PeterMitchell-506-564364 This series has reached desperation stakes. We have an average lead, and his again mentor, in a much better performance, he deserves better movie vehicles, than offered in this. Set in one of the most romantic and beautiful cities in the world, Rio (this crap has at least has something going for it) Mitchell and Chan, continuing their partnership are robbed by two Brazilian kids, one a beautiful Brazilian teen girl, who doesn't know the nightmare her future holds, the price of her beauty. Thrown an offer and a lot of money by a sleazy older manager, who favors the fighting skills of our David Sloane (Sasha Mitchell), he declines. But Mitchell and co aren't aware, he also runs a underground white slavery ring of 13-16 year old teen girls, one who escapes at it's start, meeting a horrible if briefly shocking (latter word-viewer wise) fate. Our hottie, Isabella, and she does melt the senses, is kidnapped of course after being eaten up by this dirty manager's eyes. She's such valuable commodity. And here's the rub, Mitchell is drawn back into the ring to fight this guy, where if accepted, he'll return the girl. Yeah right, and you should see what Mitchell has to endure. This elongated swim across the Rio seas, drained me visually. The end fight in the ring is almost replica to the end fight in No 2, a very familiar scene, yet this is less violent, but does have a happy outcome as far as all those kidnapped girls as concerned. Your patience may wear with this mostly flat third Kickboxer outing This 92 minutes of mostly wasted time seems to drone on, for almost ever. Instead of Kickboxer 3: The Art Of War, this should be called: Kickboxer 3: Haven't We Suffered Enough. The easy answer to that: Yes. Weird moment: When Isabella, in a blue flowery dress, is being auctioned in front of two middle aged slavers, she appears in much other scenes. Trick of the camera,or an unintentional slight.

ricardovs27 well folks, I got to say, as a Brazilian, that the portrait of Rio is not very flattering... And, unfortunately, very true. Some stupid things aside (for example, gambling is prohibited in my country since the 40's), this light-weight martial arts flick delivers, gave me some well-received giggles and Mitchell hold his own as a fighter and is quite credible as the main man.Using the character of Xian, played with gusto by Dennis Chan, as the link to the most famous movie of this series, starred by Van Damme, the plot shows a harsh reality, the women trafficking and children abandonment in my country with levity and good laughs with very good fight scenes. Definitely, a nice example of how a Direct-to-video sequel can be when a little care is taken; it does not have to always be garbage.

Richard Latanville Kickboxer 3 takes David and Xian on a trip to Brazil for a tournament. The pair befriends a local boy and his sister who try and steal their camera. They team up and the boy show the pair Rio. While on there, they meet a ruthless player (Lane) who steals women and sell them to buyers, who has his eyes on the boy's sister and takes her. The 3 of them are on a quest to save the girl. But got caught, forcing the player (Lane) to put David Sloan on an extensive training to wear him down to gain inside info to bet his life work against Sloan for the Tournament.This movie is probably my favourite of the series. Everyone expect Kickboxer to be a fighting action film, but I think it leans more of an adventure film, it works really well. The Brazilian backdrop gives it some character. I would recommend for a family to see.

jaywolfenstien With Kickboxer 3, it's not the fact that the film's plot is so predictable – the opening credits shows a woman fleeing for her life, eventually captured, and shot by the villain who keeps young girls captive for reasons we don't have to imagine. Not ten minutes later, a young girl is introduced as a poor lost soul that David Sloan (the Kickboxer protagonist since the previous film) will inevitably get off the street. Hmmm … I wonder what is going to happen to her. And it's not the fact these characters would earn the screenwriter an F in any competent screen writing class with their grocery list of randomized "character traits" and lack of meaningful development – the fact that the requirements of the prepackaged plot dictates each and every one of the characters in the story.No, the real error lay in the incredibly bland presentation – why the hell would anyone watch a movie that even the most naïve audience member can guess, and the most artistically illiterate can imagine in a more interesting and aesthetically pleasing way? I honestly can't think of a single moment where I admired the visuals, or felt they reflected anything more than an unenthusiastic cycle through the motions. I do, however, vividly recall despising a scene in a police station where throughout the entire conversation every actor's face managed to stay in shadow as though the crew setup their lights about six inches off the mark. Some great scenes have been captured with effective use of, you guessed it, shadows (Werner Herzog's brilliantly photographed Nosferatu immediately springs to mind.); however, here, the shadows are not used effectively. Back to the "plot." In another nails-to-a-chalkboard scene, the filmmakers demonstrate the fact they know what an innuendo is, while simultaneously demonstrating they know not how to pull it off (whether the writer's fault, the actor's, director's – I don't presume to know.) "I'm glad you'll be moving on your way, Sloan. It'd be very stupid to try anything with Mr. Branco and his seven body guards. *Seven* body guards," quoth the detective who sounds just as unnatural and inept as Steve Martin's Inspector Clouseau from the new Pink Panther, "Lovely weather we are having! (wink) I hope the weather continues." Later on, Sloan discovers the identity of the true villain, Mr. Lane (who previously posed as a friend), the audience learns that Mr. Lane knows Sloan will be coming for him. So, the villain sets a trap where he appears to be reading, while guards lurk somewhere else on the premises banking on the belief that good guys do not "shoot first, ask questions later." What I would've given for anti-heroes right about here. There needs to be a parody where the good guys say, "You know, he's just going to pull a gun in the final scene, and we're going to kill him anyway out of self-defense. So, screw it, let's just kill him now, and save everyone the misery of the 3rd act." The grand scheme that evolves from all of these plot tangents comes together in Lane's greedy desire to make a few bucks off a rigged fight. The trick, of course, getting Sloan to play ball. "You can have the girl," Lane says, "if you show up for tomorrow's fight." "That's it?" replies Sloan, "You don't want me to throw the fight?" Lane grins, "No, not at all – I have too much respect for you to ask that." Actually, Lane did ask just that in one of the previous scenes, but now he's content to let Sloan play fair … after forcing Sloan to wear himself out with an unnecessarily stressful workout. Again, the filmmakers demonstrate their knowledge of cruel irony, while demonstrating their ineptitude in convincingly creating it.The screenwriters, editor, and director drive the final nail in the coffin by not putting this lame beast out of its misery and simply ending the film after the climactic match (which, by the way, follows a climactic shoot out.) Sloan, of course, proves victorious, putting Lane in unrecoverable debt from the numerous outrageous bets he cannot pay. Sloan gets the little girl back – it's over and done with, right? Hero wins, villain loses? We can assume a few loose ends get tied up, non? At the expense of pacing and structure, the film refuses to let its audience go until it assures us with a third climactic scene that explicitly shows the villain gets what's coming to him, all the girls he holds captive are set free, and that nice detective is going to let Sloan off the hook. If you're going to go through so much trouble to spell things out, why stop there? Why not have a note at the end of the credits that reads, "the film is over. It is now safe to eject this DVD."