Howling III

After the complete failure of a sequel that "Howling II" was, Philippe Mora returned for yet another installment, trying a different (more spoofy) approach this time....but it didn't work out much better. Most of the blame must go not to the direction, but to the awful, disconnected script, which makes the film feel thrown-together almost at random. The werewolf effects are mostly pathetic, though those involving Imogen Annesley's newborn "baby" somehow manage to be good (and disgusting). Obviously this film was also intended to be a spoof, but it could have used more subtlety: we know that that director is meant to be an Alfred Hitchcock - lookalike, we don't need to hear him talk about Janet Leigh and the shower scene in "Psycho", we know that "flow" is "wolf" spelled backwards, we don't need to see it reflected on a mirror, etc. Perhaps the only two good things about "Howling III" are two of its actors: Annesley (definitely the cutest werewolf I've ever seen) and Barry Otto, who gives an honest performance as the compassionate scientist. (*1/2)

This movie is very disappointing, considering that it had real possibilities to be decent. Every time you think it might start to get good, it doesn't. Most of the acting is REALLY bad. The plot wanders aimlessly. The town where the werewolves live is called "Flow" (Wolf backwards. Real creative, guys.) Why are there 3 werewolves dressed up like nuns?? Who knows. Dame Edna (Barry Humphries) has a cameo. Imogen Annesley is the only good part of this movie, for what its worth.

While some people say this is the worst entry in the Howling series, I actually think it is one of the best of the sequels following the Joe Dante classic. Let's get one thing straight, this is an intentional camp film and takes great glee in being as cheesy as humanly possible. Here we are introduced to a new breed of lycanthrope from the Land Down- Under, a were-creature based on the long extinct thylacine. I don't want to give anything in the plot away but I would of really preferred if the movie focused more on giving us lots of werewolf action instead of focusing almost entirely on a certain romance-subplot. So in closing, I feel you should sit down with your friends and have have a laugh while watching this campy film.....

Howling III (1987) was a big improvement over the last film, part two. But by all means it's not a great one either. Philippe Mora directs once again but this time with better results. The film takes place in Australia and the werewolves this time are marsupial in origin. Filled with a not of in jokes and tongue in cheek humor, this film is not that bad but the problem is that the film get's a little to glad handy and it collapses upon itself. Oh well, Mr. Mora should know better next time because he almost got it right. A plethora of aussie film stars have supporting roles as well, A big step over part two but nowhere as brilliant as part one.

Maybe next time!

Slightly recommended.

C

For some reason, the director went Mad Max and made part three P.G.-13. He should have stuck to his guns and made it an R rated flick. What happens when you take a film of this genre and try to conform it for the major market? You'll lose money and produce a mediocre film.

xxx

Found myself really enjoying the first film, an atmospheric and witty film with amazing effects, and of 'The Howling' franchise it is by far the best. Didn't find myself enjoying the sequels as much, when watching them all for franchise completest sake and as someone who appreciates horror hugely, far less as a matter of fact, while not finding them completely disposable. Werewolf films have been done well on film, 'The Howling' is a good example of that but that cannot be said for its sequels.

'Howling III' is not unwatchable and there are far worse films around. It does though have most of the same problems that the second film did to every bit as bad effect, and has problems of its own. Like 'The Howling II: Your Sister is a Werewolf', the sly wit and well-timed eeriness of the first film are completely gone in 'Howling III' and replaced by over-the-top camp and bizarreness, neither of which really done well and there's little charm with either too. It was like watching a completely different franchise.

The scenery is quite nice and there are some atmospheric shots.

Dasha Blahova is suitably formidable and the occasional sly dig at the horror genre was reasonably fun.

Other than Blahova however the acting is dire, with a mix of the actors not looking comfortable in their roles, having little personality or over-compensating. Dame Edna Everage's appearance felt like it was thrown in with no regard as to whether it fitted or not. The all over the place "accents" are best not mentioned but they are only a small part of the problem, it was the character writing and the lack of screen presence that made the acting as bad as it was. The characters are neither interesting or have anything to make one feel anything for them other than frustration and annoyance, some are pointless or make random appearances. The writing is very cheesy with no natural flow, the campness gets really over the top and the stupidity stops being novelty value endearing and becomes intelligence-insulting.

Pacing is erratic, mostly dull as a result of padding out a flimsy story very choppily structured. The direction not only does not make the flaws of the second film but makes them worse. As just said, the story is a mess. There is no tension or suspense here, while it also suffers from being confusing, over-stretched and really tedious from all the dragged out stretches that felt like padding. The production values are poor this time too, the effects and make-up now woefully under-budgeted and often used gratuitously. The soundtrack is very intrusive and doesn't fit the film at all, also sounding cheap, while the ending feels incredibly rushed.

Overall, poorly done but at least it didn't leave me angry. 3/10 Bethany Cox