4/10
It's a Beverly HIlls Flop
6 August 2000
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 lot 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 the gutter 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.
28 out of 38 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed