Beverly Hills Cop III

How Landis, Lucas, and even Murphy lent themselves to this debacle is beyond me. Maybe it wouldn't have been so bad if the many implausibilities didn't make it such a departure from the first movie, which I thought was very good.

The one armed rescue from the ferris wheel? Come on! No one has that kind of strength. And how did he escape burning his hand on the rope? How come all the bad guys, who were supposedly from the best security firm in California, couldn't hit the side of a barn with their uzis yet Axel and Co. hit dead center with virtually all of their shots? How did Axel produce counterfeit money with his image on it in like 10 seconds? How come the security guards gave Axel so much hassle when he first tried to enter the park, yet when he enters the corporate center , he is unfettered? The list goes on and on.

Now, I know what you are saying. "It's a movie!" "It's not supposed to be real." But you see, the first episode of the series was quite plausible, and in contrast, made the this third film highly suspect and therefore subject to ridicule.

Suffice it to say, we won't be seeing BHC IV any time soon. Thank God!

You would think that anyone who could do the hilarious Amazon Women on the Moon would be a good director. Sorry, Mr Landis, but you blew it on this one.

Maybe it was just one sequel too many, but it fell short of the previous two and is just something to watch if there is absolutely nothing else on TV.

Only Billy Rosewood (Judge Reinhold) and Inspector Todd (Gilbert R. Hill) are back with Axel Foley in this one. Billy is great with Axel, but this film just doesn't have the action of the other two.

Theresa Randle provides the eye candy.

The early 90s were not kind to Eddie Murphy. Paramount butchered Another 48 Hours in the editing room, audiences turned their noses up at Boomerang, and almost nobody even bothered with The Distinguished Gentleman. Eddie had lost his pulling power and decided to go back to the role that made him a superstar. But 1994 just wasn't the right moment as most of the cast and crew were busy, leaving very little in the way of continuity. Several scripts came and went, and what we finally got was a lame 'Die Hard in a Theme Park' story.

There is a huge list of reasons why BHC3 stinks:

No Taggart. No Bogomil. No Jeffrey. No Harold Faltermeyer. No Bruckheimer/Simpson. No opening title. No wisecracking.

Don't get me wrong, I like Hector Elizondo, but he's no substitute for John Ashton (who's absence is explained with a single, flippant line of dialogue). I can't help but think if the above list was shorter then the movie wouldn't have been such a failure. Where on earth did the $70 million budget go? John Landis' action scenes are flat and static, with no real spark or energy.

All three Beverly Hills Cop movies have had horrible scripts, huge plot holes, and hammy villains, so I guess in a way it IS in keeping with the tradition. Eddie Murphy gives a very lazy, disinterested performance as Axel Foley, which reminds me a lot of Seagal's effort in Under Siege 2. Neither of them wanted to be there and were phoning it in long distance. This is NOT the Axel you know and love here.

It's saved from the gutter by Judge Reinhold's gung-ho as usual Rosewood, and the last minute addition of Axel Fox, a nice touch and the most three-dimensional character in the movie.

I don't know what I expected when I started watching this movie, but I was definitely let down by miles. First of all the dialogue is so bad and cheese, that it sometimes physically hurt to watch. The killing in this movie just takes away from the comedy , and believe me there is loads of killing it. Another negative factor is, that for some unexplainable reason someone thought it was a good idea to make every flame in this movie a bright blue colour, which sometimes really hurts while watching in a dark room. That being said there are some scenes that I found genuinely funny, although most of the time this was unintentional like in action scenes or scenes that where supposed to be serious and dramatic.

Watched this for the first time last night, and was pretty disappointed (was on a triple bill with BHC 1 & 2 on Bravo, great way to ring in the New Year!).

Not overly funny, the villains were pretty weak, which is odd as John Saxon is usually pretty good as a bad guy, and Tim Carhart was great as Eddie Willows on CSI. Seemed very forced at times, and definitely lacked the Foley-Rosewood-Taggart chemistry that made the first two films so successful. Hector Elizondo is no replacement for John Ashton. The return of Bronson Pinchot as "Serge" was painful to watch.

5 out of 10, based more on Eddie Murphy's performance than anything else.