Beverly Hills Cop III (1994)

[Andrew1326657706 0]

What does it look like when Bevery Hill Cop stops trying at comedy to take a shot a being a gritty action film, but succeeds at neither: Beverly Hills Cop III.

 

Beverly Hills Cop III takes place in a massive amusement park you did know was hidden right in the middle of Beverly Hills. The filming location is mostly an Great America in Santa Clara, but what bit shot on the Universal Studios tour ride will be sure to take you out of the moment. Some things not to look forward to in this razzy-nominated film:

 

- A much darker Axel Foley - Eddie Murphy struck me as much more vulgar and violent in this film

- No John Taggart - John Ashton is not in this film, he is replaced by Hector Elizondo who "heard about Axel Foley" and is instantly trusting of him - a departure from initial impressions in the first film

- Characters aren't villains, they're just incompetent - When Elizondo's character is supposed to arrange a meeting for Axel Foley at the theme park, but fails to follow through violence including a chase with guns follows. It could have been written as no double cross, but it wasn't, Elizondo's character just seems to have forgot and it is never addressed

- Lots of just weirdness - remember Serge the flamboyant gallery employee from the first movie, well he's back in number three and now he's an arms dealer

 

There's more awfulness to be seen. You can catch it on Netflix now and I think Amazon Prime Instant Video.

[Ribelin2000 23]

What a word salad you've got there.

 

It seems like you've never seen Beverly Hills Cop II either.

[Ofcoursemyhorse 1043]

2 was pretty good and was similar to 1 in terms of action and pacing. 3 is weird and I can understand why Murphy was overwhelmingly depressed to be working on the project.

[Ribelin2000 23]

But AndrewS said that Eddie was much more vulgar and violent in Cop III than the first one. But he was actually more coarse in Cop II than either of the other movies in the trilogy. Plus Cop II was trying to be much more of a "gritty action film" than Cop III.

[Ofcoursemyhorse 1043]

The reason this movie really failed though is because the first two movies were funny because Eddie Murphy was funny in them. 3 tries so goddamn hard to be funny through its setting and set pieces but Eddie is given very little in terms of dialogue that actually made the first two movies as successful as they were.

[Game of Scones 5812]

i went to school with the kid in this one. I only saw the movie because of him.

[SlidePocket 707]

The third collaboration between Eddie Murphy and John Landis, and the least successful of the trio following "Trading Places" and "Coming to America".

[AbeFroman 70]

My friends and I were huge fans of the original growing up. We could not have been more excited for BHC 3 in the summer of 1994.

 

Caught it opening weekend and we literally did not speak for the entire ride home. It was so awful we were speechless. And it was directed by John Landis!! Trading Places?! Coming to America?!

 

It is only matched in its sheer perfunctory awfulness by another Eddie Murphy sequel, Another 48 Hours.

[Ofcoursemyhorse 1043]

I really think they're almost obligated to do this movie at some point. Its one of those landmarks films in the bad movie genre, it really is a bummer.

 

The writing was incredibly weak and didnt have anywhere near enough Eddie Murphy being Eddie Murphy. Instead it was filled with horrible sight gags to the point that it almost bordered on a spoof movie. When Bronson Pinchot shows up as arms dealer its like the movie switches genres and becomes a Naked Gun.

[joel_rosenbaum 1269]

I really think they're almost obligated to do this movie at some point. Its one of those landmarks films in the bad movie genre, it really is a bummer.

I don't know, man. Beverly Hills Cop III was so terrible it wasn't even fun-terrible.

 

I think Beverly Hills Cop II splits the difference pretty nicely -- a really fun movie with plenty of Tony Scott WTF moments.

[Ofcoursemyhorse 1043]

I don't know, man. Beverly Hills Cop III was so terrible it wasn't even fun-terrible.

 

I think Beverly Hills Cop II splits the difference pretty nicely -- a really fun movie with plenty of Tony Scott WTF moments.

 

 

2 would be more fun, but I feel like that one got worse reviews from the first mainly because of how much of a carbon copy it is from the first movie. To the point that I'm pretty sure they even recycled a couple of locations from the first movie.

 

3 feels like an entirely different movie, or even like a foreign production company trying to come up with their own version.