One year later and another straight to video sequel came along once again directed by Bradford May. So bottom line we knew what to expect with this and bottom line I don't think we were too disappointed. What was kinda disappointing was the opening of this movie which, once again, started with the same recap of the original that we saw in the second movie. To top that, they even appear to actually use some of the same footage from the second movie to kick off this third movies plot, the same footage!So this time Westlake (Arnold Vosloo again) is still looking to create synthetic skin that won't disintegrate over time. He is approached by Dr. Bridget Thorne (Darlanne Fluegel) who was apparently one of the original doctors who helped save Westlake's life in the original plot (supposedly in the original movie, but obviously she wasn't in that movie). She claims that she wants to help Westlake, but low and behold she's actually working for corrupt businessman Peter Rooker (Jeff Fahey) who simply wants to unlock Westlake's gift of super strength for his own devious deeds.The start of this movie looks much like a straight to video affair which was to be expected to be truthful. If the second flick was a slightly trashy looking feature then obviously this would be no different. With both sequels directed by May you could be forgiven for thinking he made both one after the other, seeing as they start off in exactly the same way, same credits, same recaps, same Batman-esque soundtrack by Danny Elfman, same overall style etc...So in one sense, both movies are, continuity wise, very neat and tidy. All together the whole trilogy fits together nicely with the same overall visuals and atmosphere. The actual movie is of course a golden cornucopia of stereotypical action flick clichés, positively brewing over with them. The bad guys are a small bunch of very slick, smartly dressed men with sharp haircuts. Their leader (Jeff Fahey) is a smooth talking son of a gun with a large house, loads of dosh, a hot wife, a kid and an even slicker haircut than his henchmen. His second in command seems to be homosexual but I'm not too sure how that is supposed to figure into the plot, it just seems to be there. What I did find amusing, something that you saw often in dated action flicks, was how the main bad guy lived in a large house, apparently with all his henchmen. Its like...do all these guys live together? Do these henchmen actually have their own places or do they sleep in the spare rooms? In certain scenes you would see these guys just standing around with their boss as he past the time playing his piano or watching TV or whatever. The whole thing just looks so stupid, like is that all they do all day?? Its such a weird trope of dated action flicks.As for Fahey's villain, he's a slimeball, he treats his kid badly, cheats on his wife (his wife is naive and dumb it seems), and he talks like a gentleman even though he clearly isn't one. So yeah he's a good villain, a real grease stain with slick back hair. Darlanne Fluegel also does well as the sexy blonde villainess purely because she's a sexy blonde villainess, not much more to say there (stereotypical characters). The plot is fine but rather dull, silly in places and repetitive frankly. Naturally Westlake is still looking to create the perfect synthetic skin and naturally he's gotta fight these bad guys to succeed in getting around to that. Nothing special really, obviously he wins, obviously he doesn't manage with his ultimate goal leaving the franchise open for more. The action is fine but bland, effects are fine but uneventful except for one large explosion towards the end where I'm sure the stunt guys caught on fire by accident. It looks like the size and timing of the explosion caught them by surprise, but who knows.This final film does really feel more like a made for TV movie than the other two. That's not to say its bad, it still carries the Darkman name well and carries on with the seedy, tacky, grim, trashy atmosphere which was started by Raimi originally. The main problem is it doesn't really offer anything new, nothing fresh is brought to the table here, it feels a bit stale and lacks real bite. Nonetheless it still feels like a solid throwaway comicbook flick, an easy going Saturday night in with a takeaway type flick. As a trilogy all three films are solid entertainment, with this final film being the weakest, but its still engaging and enjoyable.5.5/10

What makes Darkman III better than Darkman II? I would say the amount of substance makes the cake in this movie. Sure, all the elements stay intact from the first and second. Durant is finally dead (for good) and now Darkman has another villain to subdue. So what makes it different? Doesn't Darkman defeat his enemies like he's done for the past two movies? Yeah but Peyton Westlake becomes involved with another situation that actually hit a soft spot for me when I saw it.Darkman III: Die Darkman Die, was directed by Bradford May whom I think did a pretty good job directing Darkman II. Not many Direct-To-Video sequels end up as good as their originals but Darkman II was very satisfying. I was expecting to see something mediocre but ended up seeing something worth my time. In this third installment in the franchise, Arnold Vosloo reprises his role as the face changing super hero. This time instead of just trying to get rid of a gang leader, he also tries to save a mother and child from utter destruction.Playing the villain (Peter Rooker) in this film is Jeff Fahey. The character of Rooker is really selfish. He is hardheaded and has a sick twisted mind. If he were paired up against Robert G. Durant, I still think Rooker would come out on top. Rooker's wife, Angela, is played by Roxann Biggs. Truly I don't understand how they even fell in love at the start but my question is irrelevant since we're never really told about how they met. Just like its predecessor, Darkman III does contain some witty dialog that the first Darkman film did not have. Credit to Bradford May for keeping most of the content the same but not all of it otherwise this film would not be better than Darkman II. There is even a scene that pays homage to the first movie. I won't say because what because its pretty obvious. The beginning of this film was the only thing that confused me. In Darkman II, we were explained about Darkman's past which is fine and all but then it's explained again in Darkman III in the beginning. They didn't do that for any other movie franchise; Batman, Superman, X-Men, RoboCop, or Terminator. Is that really necessary?This film does contain good action but it also contains some very heartfelt drama scenes. It was at these points I felt like something better was added to this movie. It wasn't just Darkman doing what he did for the past two movies - just trying to get rid of his past. This was about Darkman helping someone else get rid of their problems. This is what distinguishes this film from Darkman II.Bradford May's final installment of Raimi's Darkman series takes a better turn and adds a little more feeling than the usual to its story. Although it still does not measure up to the original, it surpasses Darkman II with triumph.

OK,but does that make this a good movie?well,not really,in my opinion.there isn't a whole lot to recommend it.i found it very slow,tediously,in fact.it's also predictable pretty much through and through.number one and two were somewhat predictable,but not as much.i also felt this movie was quite campy at times,which i didn't really think fits this series and the character.Jeff Fahey plays the main bad guy in this installment.he's a decent enough actor,but i felt he played his character too over the top.i guess that fit with the tone of the movie,which would have been great if i had liked the movie.plus,there were some pretty bad one liners.Arnold Vosloo returns in the title role,but is given little to work with in this movie.the character has not really evolved,as i had hoped.oh well.this is just my opinion.anyway,for me,while this movie is not abysmal,it is pretty bad.my vote for Darkman III: 3.5/5

The second sequel to Darkman is action packed but lacks the greatness of its prequel, Darkman.The action scenes are good and the acting by the returning Darkman played by Arnold Vosloo are good.This sequel is a good film but I prefer the original Darkman first.