Eddie Murphy was a symbol of the more flamboyant, uncompromising, politically incorrect and, above all, fun and entertaining 80's Era, but by the time the decade was over and the 90's arrived, this kind of actors and the peculiar genre of 80's lighthearted comedies started to go downhill in favor of a more matured, adult oriented comedies, but Eddie as a profitable mega-star with several hit movies and legions of fans, the studios tried everything they could to establish him for the new Era.Maybe his wisecracking screen personna didn't fit well in the general mood and tone of the 90's or the screenplays he started to receive were poor, the fact is that besides the Disney oriented "The Nutty Professor", which was a major hit everywhere, all of his movies were critically bashed or B.O. flops and "Beverly Hills Cop 3" was, deservedly, both.In the absence of Martin Brest who helmed the first movie and Tony Scott who directed the 'not so well received' sequel, John Landis was the perfect replacement for the director's chair, after all, he directed Murphy in two of his major hits: "Trading Places" ('83) & "Coming to America" ('88).The major problem was that at that time, Landis was far away from his glory days of comedy gold and Murphy was more interested in becoming the next action hero, following Wesley Snipes who also started on comedy, but was enjoying major success as a lead action star in such movies as "Passenger 57" ('92); "Demolition Man" ('93); "Rising Sun" ('93) or "Drop Zone" ('94).Murphy came back to the character of Axel Foley, playing him more mature & restrained and showing his dramatic side, as well trying to enhance him as a "man of action" too for the 90's decade, but he looks kind of lost in the role this time, like if the light he once had, switched off and he became a bit dull, playing it 'by the book' with more 'correctness' and less energy that didn't fit well in an once colorful, wisecracking and vivid character. Probably it was deliberated, as Murphy wanted to establish himself as a grown-up actor, but that simply didn't work.In the years between "BHC2" and this one, several screenplays were penned to conclude the trilogy, and the one that was actually filmed was certainly the worst, it lacks humour, it lacks excitement and in fact, it's a way boring film. The previous one also had a very childish approach to the villains' motifs and devices, but at least it had Murphy in his prime, improvising through the scenes; almost the same cast & crew; a frenetic pacing and stunning visuals, everything that "Cop III" don't have, just a generic & uninspired direction and passable photography. In the supporting cast, Judge Reinhold is back as Billy Rosewood, but John Ashton's absence as John Taggart is sorely missed, even with a great character actor as Hector Elizondo used as a "fill-in", the 'Laurel & Hardy' chemistry was gone. Ronny Cox & Paul Reiser also didn't come back and Gilbert R. Hill just appears in a tiny cameo as a favor to Eddie Murphy to give the Foley character a motif to go back to Beverly Hills (a re-hash from the first movie). Bronson Pinchot is hilarious as Serge as he was in the original, this time around with a bigger screen time and his scenes are some of the movie's highlights. Tim Carhart is a good main baddie, not as good as Steven Berkoff as Victor Maitland or Jurgen Prochnow as Maxwell Dent, but still leaves his mark of vileness to the franchise that always had great antagonists.In short, "Beverly Hills Cop 3" isn't a total disaster, it have its moments of humour (the "Ellis DeWald! Ellis DeWald! scene, when the viewer can glance the shades of the old Eddie Murphy playing Axel Foley) and some o.k. staged action sequences in the third act, but overall it's a bit depressing experience to follow, and even more if it was watched in a movie marathon of this franchise, after the brilliance of the first two...

Axel Foley, while investigating a car theft ring, comes across something much bigger than that: the same men who shot his boss are running a counterfeit money ring out of a theme park in Los Angeles. I finally did it i finished the Beverly Hills Cop Series and today i'm gonna be talking about Beverly Hills Cop III the "Worst" in the Series for a lot of people. Now is BHC3 the Best Sequel of All Time? No it is not is it the Wost Sequel of All Time? Again it's a no and believe me i get it it's a bit goofy at times and it goes back and forth inside a Theme Park but that doesn't mean that it sucks. I feel that from all 3 of the Beverly Hills Cop movies Eddie Murphy kicked more @ss during this film he shoots people, he blows up people and he eventually blows up half of the Park by the end of the film. He tried to prove himself worthy of the name 'action hero' and he did a pretty cool job with that plus it's still a funny film for example the scene where Billy opens the door and "knocks out" Jon Flint was pretty funny or Axel trying to shoot a bunch of thugs with that 'Terminator 2000' gun and instead of shooting bullets it starts playing song sure it might be goofy for some but i like it by the time that this movie was made it was the 90's not the 80's stuff were meant to change and sure i miss some of the older actors like Ronny Cox or the older stuff like the more comedy aspect or the ridiculous amount of trouble that Axel was getting into but that doesn't mean that this is the worst of the Series it's not the Best for Sure but i've seen worse and maybe one day Eddie Murphy will get a chance to redeem himself with a Beverly Hills Cop IV. Also last but not least that George Lucas Cameo is Priceless just saying!!!

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.

A sequel to "Beverly Hills Cop" is tricky. Our hero is always 2,000 miles away from the title setting, and it takes a suspicious death to get him out to the coast. And they were pushing it with the second movie. But here's a movie with a completely different (and awkward) tone from the first two films. "III" feels surprisingly more family-friendly (despite the F-bombs) with Eddie Murphy running amok in a faux- Disneyland theme park. There's lots of shooting and profanity, but none of the edge this series is known for. Not only that, but Murphy (despite getting to play superhero while saving some kids from a park ride) seems oddly listless this time around. It's hard not to laugh at least once during an Eddie movie, but I don't think I did once, here. It's an array of jokes that fall flat. It's not just that "Beverly Hills Cop III" is lifeless, but it's a bad Eddie Murphy movie, a bad John Landis movie, and everything that's supposed to be funny . . . isn't.4/10