Customer Reviews

Beverly Hills Cop III [VHS]

5 star:		(9)
4 star:		(10)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(10)
1 star:		(12)

 

 

The early 90s were not kind to Eddie Murphy. Paramount butchered Another 48 Hours in the editing room, audiences turned their noses up at Boomerang, and almost nobody even bothered with The Distinguished Gentleman. Eddie had lost his pulling power and decided to go back to the role that made him a superstar. But 1994 just wasn't the right moment as most of the cast and crew were busy, leaving very little in the way of continuity. Several scripts came and went, and what we finally got was a lame 'Die Hard in a Theme Park' story.

There is a huge list of reasons why BHC3 stinks:

No Taggart.
No Bogomil.
No Jeffrey.
No Harold Faltermeyer.
No Bruckheimer/Simpson.
No opening title.
No wisecracking.

Don't get me wrong, I like Hector Elizondo, but he's no substitute for John Ashton (who's absence is explained with a single, flippant line of dialogue). I can't help but think if the above list was shorter then the movie wouldn't have been such a failure. Where on earth did the $70 million budget go? John Landis' action scenes are flat and static, with no real spark or energy.

All three Beverly Hills Cop movies have had horrible scripts, huge plot holes, and hammy villains, so I guess in a way it IS in keeping with the tradition. Eddie Murphy gives a very lazy, disinterested performance as Axel Foley, which reminds me a long of Seagal's effort in Under Siege 2. Neither of them wanted to be there and were phoning it in long distance. This is NOT the Axel you know and love here.

It's saved from one-star rating by Judge Reinhold's gung-ho as usual Rosewood, and the last minute addition of Axel Fox, a nice touch and the most three-dimensional character in the movie.

The DVD looks quite mediocre.

I think "Beverly Hills cop III" was an extremely regrettable turning point in the nice career of one of the most talented and funniest black comedians Hollywood has ever seen - Mr. Eddie Murphy. Before it he used to be funny or at least much funnier. He appeared in the rather enjoyable flicks like "48 Hrs.", "Coming to America", "Another 48 Hrs.", "The Distinguished gentleman", "Boomerang" and of course "Beverly Hills cop I & II" - two beloved movies that will always be his very best works.

Then someone decided to add part three in the so far terrific "Beverly Hills cop" saga. This time Axel Foley was on the mission of revenge and the comedy was unfortunately replaced by action. Who forgot that most of the glamour behind these movies came directly from the humor? Even though John Landis - the man behind hit comedies like "The Blues Brothers" and "Three Amigos!" - sat in the director's chair the end result just wasn't that funny anymore or at least it was funny very rarely and that's a bad thing if we compare part three to its absolutely hilarious precursors. ...and as it happened, after "Beverly Hills cop III" Eddie Murphy got roles from the movies like "Vampire in Brooklyn" (with only couple of excellent scenes), "Metro" (that apparently wasn't supposed to be funny in the first place), "Doctor Dolittle" (cute little film for kiddies who love furry animals that talk), "Holy man" (interesting but more confusing than amusing) and "Nutty Professor II: The Klumps" (definitely one of his worst movies, waste of his undisputed talents and a model example of a comedy that doesn't make you laugh).

Lately I saw "Life" and surprisingly it was pretty brilliant and alongside with fairly good "Bowfinger" it's the only completely clear exception in this course. What I'm saying is, "Beverly Hills cop III" started it all. Was it all just a coincidence or was it meant to be that Eddie Murphy's best years were in the 80's and early 90's? I can't tell. This is just the way I see things.

Now this is one movie that made me want to get up and leave the movie theater! I regret paying my hard earned money to see this badly put out, predictable, boring plot.

The third installment of the popular "Beverly Hills Cop" series is like a distant relative who comes to stay with you. At first, you're glad to see them and catch up on old times, but they sure wear out their welcome fast. This film reaches that point after about fifteen minutes.

Eddie Murphy is back as Alex Foley, the increasingly improbable fish-out-of-water detective from Detroit. Once again, Axel is doing battle with the law enforcement establishment, the Beverly Hills Police Department, and the Bad Guys who killed his friend. Sound familiar? Even Serge (Bronson Pinchot) is back, in a desperate, painful scene that seems to go on forever.

The direction, by veteran Murphy helmer John Landis, is acceptable, showing Landis' usual flair for pacing and stunts. The screenplay by the usually reliable Steven deSouza, though, is woefully half-baked. It is never clear what the tone of the picture is supposed to be. The action scenes are very off-hand and frequently played for laughs, while the comedy scenes are forced and unfunny. The story never builds the sense of jeopardy and conflict that is essential to a film of this type. It is neither a laugh riot, nor is it even remotely suspenseful. Also, any film that makes Hector Elizondo--one of the best character actors around--look bad has some serious problems.

There are two good things about "Cop III." One is an excellent action sequence set on an amusement park Ferris wheel. That is the only exciting part of the film. The other thing I liked was the series of cameos by a variety of famous film directors (like George Lucas), a typical Landis gag. It at least gives you something to look for in some pretty boring scenes.

The first two films of this trilogy are great. If you have never seen them, I recommend that you go to your local rental store and rent them. As for this one, it's horrible. This is the worst one to me. I hated the theme park story, or was it just the theme park music that was annoying? Anyway, avoid it.

I rented this movie and stopped it not even halfway through...not worth reviewing, but what a piece of absolute garbage.

"Are you going to work with Eddie Murphy again?" Asked to John Landis by someone at the 1992 Fangoria Convention. "I hope not," Landis replied. Now keep in mind this was in reference to them working together in "Coming to America," not this film. I have no idea why they teamed up together again, because the evidence from this film shows they must have really disliked one another even more. Look at this film and then look at "Trading Places," their first collaboration and you can begin to see the differences. I thought with this third "Beverly Hills Cop," Landis was going to support the story adaquately, then for the action scenes show his wild spirit (ala the ending sequences of "Animal House," "American Werewolf," and "Blues Brothers"), and for the comedy, roll two to three cameras and let Eddie play with each scene. If Landis could give Michael Jackson room to do what he wanted in the "Black or White" video, why not let Eddie do what he does best instead of forcing his character and us the audience through a bunch of painfully unfunny scenes, terrible acting, and a tv movie look? Sure it looks better on dvd than it did in the theatres, but that is still no excuse for betraying the core of this series. If it had tried to do something different and been successful, this film would be liked much more. The reason why it is so hated is because the film has no pulse or soul--something I never thought possible for John Landis or Eddie Murphy.
Both men are capable of great things but lord have mercy on this film and give everyone their two hours back.

The original Beverly Hills Cop is a classic. The 2nd one was just as good. Both had a perfect blend of action, comedy, and suspense. The fact that they waited to make this 3rd installment so many years later (during Eddie's current streak of terrible movies) should have told everyone making this movie right off the bat that it was a bad idea. John Landis (who usually makes pretty good flicks) took over the directing for this one and let's just say it's not something he should be proud to have on his resume. In a nutshell, this movie is just campy... knee slapper jokes, lame plot, etc. The spirit and integrity of the first two movies is completely lost in this 3rd one. It's a shame too how you go from making two great movies to a third that's not just below par, but stinks to the high heaven.

After the successful Beverly Hills Cop and its sequel, producers Don Simpson and Jerry Bruckheimer opted not to produce the third installment. You can almost see why it hurt this one. Eddie Murphy is terrific, and so are Judge Reinhold (the only other character to appear in the other two films) and Hector Elizando. John Landis directs this time around, and while he is a worthy choice, he was handed a lousy script by Steven E. de Souza ("Die Hard," "Street Fighter the Movie"). Also, Harold Faltermeyer is not onboard as the score composer, so that took part in setting the different tone from the other two. The film is kinda strange in the fact that it doesn't quite know whether to be an action film or a comedy; director Martin Brest made a marriage of the two in the first film (and in other films as well) and even Tony Scott managed it well to some degree in the second one. The best part is Bronson Pinchot's cameo returning to the role of Serge. But overall, the film just doesn't feel like Beverly Hills Cop and I'm not really sure why it doesn't.

Beverly Hills Cop III~ Eddie Murphy is not a terrible movie. Then again if you compare this sequel to the two first movies then one must say that it is a disappointment. Eddie Murphy is not nearly as funny as in the first two movies and the script is half lame as if they had run out of ideas. The plot is paper thin, and a total hoot compared to the two previous movies. Man, I was really looking forward to watching this movie after having seen the two other movies. This is a mediocre movie at best and gets the 2 stars that it deserves. Not recommended.