Glad you concur re: Prometheus, but I can't agree re: Alien 3. I'll cut and paste my reasoning from an earlier article I wrote (I've left the link underneath, if you're interested). :)

"A small but vocal group have posthumously reappraised David Fincher’s Alien 3 as a misunderstood masterpiece butchered by the studio. They are wrong. Whatever cut you inflict upon your eyeballs, the result is miserable frustration. Yes, the film has an interesting visual sensibility with some good performances getting the most out of a dreadful screenplay, but there’s your problem; said dreadful screenplay.

Starting as abysmally as it means to go on, the film opens with the idiotic deaths of Newt and Hicks in a crash landing, thus rendering meaningless the hard-won battles of the previous film. The intention is to shock perhaps, though it just comes off as immensely unsatisfying, not to mention cynical, as doubtless the scene isn’t presented for dramatic effect, but to paper over the refusal of Carrie Henn and Michael Biehn to reprise their roles.

More fundamentally, the film fails to grasp the central tenet of Ripley’s character as laid down in the previous two instalments: She is a survivor. To have her (illogically) impregnated and killed off in this preposterous way is to disregard the fundamental premise of the earlier masterpieces. As such, this film is the cinematic equivalent of the petulant teenager who thinks they understand the world when they don’t."

Full article here: https://fanfare.pub/ten-sequels-that-disgraced-their-parents-ddaef3b1429a