Teringer An Exercise In Nonsense

Crwthod A lot more amusing than I thought it would be.

SpunkySelfTwitter It’s an especially fun movie from a director and cast who are clearly having a good time allowing themselves to let loose.

Justina The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

ivo-cobra8 *SPOILERS* Highlander III: The Sorcerer (1994) is a poor copycat movie of the first one in the franchise. This is a far superior film to Highlander II but it is really a copy of the first one. ... It really feels as if the Highlander story has no more to give us but that would be very wrong. It used to be my second favorite film in the franchise but not anymore!! Christopher Lambert returns as Connor MacLeod as the protagonist who has to face against a new dangerous and powerful enemy; An extremely powerful sorcerer known as Kane (Mario Van Peebles) who threatens to win the fabled "Prize" in order to gain world domination by eliminating Macleod.Plot: Deceived that he had won the Prize, Connor MacLeod awakens from a peaceful life when an entombed immortal magician comes seeking the Highlander.This movie has a tons of problems while people are trashing Highlander II: The Quickening idiots! You give this hack job of a movie a better rating than Highlander 2: Renegade Version?! This is a joke. Highlander 3 is at its best when it's ripping off the first film and at its worst when it tries to add in sub-plots that go no-where.Connor MacLeod has suddenly a son? Really? Are you people that stupid! The immortals can't have kids! Why would MacLeod adopt a son is stupid and ridicules! Brenda is suddenly killed in this movie with a weird explanation! Kane The Sorcerer (Mario Van Peebles) want's to win the fabled "Prize" in order to gain world domination. Haven't we saw that in the first movie when the Kurgan wanted to win the "Prize" by eliminating MacLeod?!Lt. John Stenn (Martin Neufeld) says the dialogues like that he was in the first movie, when in fact the character was never mentioned or seen in the first movie!!!!! The character Lt. John Stenn miraculously disappears from the movie without any explanation!Kane The Sorcerer (Mario Van Peebles) kidnaps MacLeod's fake son ( Gabriel Kakon) and uses him as bait by playing the same trick with a car that The Kurgan played on Brenda by kidnapping her and dragging her in the car and hitting people on the street. I saw that scene in the first movie already gosh! Kane The Sorcerer (Mario Van Peebles) has sex with a prostitute, haven't we already see that in the first movie? The end of a sword fight the battle in the power plant when we see the sword battle between MacLeod and Kane, during the battle you can see a stuntman for Christopher Lambert doing the sword fights which the fight is a fake! Why is doing a stuntman all the work for Christopher Lambert? Couldn't he do it his stunts him self, like he did in the second one?! Why this movie has so many titles? It is stupid! The Sorcerer, The Magician, The Final Dimension and The Final Conflict?! That is beyond stupid! Like producers didn't know what title they should use for this movie! Geesh! What is so epic about this movie than we saw in the first two movies? I think with the power plant this movie tried to rip off Terminator 2 and I Come in Peace (1990)! This movie is rated PG-13 not R, the first two movies a rated R not PG-13 you morons! I am sorry, but this is a terrible awful film! The only thing I liked in this movie is the song Bonny Portmore by Loreena McKennitt. It tried to follow the story the of the first film which it ruined with coping it! I liked that the film was also shot in Castle Tioran, Lochaber, Highland, Scotland, UK that is the only thing I liked. I also like MacLeod making his own sword and the song Bonny Portmore is played by Loreena McKennitt that was epic. There are almost only three things I liked about this movie.I also liked Highlander entering abandoned power plant for the final battle I like that and I like the music score playing during the fight. that is all. The rating is F 1/10 for me I am not reviewing Endgame and The Source they both suck and they are even worst than this one! 1/10 Score: F Studio: Miramax Films Starring: Christopher Lambert, Mario Van Peebles, Deborah Unger, Mako Director: Andrew Morahan Producer: Claude Léger Screenplay: Paul Ohl René Manzor, Brad Mirman Story by Brad Mirman William N. Panzer Rated: PG-13 Running Time: 1 Hr. 39 Mins. Budget: $26.000.000 Box Office: $36,800,000

mt1768 What can you say about the highlander sequels. Highlander II and Highlander the source are prime examples of complete cinematic failure and Highlander Endgame is just below average.I have heard a a lot of people say that this film is just terrible and barley any better than Highlander 2. This is a point I disagree with. While this movie has quiet a few problems, the biggest of which the story being almost completely duplicating the first. there are definitely are a few things that are good.What is good. In my humble opinion I think that that the performances are not half bad, both Christopher Lambert and Mario Van Peebles are good in their roles. The Special effects, While not great, are well used and fluid. And lastly the Action sequences a reasonably well done, while far from being the best ever put to screen they are o.k.As I said there are problems. The big one being, as I mentioned a bit further up, is the story. it is almost a complete copy of the first. Even a lot of the same things are done. such as the scene with Kane going in out of traffic with one of Conner's loved ones in the passenger seat.All in all this is not that bad a film but some people may have trouble sitting through it.

t_atzmueller As an uncorrectable "Highlander"-fan, I eyed the copy of "Highlander 3: The Sorcerer" with suspicion when it turned up in my video store. For one, the awfulness that was "Highlander 2: The Quickening" was still too fresh in one's mind. Secondly, there was no trace of Sean Connery (not that his presence saved "The Quickening", it merely alleviated). And thirdly, despite studying the cinema magazines (this was a time before IMDb, mind you) and being relatively up-to-date, I had not even heard about a third part being in production.The first reaction as the movie began: at least the tedious science-fiction storyline of "Quickening" was ignored, making this a prequel but despite ignoring "Quickening", "Quickening" had one advantage to "Sorcerer": it was real cinema while "The Sorcerer" reeks of television production, being shot on TV-sets that look like they were leftovers from a "McQuade"-episode.An action-franchise, be it "Highlander" or "James Bond" lives and dies through the villain and hence Mario Van Peebles, as villainous immortal Kane, is one of the film's biggest letdowns: Van Peebles mimics the original villain Kurgan one-to-one but where Clancy Brown came across as threatening and psychotic, Van Peebles grimacing and growling reminds us more of a Halloween-bogeyman, dressed up like Genghis Khan. Granted, all major villains of the "Highlander"-sequels have essentially been carbon-copies of The Kurgan but Van Peebles hams it up so badly, it's almost embarrassing. Even for "Highlander"-fans."It's a kind of magic", was not only one of the catchphrases of the original, it was part of the concept and partial reason to it's success: what made those warriors immortal, why they had to fight and what the fabled prize would be, was pretty much left out or only hinted at in the original film. What killed the magic in "Highlander 2" was the attempt to explain the background and reasons – something the fan didn't actually want to have explained; what's killing the magic in "Highlander 3" is the actual depiction and use of magic. Perhaps the producers didn't realize it but the "Highlander"-fans didn't want magical gimmicks or sorcerers – they wanted immortal warriors who fought each other for reasons not known or understood.One was glad when *spoiler ahead* the evil Kane was finally beheaded – not so much because Connor McLeod prevailed (again) *spoiler end* but because the movie was finally over and that there would be no more sequels, like "Highlander: The Series", "Highlander: Endgame" or "Highlander 5: The Source", which one would inadvertently have to watch. Don't ask why – it seems to be a kind of magic.

Matthew_Diamond ...but it is so bad, it is fun to watch in a way. It is so terrible that I have a hard time mentioning it. Perhaps it was the grainy film that made the 1985 original with Clancy Brown (The Kergan) so much better. Some movies require a sequel, or maybe two, while others like "Highlander" require--and demand--none at all. "Highlander III" however is not nearly as bad as "Highlander II-The Quickening", which I feel like a goofball for having watched in the theater on its opening Friday night, in which "We're gonna be okay" uttered by MacCleod garnered instant and thunderous Boos from the college crowd. By the time we had managed to get to the end of this mishmashed misdirected glob of a movie, totally a discredit to the original "Highlander" the screen was totally bombarded by soda cups, popcorn and half-eaten candy bars.Actually, "Highlander III" like the second sequel serves as excellent training for film students on the why's and how's a sequel should not be made. Shortly after MacCleod's 'reawakening' and within moments after arriving in New York, he is greeted by a carful of thugs which conveniently show up and shoot him--a wonderful advertisement for why we should not want to visit New York--if all tourists and guests to this fine city would be greeted in the same horrific manner.Directors and producers: let sleeping dogs lay. Don't awaken a sleeping giant that is much more of a "Godzilla" than a "Lord of the Rings." Stop trying so hard to get the Oscar, and just stick to the basics of good film making. "Highlander III" illustrates once again why some movies should never have existed. What a waste of money and talent!