Avis des utilisateurs

Terry O'Quinn was fantastic as the antagonist in the previous films, he made them entertaining and better than by all rights they should have been.

Having a sequel without him in was just asking for trouble but to Robert Wightman's credit he actually did a good job.

Sadly the film starts off poorly, the very concept of the plastic surgery is quite frankly offensive to the viewers! If you can get past that this is essentially the same film as the previous two and is a passable if much not needed effort.

The one difference here is that our antagonist decides that one family isn't enough and pry's himself into the lives of two while desperately trying to keep them apart.

This is harmless enough stuff but in many ways felt more like a Lifetime original than a Stepfather movie.

The Good:

Strong performance by Robert Wightman

The Bad:

Plastic surgery concept is ridiculous

The return of psycho Jerry Blake (Terry O'Quinn) in Stepfather II proved that he was impossible to kill, and sure enough, here he is again, up to his old tricks despite the claw-hammer to the chest he received at the end of Jeff Burr's sequel. Part three also shows 'the stepfather' to be impervious to pain, the killer having plastic surgery to alter his face (and, miraculously, his voice and hairline) all without the need for anaesthetic. With his new look (the character now played by Robert Wightman, who resembles Jim Carrey with a touch of Christian Bale), the killer once again goes looking for the ideal family unit.

This time, the murderous loony - now calling himself Keith Grant - marries divorcee Christine Davis (Priscilla Barnes), once again without the need of a birth certificate or any kind of legal documentation, but her wheelchair-bound amateur detective son Andy (David Tom) isn't convinced of his new stepfather's apparent good intentions. When Christine learns that she cannot have any more children, and Andy goes to stay with his father for the summer, Grant becomes angry that his family is no longer perfect and starts to romance widow Jennifer (Season Hubley) in preparation for his next move. Meanwhile, Andy has been investigating Grant's mysterious past and begins to suspect that his stepfather is a serial killer.

Those familiar with the series' formula will no doubt know how the film will pan out, Grant killing anyone who threatens to spoil his plans, before turning his murderous intentions to Christine; this time around, the deaths are a tad gorier despite this being a made-for-TV movie (Grant uses a bone saw and a rake, and a wood-chipper comes into play at the end), but this is still a very tired three-quel lacking in originality and genuine thrills, and which, at 110 minutes, is at least 20 minutes too long.

I get a kick out of these Stepfather movies. One minute the wife is this `Oh I'm so in love with you Henry/Jerry/Bill/Keith etc'. Then the next minute after he snaps she's calling him a seven letter word beginning with a B meaning an illegitimate child. This installment doesn't have Terry O'Quinn and it's not the same without him. The I just wanna be a family man gets a super duper facial make over from an underground plastic surgeon then finds another single mom with child and we're off and running. Not as good as the first two. Robert Wightman just didn't seem to be able to project that Psycho demeanor that Terry O'Quinn was so good at. As many times that the Stepfather had been stabbed, shot, hit over the head etc. you'd think that he would have wised up and said `This time I'm gonna get a girl who doesn't already have a child and try it that way for a change.'

Keith Grant (Robert Wightman) seems like an ideal choice for a husband. He's the new single man on the block, cheerful, polite, morally sound and employed at a successful neighborhood greenhouse. Unfortunately, Keith is also the same mass murderer played by Terry O'Quinn in the two previous entries. Thanks to the miracle of plastic surgery, the psycho is now a new man (literally) and is free to continue on in his psychotic search for the "perfect" family. He meets, romances and marries a schoolteacher (Priscilla Barnes) with a prodigal, computer-obsessed, wheelchair-bound son (David Tom), who sees right through Keith's facade. And they're not perfect so you know what to expect.

Wightman has his hands full trying to fill in for the wonderful O'Quinn, and comes off more nerdy and weird than psychotic and calculating. That aside, this third entry is acceptable genre fare, with a good supporting cast, realistic characters and some stupid fun with a garden mulch machine.

Score: 4 out of 10

While I think it's a very unnecessary sequel, giving that the antagonist miraculously survived fatal injuries that would've killed a normal/any other person (Knife stabs and the claw-hammer to the chest/heart he received at the end of part 2) I still found it to be entertaining. One performance, particularly, stood out from the entire cast and made this unnecessary, straight to video sequel a lot more fun to watch- and that was the youngest, David Tom playing the wheel-chaired young son. It's not very often that we see young actors with such talent. He was very convincing and believable in his role as the young suspicious son. They did a great job casting him, and got lucky with that too. He played a very big factor in my rating of this film. Now the whole plastic surgery concept thing is just ridiculous and over the top. They obviously did it because the actor Terry O'Quinn just didn't wanna do it anymore (He was probably like what?! The character never died?! I have to do the same thing over and over again?!) So they should've just literally started all over with a different villain, a different character who's just like Terry from the original with the same fascination over single mothers and divorcees. Maybe like inspired by him or something? As opposed to him getting plastic surgeries in the face to alter the way he looks. Like what about his voice and accent? Sounds very amateurish like a cheap lifetime movie or some soap opera show or something. All in all, it's not a bad end of franchise sequel, knowing that he won't be coming back after the way he dies in this. I've seen way worse movie sequels, but it's not amazing either.

The first film in the Stepfather slasher film series was excellent! The second film was respectable. This third film felt unnecessary, particularly because it was minus the star of the first two films, Terry O'Quinn. This sequel picks up following the events of part two with the homicidal stepfather again escaping custody and this time getting plastic surgery, which explains the change of actor. Robert Wightman takes over as Keith Grant / The Stepfather and once again tries to find the perfect all-American family. This new family has Priscilla Barnes as the mother to a young wheelchair-bound boy, who is paralyzed for no medically explained reason. His condition is all in his mind and, of course, SPOILER ALERT! works its way into the film's finale where he has to use his legs to fight off his deranged stepfather. Wightman is passable as the stepfather and actually does a good job impersonating the odd Robert Young Father Knows Best speech cadence established by O'Quinn in the firsts two films, but he lacks the the edge and frightening mental instability O'Quinn brought to the role. Overall, this is a pretty run of the mill slasher flick. Nothing terrible, but nothing all that interesting either. Season Hubley, John Ingle, and Christa Miller also appear in the film.

I recall starting to watch this on cable when it made its debut back in 1992. My first impression was that it looked cheap, and I didn't finish watching it. Now, in 2005, I finally got to see it from beginning to end. It is surprisingly good for a made-for-cable movie, and it stands up to Stepfather II, at the very least. Terry O'Quinn does not return to his role in this one, he is replaced by Robert Wightman. The change in appearance is explained (and shown) by plastic surgery. In fact, the whole plot seems to revolve around it. The plastic surgery sequence is particularly unsettling, as the stepfather undergoes the procedure without any anesthesia, and by a 'back-alley' plastic surgeon. Unfortunately, Robert Wightman is the weakest part of the production. His acting, when he is suppose to be normal, is just awful. He only shines in his moments when he loses his cool (that is probably how he got the part, auditioning as the 'crazy' stepfather). Priscilla Barnes carries the whole movie. She is very good, and it's a serious, dramatic role for her. Season Hubley is also very good in a strong supporting role. Worth checking out, it makes a good 'guilty pleasure.'

By now we must know this man isn't going to die! Only this time, well he has - sort of. Terry Quinn clearly read the script and decided to sit this out, ergo "Jerry" now becomes "Keith" (Robert Wightman). He has escaped from a not so high-security institution, had some plastic surgery and headed for the unsuspecting "Davis" family. That's mom "Christine" (Priscilla Barnes) and her wheelchair-bound, terrapin-keeping, young son "Andy" (David Tom). It's actually the latter character who begins to smell a rat as his new father makes a few slip ups which he confides to local priest (John Ingle). Sadly, though, his dog-collar proves little protection as the growing body count takes us nicely to a finale in a nursery equipped with loads of shears, pitch-forks, hoes and one those industrial-scale tree shredders. Sadly, nobody thought to put the script in there first, and/or the notes from the casting session as for almost two hours we are subjected to something feeble and predictable. For horror to work, I think, it has to be vaguely plausible but here the whole scenario is nonsense from start to finish. This wasn't a very strong franchise to start with, but by now we are well and truly squeezing the dregs from an idea that should never have got off the (very small) drawing board. The denouement is actually not just ridiculous but I also think quite philosophically dangerous too, but to be honest I can't recommend that you ever get anywhere near that far.

Welcome to Deer View, CA, where police forces don't exist (or people don't ever call them), where locals can go missing without anyone ever looking for them, and where it's still perfectly normal for a young boy to be best friends with an elderly priest! All in all, the ideal spot for the serial killer with the weirdest modus operandi in the history of horror cinema to start over again. Terry O'Quinn didn't want to depict the crazed stepfather for the third time, but the script ingeniously resolves this little complication. During the sinister opening credits - shot through an odd blue filter - we witness how our escaped psycho undergoes clandestine plastic surgery by a clandestine surgeon. You can recognize clandestine surgeons because they smoke whilst operating.

Enter the utterly anti-charismatic Robert Wightman, who assumes the fake identity Keith Grant and rapidly finds fitting victims for his favorite game: courting a single mother and posing as the perfect stepfather for her children; - in this case a psychosomatic crippled boy. And if someone grows suspicious? Well, then stepdaddy murders them with a shovel.

There are two possible ways to look at "Stepfather III". As a lousy and redundant 90s sequel, in which the suspense and creativity of the 1987 semi-classic are replaced by extremely sick and gratuitous gore. Undeniably, the plot is full of holes, the script full of clichés and predictable twists (from the moment we learn the boy's illness is psychosomatic, you just know he will walk at the end. I don't even consider that a spoiler). On the other hand, you could also state it's an unscrupulous and incredibly amusing slasher with all the right ingredients. The latter is how I remember "Stepfather III", for sure! My advice would be to ignore all the dumb things the characters do and say, and just massively enjoy the vile and unhinged murder sequences. The climax, involving an industrial threshing machine, is so tremendously over-the-top I couldn't stop grinning. Try to plastic surgery yourself out of that, ha!

This last ''stepfather'' sucks ! The first movie was OK, second not bad, but this last movie designed for the cable simply sucks ! The acting is so bad, the plot (what plot ?) is poor and maybe less inventive than a '' Bold and the Beautiful'' episode.

Robert Wightman (as the stepfather) is the worst actor on earth. Terry O'Quinn, who performed the stepfather in the two previous movies, was frightening. Wightman is funny and idiot by moments, especially in the final scene.

Sincerely, avoid this movie, don't even waste a buck for it. As for me, I was stupid to buy '' Stepfather 3'' in a bargain shop for $ 1. Because it's too much for such a crap ...

Don't even waste your money on the rental; go out and buy a carton of expired milk instead. The milk will surely be better. If it's just on cable and you see it in the guide; just clean out your garage or scrub all the garbage cans. Either will be much more satisfying. This movie absolutely smells!!!!!!

This movie's script, plot and acting are all so stupid (except for Priscilla Barnes) that they're hilarious. Unfortunately, this was intended to be a horror film.

Unless you like movies that are so bad they're funny (a la Plan 9 From Outer Space), I'd recommend avoiding this film.

For all the wrong reasons. Absolutely horrible yet so funny. These stepfather movies r all hilarious (especially with the help of a little "green" friend lol). For me these films are on the same level as Battlefield Earth. Love to watch when I need my spirits lifted.

Wow, and I thought the second one was bad,

This the stepfather as yet again escaped from the insane asylum and had his face surgically, that one to add a re-cast into the story.

This was no wear near as good as first movie, it was even worse then second movie, which I didn't not like that much,

However I do think this movie was far more bloody then the other two movies put together, there were few gory deaths in this movie, even the way they show the death scenes look a bit strange in bad way.

The acting in this movie was really bad from most of the cast, I didn't think Robert Wightman was the right person for this role, I just could find him believable as the killer.

I did like how the movie ended, also some parts of the movie are very predicable as we seen twice, with little sub plot about boy in wheelchair.

I was not aware that this was TV movie until now, I thought it was decent and really bloody for TV movie, the acting was really bad in this movie from most of the cast.

4 out of 10

I'm fairly certain I only watched the R rated version of the movie. I am also fairly certain that my rating would not have changed if I had seen the other version of this. I guess it would have been way more fun to watch ... but really that is not a high bar here.

Kudos for making the transition from Terry to another actor somewhat believable. But it really is not enough to elevate this, even if it is a neat idea. The new actor never reaches anything Terry set out and does not come close to him when it comes to charisma or acting chops in my opinion. This feels like a darker tv movie - all cliches included. Not many saving graces, except I reckon the ending that put a stop to the whole series - although if it had been succesful I reckon they would have thought of something to continue with the madness.

The only reason that i kept watching was that it is a ridiculous bad film!The only thing horrible was the camera-work! And maybe the unbelievable story. Or the over the top acting. I kept laughing in disbelief over so much stupidity!Watch this only as an example how to do things the bad way in movie-making. Or it is just a waste of your time.

Ok! 1 was great, 2 was ok, but this one is pushing it a bit far. Obviously Terry O'quinn didn't want to do this so they made up the storyline that the stepfather had his face changed so that he could go on with his murderous ways. With an annoying wheelchair-bound son to boot, we recommended surfing right past this film.