Spoonatects Am i the only one who thinks........Average?

Catangro After playing with our expectations, this turns out to be a very different sort of film.

Clarissa Mora The tone of this movie is interesting -- the stakes are both dramatic and high, but it's balanced with a lot of fun, tongue and cheek dialogue.

Kamila Bell This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

Platypuschow The Candyman returns once again to torment and kill a distant relative for further undisclosed or vague reasons.This time it's Baywatch alumni Donna D'Errico taking the lead and boring the hell out of us for the films 90 minute duration.Granted this is a marginal step up from Farewell To The Flesh (1995) but still spotlights why the Candyman franchise died such a death.I've never understood how Tony Todds Candyman became so iconic, how do people place him alongside the likes of Freddy, Leatherface and Jason when he had just 3 rather mediocre films to his name.I'd like to see Candyman reborn, whether a 4th film or a reboot I don't mind but we a) Need Todd to remain the titular role and b) New writers.The Good: Wade Williams Donna D'Errico is far better here than I've seen her before The Bad: Plot is still pretty messy Things I Learnt From This Movie: Remaking the origin scene and making it different makes about as much sense as nipples on men Donna D'Errico is allergic to bra's

Leofwine_draca And so we have the second sequel to a film that worked best as a stand-alone horror outing. Clive Barker's mix of fairytale and the macabre made 1992's CANDYMAN a splendid little movie, evocative and atmosphere and a breath of fresh air amidst the latest NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET or Friday THE 13TH sequel. Sadly, the rules of movie money-making never change, and so two unnecessary sequels followed that added absolutely nothing to the story and served only to besmirch the original's reputation.CANDYMAN 3: DAY OF THE DEAD offers by way of story a straightforward repeat of the first film's plot: a young woman is haunted by a ghostly killer who nobody else believes exists. She's subsequently blamed for the murders carried out by this ghost, and she must find a way to stop it before either a) she goes mad, b) she faces a life in prison or c) she herself dies. The law of diminishing returns means that everything on screen is a lesser imitation of that which has come before, and the excruciatingly predictable script means that there's nothing in the way of originality or genuine scares here.Director Turi Meyer had little experience of filmmaking before this, but the direction can't really be faulted – even if it is a little bland. No, the biggest problem lies in the casting of former Baywatch starlet Donna D'Errico as the heroine. D'Errico is a horrible actress, excruciating when it comes to her 'fear' scenes, and she's just paraded around in a variety of tight-fitting vest tops and knickers. Nice body, shame about the talent. The supporting cast are all very bland, with the exception of the sorely underused Ernie Hudson, Jr. – son of the GHOSTBUSTERS actor – who seems to have inherited some of his dad's talent. And then there's Tony Todd, who is menacing and brilliant as the Candyman, and the only real reason to watch this. Todd is one of those actors generally stuck in B-movies who always give a decent performance, and Danny Trejo is another. He isn't required to do anything other than stand around and whisper 'be my victim' but he even does that well.There are some repetitive gore sequences here, generally involving people being impaled by Candyman's hook, as well as a plethora of nude scenes in a bid to attract some (male) attention. Sadly, these don't distract from the crappy script and general tired air surrounding the proceedings. CANDYMAN is a good film, but the sequels are best forgotten about.

idiotboy For years I thought I'd seen all three of the Candyman movies, but on a whim I watched them through again recently. I wish I'd stuck with my assumption and stopped after the first two, for the Day of the Dead was an utter disappointment.My first impression, given during the opening credits was: "They dropped the Philip Glass music, and all they can show me is a shiny red hook from about fifty different angles. This movie is going to suck." My second impression was from the very first shot of our new 'heroine', Ms. D'Erico. Seeing her trying to act I was reassured that this must be the obligatory 'stupid person calling Candyman and dying instantly to prove what film it is' scene. To my horror, this was entirely not the case. My eyes were assaulted by the unfortunate attempts by various people to act throughout this poor excuse of a sequel. My ears were assaulted by each and every high-pitched squeak of a scream that Donna uttered when she was told to act scared, or surprised, or happy, or mildly confused... My sense of common was assaulted when Donna dropped her keys through a heating vent in her corridor, and I had to watch the horrifying effort she put into wedging her hand through the tiniest gap in that vent after she knocked into the hinged section leaving a gap large enough to fit her head through. Twice! Tony Todd, the legend himself, did however do a valiant job for about half the movie, before he gave up from being given the same lines to parrot he'd had in his previous two movies, over and over. He was still a formidable presence though, and kudos to him for giving it a go.I realise that I'm being quite negative about this awful awful movie, though that is probably because it hurt my brain so much to watch it. I can't recommend this movie to anyone, but there's a chance you might enjoy it anyway. If you were very drunk. Or not watching it.

lastliberal I walked in to the third act of a three-act play. Unfortunately, I have not seen Candyman 1 and 2, so I have to judge this on it's own merits.Tony Todd makes a good villain. I was interested in seeing him after watching him with a group discussing horror movies the other day. I like Candyman and will certainly look for the other two.This was my first time seeing Donna D'Errico, and it was painless. She didn't have a great role, as she spent most of the time screaming and running, but she did OK. Apparently you have to watch Playboy videos to see all her assets, but they were impressive jiggling in beater tees here. At least mommy wasn't so repressed.Worth watching, but probably better as the end of a trilogy instead of the beginning. Have to get the other two parts.