Hulk and The Eternals. This is sad because Incredible Hulk is 17 years old now, older than a lot of Brave New World's viewers, so some people might not remember who this "Samuel Sterns" guy is. And of course, The Eternals was a long, boring film that no one really wants to remember.

But I think the worst part is that Brave New World feels like a Hulk film. It 100% feels like a Hulk storyline, with Hulk characters galore. But no Hulk. Mark Ruffalo got cheated. Justice for Mark!

Some people complained about the Leader's design, but I think he looks great. And let's face it, he'd have looked ridiculous if they'd used his original comic book design. Other people complained that a non-powered hero like Sam shouldn't be able to go toe-to-toe with the red Hulk, and they're right. But those people didn't actually watch the movie, which addresses that.

This isn't the best Captain America movie, but that's a high bar, and it holds up with the others just fine. Honestly, I hate to throw the word "racism" around, but I do have to wonder about people who loved the first three Captain America movies and hated this one. No, it doesn't make you racist if you dislike Brave New World, but when people consistently only hate on the more diverse Marvel movies, it starts to paint a picture.

Has quality gone downhill since Endgame? Sure, overall, I guess. But there's still plenty to love in some of the recent movies, and I wish people would stop calling for the death of the MCU. Brave New World is proof that there's plenty of excitement still left in the series.

By the way, don't bother sticking around for the post-credits scene. There is one, but it's pointless.