Beastmaster III: The Eye of Braxus

1996 "A legendary hero. A battle beyond imagination."
Beastmaster III: The Eye of Braxus
3.9| 1h32m| PG| en| More Info
Released: 24 May 1996 Released
Producted By:
Country: United States of America
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Synopsis

Before he died, Dar's father gave a mysterious amulet to Tal, Dar's younger brother who is now king. Dar, while wandering with his animal companions, chances to meet and rescue a family who seek the help of King Tal against Lord Agon, a sorcerer who has conquered their land. Dar obtains an audience for them with Tal, who rallies his troops to march against Agon in the morning. Alas, the young king is captured by Agon's crimson warriors during the night.

... View More
Stream Online

The movie is currently not available onine

Director

Producted By

Trailers & Images

Reviews

swedzin I'll be short on this one. OK, I know how most of fans and non-fans of the original "Beastmaster" were annoyed by the sequel "Beastmaser - Through the Portal of Time". But this one, this one is the worst. How so? Here's why. The second one spawned this sequel. I don't know whose idea was it. And how come that such a bad sequel can produce the third one? The second one didn't even give any hints about the sequel. I just don't understand who decided to throw money away for this project? The story is ridiculous, clichéd and lame, visual and especial effects are terrible, acting, well... Not that quite, in short... Marc Singer was in his element of Darr, at least that was one thing that can make you enjoy the movie even a tiny bit. Sandra Hess was just hot in this film. And sadly, that's all she did. It's not her fault, the script and the director gave her nothing to work with. Casper Van Dien? This film was just a proof that his career will be destroyed at some point. Patrick Kilpatrick? Well, I guess that he was the man for the job when it comes to supporting villains and heavies. Patrick is a good actor, but the typecasting ruined him. David Warner, don't know how he ended up here, but obviously they needed a guy with suave looks and charming British accent. Lesley-Anne Down... well that was quite of surprise, although she didn't do much with her character. The only actor I admire here is Tony Todd, a great replacement for Seth from the original film. He didn't do much, but I think in this film Seth finally has some backstory and character, which is both serious and used, in a way, as a comic relief for just a second. Which is why I gave this film 3 of 10. Though his fight scenes were badly filmed and clumsy choreography, which basically goes for all characters in action scenes. I can also add that animals used in this film were pretty solid as trained actors. If you want a joke... Here it is - Beastmaster 3... time waster and the dullest of them all.
Rob_Taylor What was Marc Singer thinking? Was he truly that desperate for work, or was this just a fulfillment of some contractual obligation? Either way, he should be deeply ashamed of appearing in this turkey. The original Beastmaster was a wonderful film with a great deal of originality but the sequels have progressively deteriorated into farce.I can't begin to tell you how bad this movie is. Memorable moments include Dar's Lion buddy, who clearly is too old to do his own stuntwork anymore (Old=not likely to attack the actors) so they employ a lioness to do the scenes where he gets caught in a net. Lion with a mane becomes lioness without one. Hmmm...that's not noticeable at all...no sir!Suffice to say it's only saving grace is the finale where Dar (Singer) fights some demon lord. Why is this bit the best? Is it action packed? Is it full of great special effects? No. It's the best because it's just so farcical you'll be in stitches with laughter throughout it. The creature is a cross between a teenage mutant turtle and the Papa Dinosaur from the "Dinosaurs" TV series. Comical doesn't even begin to describe how this "evil" demon looks. It has all the menace of a Jim Henson muppet.Ads if that weren't enough we are also treated to an early performance from Casper van Dien as some supposed king. Yep, that's believable....not. In fact, of all the cast, the only ones who even looked comfortable with their roles were Marc Singer and David Warner (yes, he's the bad guy - no surprise there). The rest were a mixture of woefully bad acting and miscasting.One other thing of interest. Marc Singer now actually looks like he has spent a lifetime wandering the wilderness with nothing more than a loincloth to protect him from the elements. So that much was realistic.SUMMARY: Watch it, grit your teeth, then laugh at the dumb finale.
glossamir After seeing this movie(and while not as good as Beastmaster, but better than Beastmaster II) I have to ask if anyone else thought that the reptillian beast bore an uncanny resemblance to character of Earl Sinclair of the Jim Henson Tv series "Dinosaurs", if Earl Sinclair went on a diet and lost a ton or two? To me, the resemblance totally deflated the seriousness of the battle between the beast and Dar.
Pete Falco Me and some friends went to the movie store to rent three movies one day back in 1996. From those three movies, this is the one I remember. It is simply one of the worst movies ever made. The acting is horrible, the music is awful and the script contradicts the other two movies. For example the animal who used to be a tiger is now a lion who changes sex during the movie!Marc Singer looks like 65 something and is still the same stiff actor who tries to drop some "funny" lines from time to time.On the other hand it's fun to watch just because it's so bad. I give it 3 out of 10. If you want a good laugh I would recommend it.