The effects were still great, the acting worked, and I liked the characters... but it was missing something.I don't know what but it was. I still recommend it of course and I decently enjoyed it. Critters 3 was not as much horror and more funny but it still worked. The critter effects have slightly changed but still basically the same. The critters are now more slimy and darker in color. It was great to see Charlie return again Leonardo DiCaprio did a great job in his role as Josh. Having a critter main protagonist was interesting and fun, and I liked the development in the other critter's characters also. It was very slightly off beat but fun to watch and entertaining. To sum it all up it was not as good as #2 but stayed true to the original.
63 Reviews
Little sharp-teethed stand up comedians
Coventry22 November 2011
The DVD-cover suggests that - following two episodes set in the remote Kansas countryside area - the Krites will now be spreading fear and terror in the big city, but the truth is they never get any further than running amok in a ramshackle old apartment building and frightening a handful of its tenants. Part three in the series is an okay time-waster, but very forgettable and obviously lacking the joyous and charming spirit of the first two films. It sometimes seems that, with entering the 1990's, it suddenly became impossible to make cheesy & light-headed horror like they did in the 1980's. Oh well, at least number three is still a dozen times better than the truly awful fourth installment, which was shot back-to-back with this one and takes place in outer space. "Critters 3" particularly marks the further and irreversible descent of the franchise into comical territory. Mainly due to the eccentric design of the monsters – courtesy of the amazing Chiodo Brothers – the series bathes in a light-headed and silly atmosphere, but the two previous films nevertheless found a better balance between the comedy aspects and genuine horror. Here, the little supposedly ravenous and evil creatures almost look like tiny stand up comedians. They giggle non-stop, eat beans and fart, watching cooking programs on TV and entertain themselves with food fights. Meanwhile, a bizarre posse of low-keyed tenants (among them THE Leonardo DiCaprio in his very first long-feature film) attempt to escape the Critter-terror through fleeing to the roof. Why they just don't go out via the front door, I don't know
Don Opper reprises his role as bounty hunter Charlie, and he seems to get more imbecilic with every episode. I don't really feel like mocking DiCaprio's appearance because, in all honesty, he gives a good performance and depicts a likable teenage character.
The only film where Leo looked his age
bowmanblue20 August 2016
In case you don't know, 'Critters 3' is best known for being the first ever film to feature Leonardo DiCaprio. Here, he plays a kid who is a kid. Then, forever after, he was destined to play an adult who looks like a kid. But then that's just me being bitter at his seeming inability to age.
Anyway, if you haven't seen 'Critters 3' then you might want to start with the first two, as they're arguably better and, well, chronology and all that. The Critters are little alien monsters who crash-landed on Earth and generally eat everyone and everything – or rather everyone and everything who isn't one of the lead cast. These baddies tend to only eat people you won't really care about. Or at least they certainly do now! I haven't seen another monster/slasher film where the villains do so little damage to so few people. If the Critters franchise was ever really classed as 'horror' (which it wasn't really – it was more only every horror with a spoonful of comedy). Now, it really is played out tongue-in-cheek with no real attempts to scare you. The Critters roll and bounce around the place, bumping into things and come across more like Mr Bean with bigger teeth than anything that really threatens humankind.
Critters 3 is a short film. And for good reason. There really isn't that much in the way of plot to fill it. You get the little monsters brought back from the countryside into a big city. You'd think that with the added number of human-prey this would make a change from the farm-country the previous two were set in. However, the whole film is basically set in one apartment block. And, for some reason, no one (Critter or human) ever really seems to make much of a play to leave the building. You could argue that this creates an air of tension and claustrophobia. But it doesn't. It's just a cheap continuation of the franchise.
Yes, I know I'm being kind of negative. And this is yet another step down for the franchise. But that's not to say that I didn't find some enjoyment in it. The Critters themselves – one again – are the real stars and, for all their 'prat-falls' they're still quite fun to watch.
If you like your eighties monster-horror films then you're probably best off sticking to the first one (which most people seem to think is best, personally, I preferred part 2, but anyway...). However, if you REALLY like the Critters and want to see more of them, you can try this – it's the sort of film where you can surf the net and watch it at the same time and still miss much. Plus, did I mention it had baby-faced Leo in it? He's being chased my fur-balls – c'mon, that's got to be worth watching, right?
Anyway, if you haven't seen 'Critters 3' then you might want to start with the first two, as they're arguably better and, well, chronology and all that. The Critters are little alien monsters who crash-landed on Earth and generally eat everyone and everything – or rather everyone and everything who isn't one of the lead cast. These baddies tend to only eat people you won't really care about. Or at least they certainly do now! I haven't seen another monster/slasher film where the villains do so little damage to so few people. If the Critters franchise was ever really classed as 'horror' (which it wasn't really – it was more only every horror with a spoonful of comedy). Now, it really is played out tongue-in-cheek with no real attempts to scare you. The Critters roll and bounce around the place, bumping into things and come across more like Mr Bean with bigger teeth than anything that really threatens humankind.
Critters 3 is a short film. And for good reason. There really isn't that much in the way of plot to fill it. You get the little monsters brought back from the countryside into a big city. You'd think that with the added number of human-prey this would make a change from the farm-country the previous two were set in. However, the whole film is basically set in one apartment block. And, for some reason, no one (Critter or human) ever really seems to make much of a play to leave the building. You could argue that this creates an air of tension and claustrophobia. But it doesn't. It's just a cheap continuation of the franchise.
Yes, I know I'm being kind of negative. And this is yet another step down for the franchise. But that's not to say that I didn't find some enjoyment in it. The Critters themselves – one again – are the real stars and, for all their 'prat-falls' they're still quite fun to watch.
If you like your eighties monster-horror films then you're probably best off sticking to the first one (which most people seem to think is best, personally, I preferred part 2, but anyway...). However, if you REALLY like the Critters and want to see more of them, you can try this – it's the sort of film where you can surf the net and watch it at the same time and still miss much. Plus, did I mention it had baby-faced Leo in it? He's being chased my fur-balls – c'mon, that's got to be worth watching, right?
Very cheap but some trashy fun to be had
bob the moo29 July 2002
A young family stop off at a lay-by on their way home. At the lay-by they meet bounty hunter Charlie who warns them about something living in the woods. However that `something' has just attached it self under their mobile home and hitches a ride back to their tenement block where the critters cause havoc amongst the residents.
Lets be honest no one say to be shocked to discover this is a cheap little film that doesn't have too much going for it. The plot is the usual people hunted by critters stuff, this time in a building so it's like Die Hard with aliens .err no! The story doesn't matter as the action is what counts.
Sadly the action is poor it's not really gory and the critter attacks are always more funny than thrilling. There is no real excitement or tension and it's all a bit predictable take a guess who'll live and who'll die the cute kids or the evil landlord? See! The one thing it does have though is a sort of humour the critters have senses of humours and are cruel and some of this is amusing.
However the comedy is nowhere near the one it aspires to Gremlins, and really the funniest bit is how silly the whole thing is. Needless to say the acting is poor some people can't even be mauled convincingly. But it's interesting to see DiCaprio's debut, even if he looks about 9 years old!
Really this is a bit of dumb fun that is daft and slightly shoddy. It's may just pass the time but there are much better horror/comedies out there if you want them.
Lets be honest no one say to be shocked to discover this is a cheap little film that doesn't have too much going for it. The plot is the usual people hunted by critters stuff, this time in a building so it's like Die Hard with aliens .err no! The story doesn't matter as the action is what counts.
Sadly the action is poor it's not really gory and the critter attacks are always more funny than thrilling. There is no real excitement or tension and it's all a bit predictable take a guess who'll live and who'll die the cute kids or the evil landlord? See! The one thing it does have though is a sort of humour the critters have senses of humours and are cruel and some of this is amusing.
However the comedy is nowhere near the one it aspires to Gremlins, and really the funniest bit is how silly the whole thing is. Needless to say the acting is poor some people can't even be mauled convincingly. But it's interesting to see DiCaprio's debut, even if he looks about 9 years old!
Really this is a bit of dumb fun that is daft and slightly shoddy. It's may just pass the time but there are much better horror/comedies out there if you want them.
Not Bad, But Unnecessary Sequel!
gwnightscream10 April 2012
Warning: Spoilers
Don Opper, Aimee Brooks, John Calvin and Leonardo DiCaprio star in this 1991 sci-fi/horror sequel. This begins with teenage girl, Annie (Brooks), her father, Cliff (Calvin) and little brother, Johnny (Christian & Joseph Cousins) heading back from vacation to their L.A. apartment building. Along the way, Annie and Johnny meet bounty hunter, Charlie McFadden (Opper) who tells them about the town of Grover's Bend and it's previous encounters with the Critters. After coming home, they and their neighbors become terrorized by a new batch of hungry aliens. Soon, Charlie comes to their rescue and helps them fight against them. DiCaprio (Titanic) is younger in this and plays Josh, the stepson of their ruthless landlord. This sequel isn't bad, but unnecessary because the last film ended well. I still recommend it if you're a fan of the Critters.
Not as good as first two but it still as some fun moments
atinder2 January 2011
This movie start off with a family of 3, going to a rest stop but there tyre burst and had to stop and fix it.
Then the kids are messing around and then soon go down a big hill, then Charlie comes from underneath the ground and scary all kids. (The only person to return to this sequel and the one after just like Burt in Tremors series).
He tells these kids about Critters (As we see this in flashback of the last two movies).
As Critters seem to enter the Minnie-van, the family are unaware of this and the end up going back to their New York apartment. then the Critters have laid more eggs, under the van and soon start hatching and head toward the basement.
I am going give this movie 5 out of 10, I found this movie, a lot more funny then first however I still think that second one was even more funny then this and better movie then this.
This movie as it's moments, and keep you entertained and never get boring at all.
If you liked the last two movies, you should like this movie as well.
Then the kids are messing around and then soon go down a big hill, then Charlie comes from underneath the ground and scary all kids. (The only person to return to this sequel and the one after just like Burt in Tremors series).
He tells these kids about Critters (As we see this in flashback of the last two movies).
As Critters seem to enter the Minnie-van, the family are unaware of this and the end up going back to their New York apartment. then the Critters have laid more eggs, under the van and soon start hatching and head toward the basement.
I am going give this movie 5 out of 10, I found this movie, a lot more funny then first however I still think that second one was even more funny then this and better movie then this.
This movie as it's moments, and keep you entertained and never get boring at all.
If you liked the last two movies, you should like this movie as well.
Don't put Critters in the corner
kosmasp4 May 2019
Well if you don't have that much money, you kind of have to. This was done simultaneously with part 4 - with the cumulative budget of what they had for the very first movie. So two movies for the price of one. Which is I guess a byproduct of the failure of Critters 2 at the box office at least back then. There is a nice story about the boxoffice in the audio commentary on the disc of part 2 or in the hour long documentary.
Back to this though, which continues the "tradition" of having people that later were involved in the Titanic movie. In this case we have a very young Leonardo DiCaprio. I can't imagine him talking to anyone publicly about this movie of course, but it is one of those curiosities. So this plays out in a relatively close space - with at least one familiar face coming back to help the humans - if they can be helped of course. And again we have a PG-13 rating, but still violence and blood included
Back to this though, which continues the "tradition" of having people that later were involved in the Titanic movie. In this case we have a very young Leonardo DiCaprio. I can't imagine him talking to anyone publicly about this movie of course, but it is one of those curiosities. So this plays out in a relatively close space - with at least one familiar face coming back to help the humans - if they can be helped of course. And again we have a PG-13 rating, but still violence and blood included
Middling third entry in the series
Woodyanders7 October 2010
Warning: Spoilers
The first two "Critters" films delivered a winning blend of thrills and humor that was done with a considerable amount of vitality and a certain quirky sensibility. Alas, this second sequel to the enjoyable original doesn't offer much in the way of energy or inspiration. The premise is promising enough: The Crites terrorize a motley assortment of folks in a rundown Los Angeles apartment building. Unfortunately, director Kristine Peterson, working from a surprisingly drab and unimaginative script by celebrated horror writer David J. Schow, lets the story unfold at a plodding pace and crucially fails to generate much in the way of either tension or momentum. Moreover, although there are a few decent comic moments (the sequence with the blithely disgusting Crites pigging out in a kitchen is reasonably funny) and several cool fanged furball attack set pieces, this film is never as dynamic and flat-out sidesplitting as it could (and should) have been. This movie does finally get cooking to a moderate degree in the fairly lively and stirring last third, but it's not enough to alleviate the general tedium. The able cast do their best with the mediocre material: Aimee Brooks contributes a charming performance as the cute and spunky Annie, series regular Don Opper amuses as geeky and klutzy bounty hunter Charlie, Katherine Cortez does well as plucky telephone repair woman Marcis, a then unknown Leonardo DiCarprio acquits himself passably in his film debut as the likable Josh, plus there are sound turns by Diana Bellamy as the excitable Rosalie, John Calvin as struggling single dad Clifford, William Dennis Hunt as sleazy landlord Mr. Briggs, Geoffrey Blake as obnoxious handyman Frank Longo, and Frances Bay as sweet old lady Mrs. Menges. Terrence Mann makes a very brief appearance at the sequel set-up ending as bounty hunter Ug. A strictly acceptable, but overall nothing special timewaster.
Flesh-eating alien hedgehogs versus li'l Leo.
BA_Harrison20 May 2011
A group of people find themselves face-to-face with the ravenous, intergalactic toothy terrors known as Krites, and must battle for their lives—this time in a run down, inner-city tenement block. Help eventually arrives in the form of heavily armed Krite hunter Charlie (Don Opper) and chaos ensues.
Critters 3 is most notable for being the less-than-auspicious movie debut of triple Oscar-nominated, Hollywood A-lister Leonardo DiCaprio. Unsurprisingly, Leo acquits himself rather well, doing all one could really ask of a kid acting opposite crap hand puppets, but with the script being little more than an uninspired rehash of elements from the previous two efforts, even the acting talent of DiCaprio cannot prevent this from being very mediocre B-movie nonsense.
Also starring a young Aimee Brooks, the total hottie from 2003 horror flick Monster Man, and Joseph and Christian Cousins, who played the sickeningly cute kid from Kindergarten Cop.
Critters 3 is most notable for being the less-than-auspicious movie debut of triple Oscar-nominated, Hollywood A-lister Leonardo DiCaprio. Unsurprisingly, Leo acquits himself rather well, doing all one could really ask of a kid acting opposite crap hand puppets, but with the script being little more than an uninspired rehash of elements from the previous two efforts, even the acting talent of DiCaprio cannot prevent this from being very mediocre B-movie nonsense.
Also starring a young Aimee Brooks, the total hottie from 2003 horror flick Monster Man, and Joseph and Christian Cousins, who played the sickeningly cute kid from Kindergarten Cop.
For hardcore fans, this is a sure delight.
Bag_of_Cancer1 January 2011
Warning: Spoilers
The Crites are back for the third time, and this time they're terrorizing an apartment building in Topeka, Kansas (although it really does look like Los Angeles) instead of Grovers Bend. This might disappoint some fans, but it's not a horrible change. Really, what else could've been done in Grovers Bend? I feel the change of setting was a bit refreshing.
We're introduced to the main characters: Clifford, the widowed father; Annie, the daughter and main protagonist; and Johnny, the son (who adds nothing to the film overall). They're returning from a trip to the Grand Canyon when a flat tire forces them to pull over at a rest stop. There we meet the young Josh, his "evil" stepfather, and the likable Charlie, who fans will recognize right away as he's the only returning cast member from the first two movies, unfortunately. Charlie gives the lowdown on why he's screwing around in the woods to the heroes, treating us to a nice trailer-like flashback of the first two movies. As the heroes are called back to their vehicles, Charlie gives Johnny a crystal he apparently was given to by some friends (obviously referencing Ug & Lee, the two bounty hunters he used to travel with) that glows green whenever trouble is near, which is never truly explained. It sort of sucks because the crystal is a semi-interesting element that comes out of nowhere and then is just left alone. Anyway, as we leave the rest stop, it's shown that there are a few Crite eggs stuck underneath our heroes' RV.
Clifford and his kids make it home to their rundown apartment building, introducing us to some characters with wasted potential that spout one- liners like they were back in 4th grade – Frank, the obnoxious maintenance man; Marsha, the friend of the heroes; Rosalie, the overweight woman that doesn't serve much of a purpose like Johnny; and the Menges, an elderly couple that takes care of Annie and Johnny while Clifford is away. The Crites hatch and break into the basement of the building. The film then gives us this uninteresting subplot with Frank being in cahoots with Josh's stepfather to get the tenants out of the building so it can be turned into a mini-mall. Soon after, Frank is killed by the Crites who've inexplicably grown to adult size in what seems like a couple hours (by eating nothing apparently). Oh yeah, and in between all the attacks, there's another subplot about Annie trying to get Clifford to stop being depressed and spend time with her and Johnny before going out of town on business again, but it's just meh so whatever.
Rosalie ventures down into the basement next and is promptly attacked by the Crites after they steal her donut. Sadly, she isn't killed; Annie comes to her rescue. That's one of the things I disliked about this movie – it held back on the killing and was basically a "good vs. evil" kind of thing, because only Frank and Josh's stepfather are killed, them two being the only "evil" characters in the movie. Rosalie and Annie go to Clifford for help and soon are attacked by the Crites. They make it upstairs and encounter Marsha, who presumably goes down to investigate Annie's claims of aliens. Anywho, Josh and his stepfather (Mr. Briggs, I forgot his name until just now, haha) arrive and Briggs is soon killed. Josh is found by Marsha and the two high-tail it upstairs as the Crite pursue them.
The humans lock themselves in the Menges' room and try to get help. Unfortunately for them, and how cliché for us, the phone lines and electricity were cut by Briggs before he got the axe, so they're trapped basically. Mr. Menges comes up with a plan to use the elevator shaft to get around "them things," so everybody starts climbing into the attic. The Crites soon arrive through the ventilation system under the sink (at least that's what it appears to be) and an overblown, boring kitchen scene commences with them eating just about everything available to them and then farting it out. Blah, no thanks. I know a lot find it to be a high point of the film, but I've personally seen it far too many times and I'm just about sick of it now, sorry.
Back to the film itself, the humans are now trapped in the attic. Marsha feels the logical way of getting around the Crites – the elevator shaft – isn't very great, so she volunteers herself to climb out the side of the building and walk along the phone lines to get to the pay phone and call for help. Yeah, I understand her intent, but the execution is just stupid. Unsurprisingly, she screws up and falls, only being saved as her foot is stuck in one of the broken lines (and seriously, she could have just unhooked her foot and gotten down, as it was maybe only a 10ft drop at most). This compels Annie to use the elevator shaft where it leads us to Charlie making his arrival to save her from the Crites. The two go back up to the attic, unknowingly followed by the Crites. The Crites attack and are quickly dispatched by Charlie and the Menges. Really, they weren't much to speak of when it came down to it. So everybody gets up to the roof, but one Crite remains and attacks Johnny, so Charlie seemingly sacrifices himself to save him, even though he lives in the end anyway. Oh yeah, I forgot there was a fire growing in the basement started by a dead Crite. Doesn't matter, though, since the humans are saved and everybody lives happily ever after.
The mid-credits scene leads into the boring but much darker fourth film, too, by the way. Overall, it's a fun and campy movie, but nothing to be taken seriously. A lot more could've been done with it.
We're introduced to the main characters: Clifford, the widowed father; Annie, the daughter and main protagonist; and Johnny, the son (who adds nothing to the film overall). They're returning from a trip to the Grand Canyon when a flat tire forces them to pull over at a rest stop. There we meet the young Josh, his "evil" stepfather, and the likable Charlie, who fans will recognize right away as he's the only returning cast member from the first two movies, unfortunately. Charlie gives the lowdown on why he's screwing around in the woods to the heroes, treating us to a nice trailer-like flashback of the first two movies. As the heroes are called back to their vehicles, Charlie gives Johnny a crystal he apparently was given to by some friends (obviously referencing Ug & Lee, the two bounty hunters he used to travel with) that glows green whenever trouble is near, which is never truly explained. It sort of sucks because the crystal is a semi-interesting element that comes out of nowhere and then is just left alone. Anyway, as we leave the rest stop, it's shown that there are a few Crite eggs stuck underneath our heroes' RV.
Clifford and his kids make it home to their rundown apartment building, introducing us to some characters with wasted potential that spout one- liners like they were back in 4th grade – Frank, the obnoxious maintenance man; Marsha, the friend of the heroes; Rosalie, the overweight woman that doesn't serve much of a purpose like Johnny; and the Menges, an elderly couple that takes care of Annie and Johnny while Clifford is away. The Crites hatch and break into the basement of the building. The film then gives us this uninteresting subplot with Frank being in cahoots with Josh's stepfather to get the tenants out of the building so it can be turned into a mini-mall. Soon after, Frank is killed by the Crites who've inexplicably grown to adult size in what seems like a couple hours (by eating nothing apparently). Oh yeah, and in between all the attacks, there's another subplot about Annie trying to get Clifford to stop being depressed and spend time with her and Johnny before going out of town on business again, but it's just meh so whatever.
Rosalie ventures down into the basement next and is promptly attacked by the Crites after they steal her donut. Sadly, she isn't killed; Annie comes to her rescue. That's one of the things I disliked about this movie – it held back on the killing and was basically a "good vs. evil" kind of thing, because only Frank and Josh's stepfather are killed, them two being the only "evil" characters in the movie. Rosalie and Annie go to Clifford for help and soon are attacked by the Crites. They make it upstairs and encounter Marsha, who presumably goes down to investigate Annie's claims of aliens. Anywho, Josh and his stepfather (Mr. Briggs, I forgot his name until just now, haha) arrive and Briggs is soon killed. Josh is found by Marsha and the two high-tail it upstairs as the Crite pursue them.
The humans lock themselves in the Menges' room and try to get help. Unfortunately for them, and how cliché for us, the phone lines and electricity were cut by Briggs before he got the axe, so they're trapped basically. Mr. Menges comes up with a plan to use the elevator shaft to get around "them things," so everybody starts climbing into the attic. The Crites soon arrive through the ventilation system under the sink (at least that's what it appears to be) and an overblown, boring kitchen scene commences with them eating just about everything available to them and then farting it out. Blah, no thanks. I know a lot find it to be a high point of the film, but I've personally seen it far too many times and I'm just about sick of it now, sorry.
Back to the film itself, the humans are now trapped in the attic. Marsha feels the logical way of getting around the Crites – the elevator shaft – isn't very great, so she volunteers herself to climb out the side of the building and walk along the phone lines to get to the pay phone and call for help. Yeah, I understand her intent, but the execution is just stupid. Unsurprisingly, she screws up and falls, only being saved as her foot is stuck in one of the broken lines (and seriously, she could have just unhooked her foot and gotten down, as it was maybe only a 10ft drop at most). This compels Annie to use the elevator shaft where it leads us to Charlie making his arrival to save her from the Crites. The two go back up to the attic, unknowingly followed by the Crites. The Crites attack and are quickly dispatched by Charlie and the Menges. Really, they weren't much to speak of when it came down to it. So everybody gets up to the roof, but one Crite remains and attacks Johnny, so Charlie seemingly sacrifices himself to save him, even though he lives in the end anyway. Oh yeah, I forgot there was a fire growing in the basement started by a dead Crite. Doesn't matter, though, since the humans are saved and everybody lives happily ever after.
The mid-credits scene leads into the boring but much darker fourth film, too, by the way. Overall, it's a fun and campy movie, but nothing to be taken seriously. A lot more could've been done with it.
The best of the Critters sequels.
DigitalRevenantX710 August 2015
Warning: Spoilers
On their way home from a vacation, railway worker Clifford & his two children Annie & Johnny pull up into a rest stop with a flat tyre. While Clifford fixes the tyre, Annie & Johnny encounter Charlie McFadden, who warns them about the Crites. They dismiss him as crazy but a group of Crites hitch a ride on the underside of the RV. Once the family return to their home – an apartment complex that is due to be demolished to make way for a mini-mall by the landlord (who secretly plans to force the tenants to vacate without having to pay them relocation costs) – the Crites begin terrorising the building.
Critters was an enterprising knockoff of Gremlins that somehow made a name for itself in video afterlife. It spawned three sequels – the turgid Critters 2, this one & a further sequel with Critters 4. These days, the Critters sequels, particularly this one, have been regarded as a bad joke by the actors in it, especially Leonardo DiCaprio, who made his debut here as an adolescent.
Despite the negative publicity, Critters 3 is actually not too bad – in fact it is the closest the sequels get to matching the light family friendly fun of the original. The Critters are kept to the shadows for the majority of the film but once the lights go off, the real fun begins. Scribe David J. Schow, who would soon get famous with his script for The Crow about three years after this, gets a lot of mileage out of the Critters' attacks – and their appearances. It is a far cry from the usual output of Schow's bread & butter splatterpunk stories but it is still a fun ride. He & director Kristine Peterson do their best to cater to genre fans without letting the adults feel cheated by having the Critters do their usual thing & having Don Opper's bounty hunter return to blast the Critters yet again. Fellow hunter Terrence Mann also returns but only in the end-credits sequence that follows the film. If there is anything wrong with the film, it would be that the film is far too soft for the bodycount to happen, but the dogleg twists provide some suspense for the audience.
Critters was an enterprising knockoff of Gremlins that somehow made a name for itself in video afterlife. It spawned three sequels – the turgid Critters 2, this one & a further sequel with Critters 4. These days, the Critters sequels, particularly this one, have been regarded as a bad joke by the actors in it, especially Leonardo DiCaprio, who made his debut here as an adolescent.
Despite the negative publicity, Critters 3 is actually not too bad – in fact it is the closest the sequels get to matching the light family friendly fun of the original. The Critters are kept to the shadows for the majority of the film but once the lights go off, the real fun begins. Scribe David J. Schow, who would soon get famous with his script for The Crow about three years after this, gets a lot of mileage out of the Critters' attacks – and their appearances. It is a far cry from the usual output of Schow's bread & butter splatterpunk stories but it is still a fun ride. He & director Kristine Peterson do their best to cater to genre fans without letting the adults feel cheated by having the Critters do their usual thing & having Don Opper's bounty hunter return to blast the Critters yet again. Fellow hunter Terrence Mann also returns but only in the end-credits sequence that follows the film. If there is anything wrong with the film, it would be that the film is far too soft for the bodycount to happen, but the dogleg twists provide some suspense for the audience.
So Much Fun. A Real Treat of a Direct-to-video Gem.
lukem-527602 September 2018
I love the Critters franchise i really do as i grew up watching all four on video & enjoyed all of them as they are Nostalgic creature features!!!
Critters 3 is so much fun & has an excellent new setting this time in a city tenement building where the menacing Krites end up & start to munch on the residents & it's perfect late night entertainment just like the whole franchise really.
I love the bounty hunters Ug (tiny cameo) & Charlie & they are the only original characters back but it's such a fun set up & some where new & exciting that IT'S ok we have a new bunch of characters that are all fun & give good performances & yes we have a young Leo DiCaprio who is really good in this.
The music score as always is very good just like the first two films & although each film is directed by a different director they all feel so similar & fit perfectly together within the krites universe, part 3 is alot of fun & has some great suspenseful scenes & like i said a great little cast of tenants trying to survive this Alien siege.
Critters 3 is another fun film in the excellent Critters franchise,these are nice easy fun filled films before c.g.i & super hero films took over!!!
Great old school fx & fun characters & excellent music that's why i love this franchise!!! Excellent fun & CRITTERS 1 & 2 are my favourites of this excellent franchise, but 3 is good low-budget fun. I have so much love & Nostalgia for this film & the franchise but i loved the characters in the building in this flick & the Krites look really great, even if this one is of low-budget.
Critters 3 is that perfect late night fun Horror sci-fi comedy to watch over & over again,i love the building siege setting & how the tenants have to come together to survive the attack that always stuck with me since a kid & i just love that idea of an attack happening inside a big building like the classic Gremlins 2 (1990) & Poltergeist 3 (1988) & Attack the block (2011) very similar to Critters 3!!!
CRITTERS 3 truly is a nice little Horror comedy adventure as it's not scary but IT'S all done with a feelgood fun style & kids could watch it too it's not too bloody just enough but has that nice late night survive the night adventure feel.
So glad i grew up with all these fun rubbery creature B movies on video.
Critters 3 is so much fun & has an excellent new setting this time in a city tenement building where the menacing Krites end up & start to munch on the residents & it's perfect late night entertainment just like the whole franchise really.
I love the bounty hunters Ug (tiny cameo) & Charlie & they are the only original characters back but it's such a fun set up & some where new & exciting that IT'S ok we have a new bunch of characters that are all fun & give good performances & yes we have a young Leo DiCaprio who is really good in this.
The music score as always is very good just like the first two films & although each film is directed by a different director they all feel so similar & fit perfectly together within the krites universe, part 3 is alot of fun & has some great suspenseful scenes & like i said a great little cast of tenants trying to survive this Alien siege.
Critters 3 is another fun film in the excellent Critters franchise,these are nice easy fun filled films before c.g.i & super hero films took over!!!
Great old school fx & fun characters & excellent music that's why i love this franchise!!! Excellent fun & CRITTERS 1 & 2 are my favourites of this excellent franchise, but 3 is good low-budget fun. I have so much love & Nostalgia for this film & the franchise but i loved the characters in the building in this flick & the Krites look really great, even if this one is of low-budget.
Critters 3 is that perfect late night fun Horror sci-fi comedy to watch over & over again,i love the building siege setting & how the tenants have to come together to survive the attack that always stuck with me since a kid & i just love that idea of an attack happening inside a big building like the classic Gremlins 2 (1990) & Poltergeist 3 (1988) & Attack the block (2011) very similar to Critters 3!!!
CRITTERS 3 truly is a nice little Horror comedy adventure as it's not scary but IT'S all done with a feelgood fun style & kids could watch it too it's not too bloody just enough but has that nice late night survive the night adventure feel.
So glad i grew up with all these fun rubbery creature B movies on video.
They are nasty things with sharp teeth...
paul_haakonsen21 June 2017
If you are already familiar with the concept of the critters from the previous two movies, then you will feel right at home with this third movie in the franchise.
The storyline in "Critters 3" is very easy to keep up with, and it was very much in the spirit of the previous two. Except that they moved the story from the outdoors setting of Grover's Bend and taking it indoors in a New York Apartment complex. This change of scenery was actually quite interesting and fun.
The creature (read critters) design definitely got an improvement, and there is more life-like movement to the ferocious little dangerous creatures. And they have taken on more of a personality trait as well, making them more than just monstrous eating machines. The details on the critter designs is better than in the previous two movies. It would seem that the paralytic quills that the critters can fire off are less potent in this third movie, for some reason, in comparison to the previous two movies.
"Critters 3" does take quite a while before it gets up into gear and starts to deliver what the audience wants; which is the critters, of course. That being said, don't get me wrong, because the movie is not boring or anything, it just takes its sweet time to establish some characters and setup the setting for the remainder of the movie.
The cast in "Critters 3" were doing a good job, as the cast also had done in the previous two movies. And it is always nice to have some returning cast pop up in sequels. And having a young Leonardo DiCaprio in this movie was just hilarious, but he actually proved to be a good actor even back then. If you have been watching movies during the late 1980s and early 1990s, then you will see some familiar faces in "Critters 3", such as Diana Bellamy (playing Rosalie) and Frances Bay (playing Mrs. Menges).
You can actually jump into the franchise with any of the movie, because it is hardly a prerequisite that you watch the movie in chronological order to be fully up to speed as to what is going on. So it is quite possible to sit down and watch "Critters 3" without having watched the previous two movies and still get the full enjoyment and entertainment out of the movie as you would if you had watched the previous two.
The added comedy element is more prominent in "Critters 3" compared to the previous two, for better or worse. I did, personally, enjoy it, because it seemed like a natural evolution to take the franchise in. And the critter that drank the dish wash detergent still cracks me up every time I watch the movie.
"Critters 3" is definitely a well-worthy addition to the "Critters" franchise.
The storyline in "Critters 3" is very easy to keep up with, and it was very much in the spirit of the previous two. Except that they moved the story from the outdoors setting of Grover's Bend and taking it indoors in a New York Apartment complex. This change of scenery was actually quite interesting and fun.
The creature (read critters) design definitely got an improvement, and there is more life-like movement to the ferocious little dangerous creatures. And they have taken on more of a personality trait as well, making them more than just monstrous eating machines. The details on the critter designs is better than in the previous two movies. It would seem that the paralytic quills that the critters can fire off are less potent in this third movie, for some reason, in comparison to the previous two movies.
"Critters 3" does take quite a while before it gets up into gear and starts to deliver what the audience wants; which is the critters, of course. That being said, don't get me wrong, because the movie is not boring or anything, it just takes its sweet time to establish some characters and setup the setting for the remainder of the movie.
The cast in "Critters 3" were doing a good job, as the cast also had done in the previous two movies. And it is always nice to have some returning cast pop up in sequels. And having a young Leonardo DiCaprio in this movie was just hilarious, but he actually proved to be a good actor even back then. If you have been watching movies during the late 1980s and early 1990s, then you will see some familiar faces in "Critters 3", such as Diana Bellamy (playing Rosalie) and Frances Bay (playing Mrs. Menges).
You can actually jump into the franchise with any of the movie, because it is hardly a prerequisite that you watch the movie in chronological order to be fully up to speed as to what is going on. So it is quite possible to sit down and watch "Critters 3" without having watched the previous two movies and still get the full enjoyment and entertainment out of the movie as you would if you had watched the previous two.
The added comedy element is more prominent in "Critters 3" compared to the previous two, for better or worse. I did, personally, enjoy it, because it seemed like a natural evolution to take the franchise in. And the critter that drank the dish wash detergent still cracks me up every time I watch the movie.
"Critters 3" is definitely a well-worthy addition to the "Critters" franchise.
Leo Dicaprio's Ultimate #1 Fan
ipodcrazy251 July 2006
The movie wasn't that good basically you can practically tell what's going to happen before it happens even if you have never seen the movie before! very predictable . But if your a Leo fan it's a must see because Leo is so cute in this film and he has a pretty big role in this movie! I love the part where Leo is beating a critter with a flashlight then the other critter shoots a spike and it hits Leo in the neck ! I feel bad for Leo at that part though :( anyway great movie if your a Leo fan but if your not don't bother because the movie is pretty lame if your not watching it to see Leo. This was also Leo's first movie ever!
Another cheap, but fun, critters movie
Balto-22 January 1999
This has to be the worse Critter movie in the series, full of cheap effects and bad acting. The storyline is just as bad and the acting is terrible. Why is this movie fun? Because there is so much good material to make fun of and mock. It's not scary, and it's not really any good in the Sci-Fi department, but as a bad film to make fun of, its great. Don't watch this film if you're looking for a good movie, watch this film if you're looking for a good film to make cracks at.
Worth seeing only for an early appearance from a future A-lister
tomgillespie200210 January 2016
Shot back-to-back with Critters 4, this third instalment of the relatively successful comedy-horror series featuring the oddly cute but deadly crites was the first to skip theatres and arrive straight to video. The movie starts as widowed father Clifford (John Calvin), his daughter Annie (Aimee Brooks) and son Johnny (Christian and Joseph Cousins) drive home from their family vacation. When they are forced to pull over due to a flat tire, Annie and Johnny head to a rest stop to play a bit of Frisbee, where they encounter Josh (Leonardo DiCaprio), a floppy-haired cool-kid with an arsehole of a stepfather (William Dennis Hunter), who just so happens to be the landlord of the family. While stationed there, they encounter alien bounty hunter Charlie (Don Keith Opper) who warns the children of another crite invasion.
After a summary of the previous two movies by the former Grover's Bend sheriff-turned-intergalactic alien killer, the family arrive at their apartment building where a collection of comedy archetypes reside. Some eggs hatch and the usual havoc ensues as the new collection of furry killers travel from floor to floor munching anything they can get their teeth into. The action stops at the apartment building once we arrive there and this is where the budget constraints become obvious. Not that the Critters franchise was ever blessed with innovative special effects or puppet-work, but things seem especially lazy and poorly done here.
With everything taking place in one location, we are forced to sit through set-piece after set-piece, as the crites do little but bounce or roll to the next attack and use their poisoned darts to varying degrees of success, usually depending on who they're shooting at. The attempts are humour are childish, with one of the few interesting characters - no-nonsense maintenance lady Marcia (Katherine Cortez) - left literally swinging from a wire for an extended amount of time in a running joke that quickly wears thin. Similar to Gremlins (1984), there is an attempt to give the critters some kind of personality, but they prove as indistinguishable from one another as they have previously. Worth watching only for the curiosity of seeing future A-lister Leonardo DiCaprio in one of his earliest appearances.
After a summary of the previous two movies by the former Grover's Bend sheriff-turned-intergalactic alien killer, the family arrive at their apartment building where a collection of comedy archetypes reside. Some eggs hatch and the usual havoc ensues as the new collection of furry killers travel from floor to floor munching anything they can get their teeth into. The action stops at the apartment building once we arrive there and this is where the budget constraints become obvious. Not that the Critters franchise was ever blessed with innovative special effects or puppet-work, but things seem especially lazy and poorly done here.
With everything taking place in one location, we are forced to sit through set-piece after set-piece, as the crites do little but bounce or roll to the next attack and use their poisoned darts to varying degrees of success, usually depending on who they're shooting at. The attempts are humour are childish, with one of the few interesting characters - no-nonsense maintenance lady Marcia (Katherine Cortez) - left literally swinging from a wire for an extended amount of time in a running joke that quickly wears thin. Similar to Gremlins (1984), there is an attempt to give the critters some kind of personality, but they prove as indistinguishable from one another as they have previously. Worth watching only for the curiosity of seeing future A-lister Leonardo DiCaprio in one of his earliest appearances.
DON'T CALL ME SPORT
nogodnomasters29 December 2018
Warning: Spoilers
This film picks up two years later with Charlie, the alien bounty hunter (Don Keith Opper) being the only member of the original two films whose career couldn't pick up. This film does have another cute kitchen feeding frenzy scene, although it really doesn't have anything else that is entertaining.
This film features a young Leonardo DiCaprio as well as a young Aimee Brooks with neither one showing any promise with this script. The film was a let down riding on the coattails of its previous success. Apparently there are always eggs left behind that hatch in 2 year cycles which is why they opted to keep the sequel in the same boring location.
Parental Guide: No f-bombs, sex, or nudity.
This film features a young Leonardo DiCaprio as well as a young Aimee Brooks with neither one showing any promise with this script. The film was a let down riding on the coattails of its previous success. Apparently there are always eggs left behind that hatch in 2 year cycles which is why they opted to keep the sequel in the same boring location.
Parental Guide: No f-bombs, sex, or nudity.
Not That Bad
slimer848915 April 2015
Recently, I obtained the Critters 4-pack at a Dollar General. Since seeing any Critters movies at a store is such a rare occurrence, I decided to buy it. This way, I can finally watch the movies without having an Internet connection and I can also finally watch the two Critters movies that I have not seen yet: Critters 3 and Critters 4. After I saw the second film, I was shaky to see the third and fourth installments. The third one looked okay and the fourth one looked really boring. So, since I bought the 4-pack, I decided to give number 3 a watch. I saw it, and....
It's an okay movie. Yeah, it kind of sucks that we don't have any Brown family members in this movie, but then again, it would just be the same old stuff. The new characters are alright. I would've loved to see the bounty hunters back, but maybe it's a good thing that they're not in this movie, since we could finally be able to see how people kill the Crites without help from them. But the movie has it's fair share of stupid moments, like the scene where Josh (played by DiCaprio, by the way)mumbles to his dad that he didn't like being called "sport". Yeah, I get the "sport" part. His father called him that until his death, but we never saw Josh sigh or show any sign of getting bothered by the name, so it comes off as weird. We also have a Critter farting gag. I would've never thought that a Critters movie would stoop to that much of a low. Also, this is the only movie in the series (so far) that one of the Crites is given a name. In one scene, one Crite is referred to as Blackie by another Crite. The only character from the previous movies that appears in this one is Charlie. He's still Charlie.
Well, it's nice how they chose to be on Earth in this one instead of boring space like the fourth one. And one day, I'll get to that movie. I hope it's not as bad as I think.
It's an okay movie. Yeah, it kind of sucks that we don't have any Brown family members in this movie, but then again, it would just be the same old stuff. The new characters are alright. I would've loved to see the bounty hunters back, but maybe it's a good thing that they're not in this movie, since we could finally be able to see how people kill the Crites without help from them. But the movie has it's fair share of stupid moments, like the scene where Josh (played by DiCaprio, by the way)mumbles to his dad that he didn't like being called "sport". Yeah, I get the "sport" part. His father called him that until his death, but we never saw Josh sigh or show any sign of getting bothered by the name, so it comes off as weird. We also have a Critter farting gag. I would've never thought that a Critters movie would stoop to that much of a low. Also, this is the only movie in the series (so far) that one of the Crites is given a name. In one scene, one Crite is referred to as Blackie by another Crite. The only character from the previous movies that appears in this one is Charlie. He's still Charlie.
Well, it's nice how they chose to be on Earth in this one instead of boring space like the fourth one. And one day, I'll get to that movie. I hope it's not as bad as I think.
The third film in the Critters franchise is nothing to get excited about.
poolandrews6 June 2005
Warning: Spoilers
Critters 3 starts on the open road as Clifford (John Calvin) his teenage daughter Annie (Aimee Brooks) & his young son Johnny (the IMDb list two actor's Christian & Josephh Cousins, identical twins perhaps?) are heading back home from a vacation. Suddenly the tyre on their van blows & they have to stop at a public rest area to fix it. While there Annie & Johnny meet a kid named Josh (Leonardo DiCaprio, yes that one) who in turn all run into Charlie McFadden (the films co-producer Don Keith Opper) from the previous two Critter films. Charlie tells them the story of the Critters & the town of Grovers Bend but they don't believe him. Meanwhile back at the van a Critter lays some eggs on it's underside, out of sight from everyone. Once Clifford has fixed the tyre the trio set off for their home, a run down urban tenement block in Los Angeles somewhere complete with Critter eggs along for the ride. Upon arrival the eggs hatch & the Critters head straight inside the tenement block quickly disposing of Frank (Geoffrey Blake), the caretaker. As the night draws on the few remaining residents, a fat woman named Rosalie (Diana Bellamy), a telephone repair woman Marsha (Katherine Cortez), an elderly couple Mr. (Bill Zuckert) & Mrs. Menges (Frances Bay) must come together with Clifford & his kids to fight the Critters. Josh also makes an appearance as his Stepfather (William Dennis Hunt) owns the building. But will the group be able to defeat the Critters & prevent themselves from becoming dinner?
Directed Kristine Peterson I thought Critters 3 was an incredibly undistinguished film, but at least she can say she made a film staring Leonardo DiCaprio & not many people can say that! The budget for Critters 3 probably wasn't exactly a fortune as the whole production looks cheap throughout, there are very few characters, very few Critters & I think only 3 ever appear in the same shot at once & it does away with any sort of space angle so there are no expensive spaceship or distant alien planet special effects to pay for. The script by David J. Schow is strictly by-the-numbers & very predictable. A group of humans are stuck in an isolated situation with Critters & have no means of contacting the outside world for help, that plot scenario sounds very familiar right? Well it's same as the previous Critters (1986) & Critters 2: The Main Course (1988) & many other horror films so it should. Critters 3 does nothing with the premise, it never even tries to add anything to an already old, tired & well used storyline. Critters 3 is also very tame for a horror film with only two people actually being killed, the comedy elements are seriously lacking as well with the best joke Critters 3 can mange being a Critter eating some beans & then farting, very funny if your about 5 years old. The characters are mostly standard horror film clichés & quickly became annoying. There is virtually no blood or gore in Critters 3 at all, just a few splashes of blood & disappointingly Critters 3 in fact seems to go out of it's way not to show any violence. The special effects on the Critters are OK but they still look like static, simplistic hand-puppets that have very little movement. The acting isn't that good & Critters 3 happens to be a certain Leonardo DiCaprio's very first feature film, to be fair to the kid he's alright & I wonder if any of the other cast or crew had an idea what he go on to become. Why on Earth does that Charlie guy have to keep popping up in these Critter films? To give Critters 3 some credit it moves along at a good pace & isn't boring, it's generally well made with nice enough production values & it's a bit of harmless fun if your in the right sort of mood & thankfully it only lasts for about 80 odd minutes. Overall Critters 3 is an OK time waster but don't expect anything deep or meaningful. There's nothing really wrong with it as cheap horror film but I couldn't help feeling that I'd seen it all before. An average time-waster that isn't as good as either of the previous two Critter films. Critters 3 ends with a 'to be continued...' as this was filmed back to back with Critters 4 (1991) which unsurprisingly went straight to video, probably to save even more money. Critters 3 is a decent enough way to waste 80 odd minutes if you can watch it on T.V. for free otherwise don't bother.
Directed Kristine Peterson I thought Critters 3 was an incredibly undistinguished film, but at least she can say she made a film staring Leonardo DiCaprio & not many people can say that! The budget for Critters 3 probably wasn't exactly a fortune as the whole production looks cheap throughout, there are very few characters, very few Critters & I think only 3 ever appear in the same shot at once & it does away with any sort of space angle so there are no expensive spaceship or distant alien planet special effects to pay for. The script by David J. Schow is strictly by-the-numbers & very predictable. A group of humans are stuck in an isolated situation with Critters & have no means of contacting the outside world for help, that plot scenario sounds very familiar right? Well it's same as the previous Critters (1986) & Critters 2: The Main Course (1988) & many other horror films so it should. Critters 3 does nothing with the premise, it never even tries to add anything to an already old, tired & well used storyline. Critters 3 is also very tame for a horror film with only two people actually being killed, the comedy elements are seriously lacking as well with the best joke Critters 3 can mange being a Critter eating some beans & then farting, very funny if your about 5 years old. The characters are mostly standard horror film clichés & quickly became annoying. There is virtually no blood or gore in Critters 3 at all, just a few splashes of blood & disappointingly Critters 3 in fact seems to go out of it's way not to show any violence. The special effects on the Critters are OK but they still look like static, simplistic hand-puppets that have very little movement. The acting isn't that good & Critters 3 happens to be a certain Leonardo DiCaprio's very first feature film, to be fair to the kid he's alright & I wonder if any of the other cast or crew had an idea what he go on to become. Why on Earth does that Charlie guy have to keep popping up in these Critter films? To give Critters 3 some credit it moves along at a good pace & isn't boring, it's generally well made with nice enough production values & it's a bit of harmless fun if your in the right sort of mood & thankfully it only lasts for about 80 odd minutes. Overall Critters 3 is an OK time waster but don't expect anything deep or meaningful. There's nothing really wrong with it as cheap horror film but I couldn't help feeling that I'd seen it all before. An average time-waster that isn't as good as either of the previous two Critter films. Critters 3 ends with a 'to be continued...' as this was filmed back to back with Critters 4 (1991) which unsurprisingly went straight to video, probably to save even more money. Critters 3 is a decent enough way to waste 80 odd minutes if you can watch it on T.V. for free otherwise don't bother.
Every word that is harmful is this film, a REAL slap to the face of film
therealjacob122 August 2012
Just no. Please people even rating this above two stars is complete slander. This film is honestly so boring and terrible, every aspect of this film is quite frankly shocking. The acting is atrocious, I cringed too much watching this film cause their acting was that bad. The film is rated PG-13 which I simply don't get. I feel as if they only did this so they could get a bit more cash into it because they must of known it wasn't going to be a success. I honestly 100% can say this film is a guarantee miss, The only satisfaction i take from this film is writing this review warning you not to watch it. The long story short is that its a crap gremlins, it try's to recreate that creepy feel of the creatures of gremlins in a stupid creation which looks like a Furby and it just does not work. PLEASE! for the sake of your own time. Do not watch. Pointless sequel.
Very good! A fine sequel with laughs and horror!(and sci fi)
nzswanny12 December 2015
Warning: Spoilers
I don't see how this is any worse than Critters and Critters 2...it's awesome! Critters 3 is very good and has plenty of laugh-out loud moments and moments that'll make you on the edge of your seat! Critters 3 is about a family going to stay at an apartment (or hotel, I forgot,) and they accidentally bring critter eggs to the building. The eggs start to hatch and try and find dinner in the apartment (or hotel) before they get really hungry! There was quite an emotional and comical scene when someone's step father gets eaten by the critters, and this may disturb some viewers. However, apart from that, the movie was great! This movie is definitely underrated and deserves at least 3 stars. This movie is very good. 7/10
Pretty awful
Critters198611 April 2012
Now today I'm not going to review Critters 3 instead I'm going to talk about it. Now for Critters 1 and 2 I've said how good they are but I'm not going to say that this one is good instead it is awful. They always make good horror movies but then they have to make the sequels really bad which I find really annoying!! Now normally horror movies are directed by men but Critters 3 is directed by a girl (no wonder this movie is so crap.) And they have new actors in this movie and they are terrible. Also Leonardo Dicaprio Joins the Critters as he try to stop those nasty hairballs. Now this maybe a short review. Thats because I've got nothing else to say so Bye.
This was actually good!
reapercrew-0558411 October 2021
Critters 3
Toronto855 April 2011
Critters 3 continues the story of the hairy Critters from outer space that try to kill any humans in sight. This time Leonardo DiCaprio joins tenants in an LA apartment complex as they fight to escape death. The film starts off with a family road trip. They stop off at Grover's Bend (same place from the first two movies) and some Critters and their eggs attach onto the car. They eventually wind up in downtown Los Angeles where they live in this seedy apartment building. Of course the eggs hatch and are now on the loose. They kill off a maintenance worker in the basement before attacking a large woman's Bunny slippers. Once they hear her screams for help, the chase is on between the tenants and the little monsters. Leo DiCaprio plays a kid with a nasty stepfather who is actually the landlord of the apartment.
There are plenty of laughs throughout the whole thing. The large woman getting stung in her behind with the critters spikes. There is a funny scene reminiscent to Critters 2 in the diner when the monsters start eating the food and make a mess of the place. In Critters 3, we discover that the critters can indeed pass gas. This third Critters is very different from the other two, but yet just as good. I thought the location of the apartment building was smart and I like the chase scenes throughout the place.
Definitely a good addition to the comical horror series. Check this one out for sure.
7/10
There are plenty of laughs throughout the whole thing. The large woman getting stung in her behind with the critters spikes. There is a funny scene reminiscent to Critters 2 in the diner when the monsters start eating the food and make a mess of the place. In Critters 3, we discover that the critters can indeed pass gas. This third Critters is very different from the other two, but yet just as good. I thought the location of the apartment building was smart and I like the chase scenes throughout the place.
Definitely a good addition to the comical horror series. Check this one out for sure.
7/10
Better than part 2 I'll give it that
newsteadadam29 April 2000
Okay I was a big fan of the first Critters movie. In fact I love it with a passion, but the sequels are bad. This one isn't the worst. I would have to say that this is the best sequel that came out of the series. Plays more of a comedy than a Science Fiction-Horror flick but hey what are you going to do?
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
