Is it Bad?: Beverly Hills Cop III (1994)

 Just in time for my Birthday, the Beverly Hills Cop Franchise is back.

Why has it been absent for 30 years?

To find out, let's check out the previous one...

Beverly Hills Cop III.

It is supposedly too serious.
It is supposedly too silly.
Did Eddie Murphy really try?
Was John Landis the best pick?

Is it bad though?

Pro: While the Film is still an Action-Comedy, it tries to be more.  

Axel is motivated by the death of his Captain here, with Murphy showing legit emotions.

Con: Many people point to the tonal whiplash here, given the funny setup before.
I'm not that bothered by it myself though.

Con: The lack of Taggart here to round out the Comedic Trio.

Mind you, there's a complicated answer for that- basically the Script was rejected, he had to do another project and then wasn't available- and it is unfortunate.

That said, Hector Elizondo does fine in his place.  Is it the same?

Pro: Putting Axel in a Theme Park makes for a good Fish out of Water Story.

A little more time in Detroit would have really sealed the deal though.

This is the only one in the Franchise (so far, at least) that doesn't feature a Strip Club Scene too.
Darn?

Pro: The Plot is *gasp* not a convoluted affair.

I love the Original, but its Plot involved bearer bonds, an Art Gallery and random stuff.
The second one features Robberies with a fake Theme that are something something gun running.

This one features some sort of criminal affair in a Disney World/Universal Studios pastiche.  I can explain it in one sentence.

Pro: Serge is back.  His replacement in Part 2 was still fine, but it feels like a Beverly Hills Cop Film with him in it.

His Character takes a silly, but logical turn here, as well as serving as the Film's Q.

Con: According to Bronson Pinchot, he's reacting here to Director John Landis and not Murphy, who he claims was depressed (about his career) and the stand-in was easier.

Mind you, you'll only notice that now because I just told you.

Pro: The Film makes full use out of the unique setting, with Foley having to be disguised at points, as well as interacting with Park Guests (including George Lucas).

They also use an Attraction for an Action Scene later and use the empty Park at night for the finale.

Pro: It is still a Beverly Hills Cop Film, and he still has clashes with an outside Authority Figure (just not his dead Boss or the missing Ronnie Cox).

Con: They do kind of repeat this alot, don't they?

Pro: It works, right?  Plus, it is Stephen McHattie!

Con?: The Film double-dips on aged friend shot for pathos here.  Granted- the second one doesn't die.

This apparently has confused Mr. Murphy, as he spoke about his motivation in 'the last one' was 'Uncle Dave being shot.'  I guess he forgot the beginning.

Granted- it has been 30 years.

Pro: The Film does make good use of Axel- and not someone else- being framed for a crime in Act 3.  In addition, it gives us a Cameo-fest that features Arthur Hiller, Forrest J. Ackerman and Ray Harryhausen!

Pro: The Film gets really creative with the finale, with Characters outside in the Park, running through the Tunnels and interacting with the Attractions.

It's a bit obvious when they show us Alien Attack (a retrofitted Earthquake Attraction) in full earlier that it will come up later.

Serge's ridiculous gun is a fun prop too.

Con: Supposedly Murphy wanted to be taken more seriously as an Action Star, so the Film's finale ends with him wounded- as Reinhold and Elizondo.

I know that lots of people don't like the idea of the Film ending at Wonder World either, but it does still give us the proper freeze frame ending.

What's Good?

The Film still feels like a proper Beverly Hills Cop Film.  You can say that things look too bright, or it is not as funny, but you can't deny how it feels.

The Action is good here and they make great use of the setting(s).

A small thing I like- they use multiple remixes of 'Axel F,' which is fun.

The returning Characters are nice here and the new ones- especially Timothy Carhart as Ellis DeWald.  He has that same punchable face and vibe as William Atherton.

What's Bad?

The Film isn't quite as funny as the other 2, with less of the defining moments of the previous Films.  Despite being the most recent one, it is the least remembered.

The lack of Taggart here is disappointing- no question.

The attempts to make the Film more grounded at times is certainly a choice that many people don't like.

So...

Is It Bad?

NO.

Objectively, the Film is fine.  It isn't amazing, but it is not bad.
Will it be your favorite in the Franchise?
Perhaps not.

I can't be mad at any Film with a Cameo from Julie Strain...

She's 'Annihilator Girl'

...and Al Leong.

as 'Uncredited Car Mechanic.'

Next time, should I go right to the obvious green target?  I think so.