The early 90s were not kind to Eddie Murphy. Paramount butchered Another 48 Hours in the editing room, audiences turned their noses up at Boomerang, and almost nobody even bothered with The Distinguished Gentleman. Eddie had lost his pulling power and decided to go back to the role that made him a superstar. But 1994 just wasn't the right moment as most of the cast and crew were busy, leaving very little in the way of continuity. Several scripts came and went, and what we finally got was a lame 'Die Hard in a Theme Park' story.

There is a huge list of reasons why BHC3 stinks:

No Taggart. No Bogomil. No Jeffrey. No Harold Faltermeyer. No Bruckheimer/Simpson. No opening title. No wisecracking.

Don't get me wrong, I like Hector Elizondo, but he's no substitute for John Ashton (who's absence is explained with a single, flippant line of dialogue). I can't help but think if the above list was shorter then the movie wouldn't have been such a failure. Where on earth did the $70 million budget go? John Landis' action scenes are flat and static, with no real spark or energy.

All three Beverly Hills Cop movies have had horrible scripts, huge plot holes, and hammy villains, so I guess in a way it IS in keeping with the tradition. Eddie Murphy gives a very lazy, disinterested performance as Axel Foley, which reminds me a lot of Seagal's effort in Under Siege 2. Neither of them wanted to be there and were phoning it in long distance. This is NOT the Axel you know and love here.

It's saved from the gutter by Judge Reinhold's gung-ho as usual Rosewood, and the last minute addition of Axel Fox, a nice touch and the most three-dimensional character in the movie.

While I was disappointed with this movie overall, it does have its moments. Hector Elizondo adds some genuine quirkiness, the car chase set-piece is impressive, there is the odd fun visual joke and the production values are pretty good. However, there are a lot of things that make this film for me the weakest of the three. The story is very unoriginal and predictable, the script is pretty poor, John Landis gives one of his weaker directorial jobs, the film isn't as assuredly paced and neither Eddie Murphy or Judge Reinhold come across as likable this time around. Overall, I wouldn't say it was a complete disaster but it is a big disappointment compared to the wonderful original.(the second was disappointing too but watchable) 4/10 Bethany Cox

Although it was panned on release and much hated by fans of the earlier films, I think BEVERLY HILLS COP III is a pretty decent conclusion to the trilogy. It sees Eddie Murphy on typically energetic form as renegade cop Axel Foley, this time investigating a gang of counterfeiters whose base is beneath a popular theme park.

The theme park setting allows for plenty of fun moments, including a high-stakes piece of drama that wouldn't be out of place in a Jackie Chan film like MY LUCKY STARS (Murphy's stuntman is made of strong stuff, that's for sure). The plot is just complex enough to sustain the running time, and another feather in the cap is the presence of director John Landis, who knows a thing or do about shooting an entertaining movie.

Landis fills his movie with various cameos which keep the viewer entertained amid all the laughs and action chaos. BEVERLY HILLS COP III is no masterpiece but it's considerably more fun than pretty much all the comedies (Murphy's and otherwise) that followed.