Malevolence 3: Killer

If you look not so carefully you'll note that qll the reviews that give this a 9 0r 10 have similar headers. FAKE REVIEWS.

This is my HONEST assessment of the film.

The production values are better than a lot of the really bad horror films out there but that doesnt make this a good movie.

In fact, it's pretty awful.

The acting is atrocious and the directing is that of a high school student. One has to wonder how someone put up $750K for this crap.

And folks, can you stop with the brooding music already? It's been doe over and over and now it's just annoying. Stephen Mena should not be allowed to make another picture

The movie director has seen Halloween for sure and was pretty inspired but didn't really know how to express that. This is why he made such a dull and ridiculous film. It was an amateur attempt to make a fiction movie. Malevolence 3: Killer is full of bad acting, bad editing and pretty long scenes that look like a first movie making task at film-making school. If you are a horror fan, don't waste your time on this pile of rubbish.

The first two relied more on psychological study, character development, intense brooding tension n the juxtaposition of tranquility (amazing photography) and underlying danger, this one is a straight up slasher filled with cliches. Saw this last nite n was disappointed.

So aft his lair gets busted n two people survive the harrowing nite, Martin while on the run from the FBI, somehow tracks the two survivors with their wallet. A big question. Why werent the survivors given ample security. How did Martin get hold of the wallet. Towards the end too, a survivor is left without any security inspite of the survivor's phone taken away by Martin while the same FBI guy is pursuing the case. Martin is shown as an introvert, illiterate, traumatized n homegrown boy but he manages to track down his original address while our FBI guy later realises that Martin's mother has relocated. The killings get lousy as none of the victims puts up a fight n it gets filled with cliches. This time the cinematography ain't that great n a sex scene with nudity is added to titillate. Generous with 7 for Mena's effort n his one man show with tackling different technical aspects of the films.

KILLER is the third installment in Director, Stevan Mena's "trilogy". Opening with the finale of MALEVOLENCE, it shows the escape of Martin Bristol into an unsuspecting town. Elle (Katie Gibson), a struggling college student, and her two housemates are about to find out that they have bigger problems than just inconsiderate boyfriends and the world's slimiest landlord. Martin is on a singular mission, and only future corpses stand between Martin and a big reunion.

Definitely the lesser entry in the series, it's not bad, although some of the acting is surprisingly wooden, and the ending is less than satisfying.

THINGS NOT TO DO, EVER: #1- If you see someone being dragged into a dark garage, don't follow them! #2- If the murdering maniac is indestructible, don't lose track of him!

BEST HUMOROUS PART OF THE MOVIE: Adrienne Barbeau's character, Meredith telling an FBI agent about the result of her late husband's smoking habit! Pure gold!...

I would have given it a 5.5 if I could, but since we round up here on IMDB I went with 6. Many of the commenters are right when they say it has strong "Halloween" vibes. Sure it's a bit cliche at times, but it's a slasher, and an homage to 80s slasher films, so that's to be expected. It's apart of the genre. I liked it in general. The acting was good and certainly better than most 80s slasher casts. Story was solid enough. And as someone who's always liked 80s horror it was nostalgic. People giving it a 1 are just trying to manipulate the rating in my opinion, and if you like 80s slasher films, I think you'll like it.