Les Sacrifiés 3

This film has the most imaginative and technically proficient action (Hughes is as spectacular as in the 1980s and at the same time crisp and clear as is appropriate thirty years later), the funniest newcomers (not the youngsters!), the most luxurious villain (yeah, Mel's to blame, but damn it, take it easy on him already, he's in his prime), and sadly, the most boringly conceived plot (it's not much more than an amusement ride and the second film sorely lacks self-deprecation). (2015-08-08)

A couple of minutes after the end, and I already don’t know what it was about. Maybe it’s because it was about nothing... :) While the second one made my heart skip a beat at the fact that an action film today can still be so genuinely entertaining and that can transfer that vigour to the viewer, the third one is a soulless, uninspired carnage that only tries to win fans by how many famous names appear in as super-stylish badass icons. The best character is hands down Banderas’s, who spices up the dull parade of B-movie action and script recycling at least for a while with much-needed, previously completely derivative humour. 45% (2015-10-11)

I think it's a better film than the second film, which feels somewhat forced. But of course it has its flaws. On the one hand, it’s perfectly filmed and well-arranged action with an amazing finale with the army, a likeable bunch of familiar old men spiced up by the excellent Banderas and Ford, who obviously had a good time, villain Mel Gibson, and a constant pace. On the other hand, most of the time the young team is not very interesting (this is not true in the finale, where they all shine) and especially, especially, especially the lackluster Stallone vs. Gibson duel. Plus there is one glaring illogicality - the Expendables fly to Somalia to eliminate someone and they don't even know what he looks like? Very strange.___P.S. Those who watched the pirated copy instead of at the movie theatre must have missed about half of the experience. Good for you. (2014-08-18)

This is not a tribute to the eighties, this is mindless and dull. There is no winking, only a rehash of annoying trademarks we used to smirk at in the past, but in a newer package. The frowning main character, the incredibly confusing and poorly edited action, a heap of amateur digital effects, and except for two or three shots, uninteresting full-contact fights with no trace of dynamics. If it had at least least half of the raw feeling of Bourne, I would happy. Truly disappointing. Only Antonio Banderas and the non-action chemistry between the main characters entertained me. But they didn't have to make an action movie for that. A live stream while having dinner in LA would have been enough. (2014-08-23)

You bet I’m overrating it, because at last they managed to fine tune it. The first part was about nostalgia, part two just blinked by, part three is a big show about revenge, education and the team spirit, what else? The primary strength is Gibson, hungry for a proper role, he relishes every minute on screen, but he has criminally few of them. Snipes is out of jail and making himself known. He’s still got it. The king of the snappy line is definitely Banderas and his mouthy Galgo, his broken English enough to drive the audience round the bend. And what about the old gang? Still singing the same tune, they work well together, even if it’s sometimes a bit knives out. Arnold and Jet question their orientation with a smile. Anything for a laugh. And the youngsters a pretty fine too. Hughes proves himself to be the best director of the trilogy yet, despite occasional confusing action scenes, he has everything in hand and so in visual terms Expendables 3 comes out on top. The screenplay is full of holes and gigantic, in places exaggerated (the house packed with C4 and tanks), in places too restrained finale (Sly vs. Mel), but at least it’s consistent. In any case, it’s one big show that is best scene on the silver screen. - Why did they call you Doctor Death? - I was a medic. (2014-08-15)