Candyman: Day of the Dead (1999)

Sadly Over-hyped

It's the kind of movie you'll want to see a second time with someone who hasn't seen it yet, to remember what it was like to watch it for the first time.

It’s not bad or unwatchable but despite the amplitude of the spectacle, the end result is underwhelming.

Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

The first movie is a perfect example of how to make a classic horror film. After the mediocre sequel, I thought it couldn't get any worse! I was dead wrong on that. This went STV and it shows. At least the second sequel had semblance of suspense, this sequel nearly put me to sleep. It's extremely cheap and clearly here to make some quick cash. They try to force the "Candyman" is a myth thing on us. Uh....how many times has Candyman killed people? Surely, someone would start to think he's for real at this juncture. I didn't buy it and it felt like they were going to the well one too many times. I also hate how they keep showing snippets of Daniel Robitaille's past. WE KNOW THE STORY!! Enough already. There is virtually no suspense, no thrills, and absolutely no scares. Not only that, but it's really boring. There are far too many times where I felt like dozing off. That shouldn't be happening with Candyman. There is gore, but I didn't care. We get your usual hook carnage and some CGI bees. The acting is pretty bad. Tony Todd looks disillusioned and embarrassed by this sequel. He knows what a piece of crap this sequel is. He's shown way too much and the mystique is gone. What a shame! Donna D'Errico felt like a model and nothing more. Her performance is amateurish, and she had no business being the heroine in this movie. Needless to say, she failed to evoke sympathy from me. Jsu Garcia (NOES fame) grabs a quick paycheck. A reviewer on this site called this a "pathetic end" I couldn't have said it any better. It ranks as one of the worst endings to a horror franchise. Hopefully they give Candyman the send-off he richly deserves. 2/10

Perhaps you are wondering if there is a reason this is the last flick in the series for eleven years by now. Easy: this stinks. What do you mean, "that's not enough"? Fine. This should never have been a franchise to begin with. The original was brilliant, far surpassing any reasonable expectations in terms of substance for the genre that has an undeservedly poor reputation. These two both spell out what the first did so well at hinting at(are movie-goers this stupid? If they are, we really should shift money from Hollywood to education), have Todd(who, himself, did not like this) use his awesome voice(solely responsible for one of the two stars I award it) to deliver lines that no one would listen to if anyone else(well, maybe James Earl Jones, and a handful of others could do it, too) spoke it, *and* show us flashbacks to *things we already know happened*!(again, does this pass for storytelling now? This time, it seems to be to incorporate additional raunchy material) This opens with a half-naked hot chick, and if you find yourself not able to stand her right away(don't feel bad, none of us can take her seriously), stop watching immediately. She's the lead, you're not going to be given a reason to care about her(other than, I guess, her appearance), and she doesn't get any better as this goes on. Like the plot(what there is of one), it only gets worse as it goes, and increases in stupidity. Does she look familiar? She was a playmate, on Baywatch, and... oh, wait, that's it. Yeah, that's why you didn't recognize her face. She does what we know she can do, look good... and nothing else(oh, and scream... that, she can do, too). Other than Tony, Prison Break's Brad Bellick is the only person resembling an actor giving an actual performance in this(the kid is atrocious, and she isn't alone). This follows the second, and instantly a simple application of logic destroys it. The girl has now grown up... so either that one took place twenty years before it was made, or this one is set... well, at least ten years from now or so. Don't let all that futuristic technology frighten you. This so phones in the retelling of the myth at the beginning, a trend this follows from the '95 one, that you have to wonder why these people were making it at all, if they were so indifferent to it. The rules are changed(don't worry, this, too, awkwardly works in people saying the name five times to a mirror), and I hear the hook is, as well, though I can't tell. Our titular villain has a genuine motivation, and it makes so much sense that the only way I can see anyone siding against it is a lack of abstract thinking. Every character is obnoxious and most are powerfully forgettable. This isn't creepy(a couple of attempts are downright laughable) and there is no atmosphere, if it does try for them. It has a ton of jump-scares that don't pay off. The FX aren't awful, if they don't have an effect on the audience, as there is nothing in this we can get into. It moves at a snail's pace(or seemed like it, as *nothing* happened!), and its running time of 85 minutes is also what it is too long by. There is a lot of bloody violence, some gore and sexuality, and a little nudity. The DVD comes with a theatrical trailer, a minimal photo gallery and one of the lousiest menu systems I've experienced. I recommend this to those of an endlessly optimistic persuasion. Everyone else, save yourselves the pain. As with the recent remake of Romero's classic, it is quite frankly not The Dead's Day. 2/10

I walked in to the third act of a three-act play. Unfortunately, I have not seen Candyman 1 and 2, so I have to judge this on it's own merits.Tony Todd makes a good villain. I was interested in seeing him after watching him with a group discussing horror movies the other day. I like Candyman and will certainly look for the other two.This was my first time seeing Donna D'Errico, and it was painless. She didn't have a great role, as she spent most of the time screaming and running, but she did OK. Apparently you have to watch Playboy videos to see all her assets, but they were impressive jiggling in beater tees here. At least mommy wasn't so repressed.Worth watching, but probably better as the end of a trilogy instead of the beginning. Have to get the other two parts.

Candyman 3 day of the dead is pretty much one of the best horror movies you can find. The plot is not any thing special because it is pretty much the same plot as candyman 2 farwell to the flesh but the movie itself completely makes up for it believe me. This movie is about a women named Caroline(Donna D'Errico) who is an ancestor to the candyman(Tony Todd). Candyman wants to bring Caroline back to the grave with him. This movie is probably the second goriest movie in the series behind the original candyman. I would highly recommend this to a fan of Candyman or Scream. I give this 2 thumbs up.Roosterz review for parents, My ratings are either Minor,Mild,Moderate,Heavy,Strong,Graphic or pervasive.Sex:Moderate Violence:Graphic Nudity:Moderate Gore:Graphic Language:Heavy.