MovieChat Forums > Lethal Weapon 3 (1992) Discussion > General Assessment- B-minus

General Assessment- B-minus

posted 9 years ago by hypestyle
3 replies | jump to latest

Intriguing. The rogue ex-cop guy was the weakest villain, to me. His motivations didn't seem that clear, even in the third act when he arranges the raid of the police evidence warehouse. Was he primarily a black market gun-runner, and the housing development was his front business? Oh well...
I also didn't understand why Leo had white hair here. Was he still in witness protection? If so, why is he still using his real name, especially since he's apparently running a real estate consultancy.
The summer 1992 release date inadvertently coincided with the Los Angeles riots of that spring. That led an uncomfortable subtext to the part where Riggs and Murtaugh heckle a man while temporarily being put on uniform duty.
The gang violence subplot seemed to come and go without going into much depth. I remember at first assuming that the young man shot by Murtaugh was his son, who maybe had secretly joined a gang. It could have been a more powerful shock, for a middle-class kid like his son to end up joining a gang (yes, it happens). A broader exploration of the street-gang culture in LA and some of the players behind it (and Murtaugh's concerns for the ethnic context) could have made for a more overall intriguing movie.
The rookie cop death came across as kind of cheap. Murtaugh's yet-again-staving off retirement came across as relatively forced.
And this is the first film (or rather the only) in the franchise where the climax doesn't have a Riggs final brawl with a significant henchman/villain.

"With Great Power Comes Great Responsibility"
Stan Lee, 1962

[–] Cognoscente (2662) 2 years ago

Imagine if the villain had been black.

They might as well have changed his ethnicity since this sequel stood out in other areas too - no rain scene, no bad guys in Roger's house, no trailer scene (in the theatrical/regular cut that is) and no mention of Martin's dead wife.

[–] buzzlightbeer (1910) 2 years ago

i enjoyed reading your post here.

actually i have zero, and i mean ZERO recollection of anything at all in #3 or #4. And this is coming from a huge shane black fan, maybe THE biggest shane black fan out there. (i am not joking lol)

i did see it at the theater that year, yes. i imagine i've caught a couple scenes here and there in pieces on hbo or starz, but other than that i don't think i ever sat through #3 or #4 again for two full viewings. they just never landed with me. i've seen #1 and 2 millions of times, but eh, the final two were truly sub standard, and i didn't want them tarnishing my impression of the first two. in fact i'd go so far as to say that #3 and #4 fell more into the slapstick category, with silly gags and bad jokes. they added leo in #2. they added rene russo in #3, and chris rock in #4. i remember at the time thinking how this adding a new 'key' character with each sequel came off contrived and like a gimmick.

the first two are canon as far as i am concerned, in spite of the fact that shane black disavowed himself from #2. i did not care for donner at all and all his (barf) diversity politics he forced in at every corner, but nonetheless i stood with the first two films anyway.

again, interesting to read your post. the first LW truly broke ground in the action movie genre, and i was there to see it literally on the first day, front row seat. it had a big impact on movies made after 1987.

cheers

[–] Puvwall (1387) a year ago

I agree with everything you said.

I would add the final chase is fun , and exciting.

My first time watching though this franchise, and man is it ever a weird set of movies. Entertaining but in a real casual, might as well be doing the dishs too way