Directed by:
Patrick HughesCinematography:
Peter Menzies Jr.Composer:
Brian TylerCast:
Sylvester Stallone, Jason Statham, Antonio Banderas, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Jet Li, Wesley Snipes, Dolph Lundgren, Kelsey Grammer, Randy Couture, Terry Crews (more)VOD (5)
Plots(1)
Barney (Stallone), Christmas (Statham) and the rest of the team comes face-to-face with Conrad Stonebanks (Gibson), who years ago co-founded The Expendables with Barney. Stonebanks subsequently became a ruthless arms trader and someone who Barney was forced to kill... or so he thought. Stonebanks, who eluded death once before, now is making it his mission to end The Expendables -- but Barney has other plans. Barney decides that he has to fight old blood with new blood, and brings in a new era of Expendables team members, recruiting individuals who are younger, faster and more tech-savvy. The latest mission becomes a clash of classic old-school style versus high-tech expertise in the Expendables' most personal battle yet. (Lionsgate US)
(more)Videos (29)
Reviews (14)
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.
()
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).
()
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.
()
This movie is so terribly gay that if I were to unexpectedly walk into one of the RVs some night during filming, I believe I'd collide with an Italian Stallion clinging his powerful lips to the shaved nipple of a cute giggling Terry Crews, with Austrian-eyed Arnold rubbing a cigar on Statham's naked buttocks and Kellan Lutz with his pink lips behind the camera shooting the whole thing. The downgraded access to a PG13 rating has, among other things, traded blood for cold man sweat, and thanks to motivational bullshit like a gym coach, we suddenly have not an action movie in front of us, but a classic prepubescent muscle show for young Leo Beráneks. Logically, then, the best action scenes here are the skillful Banderas and Ronda, because they at least pretend to have some choreography. I don't think that the lower level of accessibility automatically reduces the functionality of the action scenes, just that for this action and the forms the filmmakers have chosen for it to it take (knives, machetes, close-range shooting), it doesn't work. Not even the LazyTown-esque special effects help. And as for Stallone and his old-man dragging of pensioner's dilemmas into an action movie, all I can say is "Sly, go to Pelhřimov. They have a crematorium there. Take a good look around. See what you're getting into." Actually, the whole thing reminded me of a pub owner I met recently who, when asked what kind of beer they had, said, "We’ve got Budvar. But I wouldn't have any."
()
Sly's scripted assurance that old geezers are still better than young inexperienced kids is actually enough to make me happy. I could have done without the gender emancipation element in the form of an invincible warrior in a skirt (the director should have explained to her that a perpetually scowling face would not make her a tough brawler), but on the other hand, Banderas was pleasantly delightful in his self-deprecating role delivered like a ferret on speed. The fact that the young ones lack any charisma at all is actually good, it makes the personality of the old action stars stand out all the more. And the final action-packed 20-minute set-piece finally brought it up to a very close 4*. I have to laugh at some of the criticisms here (as well as like-minded reviews on news sites) to the effect that the Expendables 3 "is all about shooting". What else did you expect from a pure action franchise scripted by a man named Sylvester Stallone? A Kantian reflection on the meaning of existence and the universe?
()
Ads