Candyman: Day of the Dead

"Candyman 3: Day of the Dead" is a prime example of a horror series going to the well one too many times. At the time of its release in 1992, the original "Candyman" was one of the most ferociously nasty horror films in a number of years, and while the 1995 sequel, "Candyman: Farewell to the Flesh," wasn't quite up to par with the first film, was at least watchable. The disappointing "Candyman 3" isn't utterly horrible, but it is, at best, unnecessary.

Tony Todd (and his cool-as-hell, gravelly as grave dirt voice) returns for a third go-round as the hook-handed, ghostly maniac, and this time he's brought back to life by his last surviving relative, his great-great granddaughter "Caroline," an artist who lives in the Barrio section of Los Angeles. Caroline is inexplicably portrayed by former "Baywatch" babe Donna D'Errico (of all people!), who can't act worth a damn but boy, does she look good running around in a tight tank top and black panties, so I honestly had no complaints about her performance. After she displays Candyman's paintings at a local art gallery, Caroline makes the mistake of saying her ancestor's name five times into a mirror and soon Candyman is running around the streets of L.A., popping up amidst swarms of bees, carving up her friends, asking her to "Be...my...victim," et cetera, et cetera. A pair of racist cops are convinced that Caroline is behind the string of murders and are intent on putting her away for the crimes, so in order to clear her name she has to stop the Candyman once and for all (with some help from an actor friend and his adorable young daughter), set against the backdrop of the annual Dia de los Muertos ("Day of the Dead") celebration in East L.A.

On paper it sounds OK, but the film unravels quickly. The movie is so cheap looking compared to the other two entries in the series that it could pass for a SyFy Channel or Lifetime Original Movie. Apparently the film was shot in a mere 20 days, mostly during daylight hours as the budget wouldn't allow for nighttime shoots, so even when scenes are supposed to be dark and scary, they look far too bright and unrealistic. Tony Todd does the best he can with what he's given but even he looks like he's simply going through the motions. As I previously mentioned, D'Errico can't act, so her Minnie Mouse-ish screams of terror will provide tons of unintentional comedy. There's a few decent gore scenes and some T&A sprinkled throughout but overall "Candyman 3" never comes close to giving you the feeling of darkness and dread that the original had in abundance.

I suppose if you're a fan of the series, "Candyman 3" is worth a look as long as you can find it cheap (like I did) but unless you're a Candyman completist you can safely give this one a miss.

I have a theory that you can judge a film on its trailers. The rental for Candyman 3 included such cinematic gems as Idle Hands, The Eternal, Water Damage and The Substitute 3: The Winner Takes All. To save you looking, the average rating for said films on the IMDb is currently 4.87. Though that's still higher than the rating for Candyman 3.

Another film with the same title was also a weak third in a horror trilogy. Though George A.Romero's Day of the Dead is still streets ahead of this. The vague phallic symbolism of the Candyman's hook is here expanded upon, the sociological issues toned down, while the beautiful theme is ditched in favour of a generic pop beat. Lead Donna D'Errico has gorgeous breasts, but do we really need to see them all through the film? A plastic temptress who, like Kelly Rowan, couldn't hold a candle to Virginia Madsen, she fails to wear a bra in any single scene. She even goes topless on two occasions, one of four actresses in the movie to do so. That's Day of the Dead all over: gratuitous nudity, bad language, gore and a total lack of credibility.

The Mexican element is in no way stereotypical. No, instead characters make love to Latino guitar music after downing Tequilas. Sĕnõr. While a group of Candy disciples obviously spent so long in worshipping him they had no time for acting lessons. Poor old Candyman, marginalised in his own franchise in favour of D'Errico's nipples, resorts to saying "be my victim" about ten million times. Maybe he's really saying "bee – my victim!" in reference to those lamely CGIed insects that fly around him? Perhaps not. Candyman states he wants to reclaim his dignity. Sorry, mate – you lost that when you signed on for the sequels...

Did this film really have a chance at beating the hook stabbing prequels? I was pleasantly surprised at how good the follow up to the first was, however the third...well.

After avoiding this movie for ages, not wanting to be disappointed, I finally popped by my local video shop ( I may have gone to see it at the flicks if I had been given the chance ). Sat down with a mate who hadn't seen the others and watched him squirm, not from the horror but from boredom.

A poor low budget remake of the others this certainly was. A gripping glorious gore fest this was not.

We now find that Candyman had time to do a couple of sketches of his voluptuous lover (he's no Picasso) during his slave(?) days. Thankgod the writers kept his horrible demise the same.

Well I wasn't expecting the Earth, but how about a complete self parody instead of this, at least we could have laughed aloud in the correct places, like Scream. Was it supposed to be funny?

Some good ideas: an insensitive lover who had to get it, a subway scene that didn't stand a chance against 'American werewolf' but was still enjoyable, a great cop death and plenty of honey.

Okay it was bearable. Just. Maybe they'll repair the damage with another; until then I'll conveniently forget this one. Watch the others again instead.

First off this had a couple of things going against it(no philip glass score, not released theatrically, baywatch babe in lead role) but it is a pretty good movie. Sure Donna D'Errico just stands around and screams terribly when she should be running for the doors but she holds up in SOME scenes. The movie's score is at first crappy for a candyman movie(it sounds like a rap beat or something) but when candyman appears in the subway its all good. Other characters are kinda underwritten and some of the movie is a little bit to much the same as the first but the writer and director try to merge the best of the first two and for the most part do a good job but it's a nicely edited and well photographed movie that should hold up for fans of the first 2.....it's a movie that is well made and is more theatrical than direct-to-video.....nice n gory too.

I saw this movie and I couldn't help but laugh. It was sooooo pointless and dumb. What a waste of money, time, etc. Why couldn't they just have Candyman die in the first one?! No, they had to go ahead and make two pointless sequals. In this movie everything changes from the graphics to Candyman's hook which made me laugh at the movie even more. It was a flop as well as a joke which is no wonder it came out straight to video. The main character in the movie is a Baywatch dumb blonde who can't act or even act like she's acting. She even has sex with Candyman which made me laugh I almost peed my pants. DON'T WASTE YOUR TIME UNLESS YOU WANT TO LAUGH ALL NIGHT LONG!! I give it one star out of ten!! *snickers*