Dar l'invincible III - l'oeil de Braxus

Old Lord Agon (David Warner) desires an object of power, the Eye of Braxus, which would provide him with new energy. Dar (Marc Singer) owns one half of the amulet, young king Tal (Casper Van Dien, with a ridiculous wig) the other half. Tal is caught by Lord Agon. Dar starts a rescue mission across the jungle and meets Shada (Sandra Hess, "Mortal Kombat 2"). He makes the mistake to trust her, but then she tries to steal the amulet. And on who's side is the witch Morgana (Lesley-Anne Down)?

It looks like a cheap TV production, not a movie, because it is a cheap TV production. The demon Braxus could be one of the Ninja Turtles on a Monday morning. Gabrielle Beaumont, an experienced TV director ("Dynasty", "Star Trek: Next Generation") does a good job within the budget limitation. The story is solid, the characters have a certain charm, thus 'Beastmaster 3' is neither a contribution as important to the genre as the first installment, nor trash as bizarre as the second part, but simply average entertainment to pass the time.

This movie will never win an Oscar (or any other award) but to be honest, I don't think it was ever made to do so. It is very much in a B-movie style and that's exactly how it should be. And shouldn't be taken too seriously.

I personally like the idea that ferrets and a lion can get on in harmony - but hey I'm an idealist.

The acting is terrible - the story has been done so often that anyone in their basement could probably make a decent job of a copy, but all that said the movie is enjoyable... as long as you take it for what it is!! AND NOTHING MORE!! In many ways it reminds me of movies like Willow and Krull - not huge productions, not great acting but enjoyable all the same.

Quick Review: Man who can command animals' sets off to save his brother (the king) from an evil sorcerer before same can let loose the power of a terrible creature... filled with swords, sorcery and scantily clad people.

Me and some friends went to the movie store to rent three movies one day back in 1996. From those three movies, this is the one I remember. It is simply one of the worst movies ever made. The acting is horrible, the music is awful and the script contradicts the other two movies. For example the animal who used to be a tiger is now a lion who changes sex during the movie!

Marc Singer looks like 65 something and is still the same stiff actor who tries to drop some "funny" lines from time to time.

On the other hand it's fun to watch just because it's so bad. I give it 3 out of 10. If you want a good laugh I would recommend it.

Beastmaster III is a definite improvement over the second flick in this series. It's not the best in the genre, but it certainly is not the worst. Marc Singer still plays the best beast master around, and this time he has a supporting cast that chews as much scenery as he does! Tony Todd (of "Candyman" fame) and Sondra Hess (Sonya Blade from "Mortal Kombat 2") are fine as Singer's backups, but it's really the animals who steal this show. I'm not anxious for a Beastmaster 4, but this one definitely left a better taste in my mouth than number 2. Recommended for B-movie and barbarian flick fans.

Marc Singer returns as Dar "The Beastmaster" who this time helps save his brother king from an evil sorcerer named Agon(David Warner) in this made for TV version of the Beastmaster story. What helps Beastmaster III in being better than it's awful predecessor (Beastmaster 2) is that it stays in it's time zone and it doesn't have Kari Wuher (Always a plus) the movie plays out like a watchable sword and sorcery movie from the 80's. The action isn't very well staged because the camera angles give off the impression of made for TV but they do happen frequent enough and are occasionally fun to watch. Though the movie belongs to Marc Singer who basically is likable and very well suited to his part. Indeed the whole cast is fun as they include Tony Todd, Lesley Anne-Down, David Warner and Patrick Kilpatrick. Once again the movie ends on an unsatisfying note but basically it does represent a vast improvement over # 2. However stick with the first, as the best of the series.

* * out of 4-(Fair)