Wishmaster 3 (2001) from Johnny Web (Uncle Scoopy; Greg Wroblewski) and Tuna

This movie has a couple of lessons to be learned, for you youngsters.

1) I know you young guys love to play Tetris and shit like that, but if you see a puzzle-box covered with ancient runes, I'd pass on it if I were you.  Experience has taught us older guys that solving those never brings world peace or personal happiness. Mostly, when you solve 'em, you open up a gateway, allowing guys from hell or France to enter our existence, thereafter either destroying our plane of existence or at least clogging our arteries with their rich sauces.

2) You can have good lighting and photography, some competent direction, adequate acting and special effects, and still make a shite movie if you don't have a script. Go the extra mile and hire a writer. C'mon, guys, it's not like they'll break your budget. Most of them live under bridges and sell flowers to passing cars. They'll churn out a script for a hot meal and a couple nights in a soft bed.
The most irritating thing about the script is that Wishy's powers keep changing. Sometimes he can move faster than the Flash or Danny "Suits" Sparrow, while at other times he has to chase people up the stairs at normal human speed, and at other times he moves about the speed of a car. Whatever they happen to need for the plot at that particular moment. 

NUDITY REPORT
Two topless she-demons are actresses named Angela Jackson and Ruth Dubuisson. Beautiful girls, perfect lighting.

One of the leads, Louisette Geiss, is topless in a sex scene
Sometimes the Wishatollah has the power over all time and space, and other times you can toss him with a judo move.

That is, in fact, the story behind the entire film. Whatever is convenient. 

The guy battling the Djinn has a super-duper magical sword. Now if they ran Wishy through with the sword - end of movie. So what does he do? One time, Wishy is completely vulnerable, and Good Guy has the sword in his hand, so he hits the old Wishmeister with the hilt end, as if Wishy were Moe trying to pull the ol' nyuck-nyuck on Curly, and not a supernatural being who wants to cause the end of the world. On another occasion, our hero fails to use the handy sword and runs Wishy through with a flagpole - and he actually had to go out of his way not to use the sword! 

DVD info from Amazon.

  • Widescreen anamorphic, 1.85:1

  • Full-length director commentary

  • Making-of featurette

And I didn't even understand the ending. 

What is the deal, here?

Positives:

  • The acting is OK, the photography is good, and the pacing is fairly slick
  • There are some naked chicks, which makes that good photography well worthwhile
  • The DVD features a good widescreen transfer (Huh? It was a straight-to-vid!), and is remarkably full-featured for a grade-b

But be warned, the script is awful.

The other irritating thing about Wishy is that he thinks he's in West Side Story instead of a monster movie

Tuna's Thoughts
Wishmaster 3: Beyond the Gates of Hell (2001) is a direct to vid, but not a bad genre film. It is a horror thriller set in a college. An archeology student unleashes the Wishmaster, an ancient Persian demon. If the Wishmaster can get her to make three wishes, hell will take over the earth. Some of the effects are rather nice, the acting was decent, and the photography was good. It certainly didn't rise above the genre, but the DVD was a good transfer, and featured a feature length commentary, wherein they promise Wishmaster 4 will have even more nudity and sex.


The IMDB score of 3.4 of 10 is probably more a grade of the genre than of this particular example. Sure the entire thing was silly and improbable. It is the sort of film that you watch in a group and make fun of, which is what the cast and crew did in the commentary. Scoop enjoyed it less than I did, and awarded a D. To me, it is a solid genre effort meant to be laughed at, so C.

The Critics Vote

  • no reviews online

The People Vote ...

  • With their votes ... IMDB summary: IMDb voters score it 3.4 
  • With their dollars ... straight-to-vid
IMDb guideline: 7.5 usually indicates a level of excellence, about like three and a half stars from the critics. 6.0 usually indicates lukewarm watchability, about like two and a half stars from the critics. The fives are generally not worthwhile unless they are really your kind of material, about like two stars from the critics. Films under five are generally awful even if you like that kind of film, equivalent to about one and a half stars from the critics or less, depending on just how far below five the rating is.

My own guideline: A means the movie is so good it will appeal to you even if you hate the genre. B means the movie is not good enough to win you over if you hate the genre, but is good enough to do so if you have an open mind about this type of film. C means it will only appeal to genre addicts, and has no crossover appeal. D means you'll hate it even if you like the genre. E means that you'll hate it even if you love the genre. F means that the film is not only unappealing across-the-board, but technically inept as well.

Based on this description, this film is an D. Bad movie, but 100% of the responsibility falls on the script -  completely witless, completely humorless, completely inconsistent. The photography, performing and pacing are not bad. (Tuna says: C)

Return to the Movie House home page