When a Chinese criminal mastermind flees to Paris, there¹s only one culture-clashed, crime fighting duo for the job. Ready to raise hell in the city of lights, Chief Inspector Lee (Chan) and Detective Carter (Tucker) inst... more »ead get caught in an explosive battle between French police, the Triad gang and two gorgeous femmes fatales! With everybody kung-fu fighting to the top of the Eiffel Tower, this one-two punch of hilarious action doesn¹t let up to the final heart-stopping au revoir!« less
Van C. from MARIETTA, GA Reviewed on 12/14/2009...
0 of 1 member(s) found this review helpful.
Jennifer M. from BLACK RIVER, NY Reviewed on 11/27/2009...
Great Movie. These two together are funny as hell. Laughed for hours.
1 of 1 member(s) found this review helpful.
Eileen H. from NORWALK, CA Reviewed on 10/9/2009...
still funny, however, the first 2 were way funnier.
1 of 1 member(s) found this review helpful.
Kristina G. (familiagarduno) from COLUMBUS, OH Reviewed on 12/26/2008...
What a great movie! Like any movie there were a few spots of "ho-hum" but it pulled you right back in - not to mention the random snarky, comedic comments by Jackie Chan and a take on a classic skit by Abbot & Costello. You won't regret sitting down to this one :) And hello - did anyone else out there laugh so hard they cried with the "I don't speak French" line????
4 of 5 member(s) found this review helpful.
Quentia M. from LOUISVILLE, MS Reviewed on 12/16/2007...
please send when come out
0 of 6 member(s) found this review helpful.
Reuben Roa | Murrieta, CA United States | 09/08/2007
(5 out of 5 stars)
"I have a question, why are people giving this movie bad reviews that state themselves they didnt even really like the other two movies to begin with? Im not gonna go write a review about harry potter or something I hate and trash talk it cuz my opinion is irrelevant. If you liked the other two movies then this one will not be disappointing. This movie was supposed to be a comedy with some martial arts action poured on top and thats exactly what it was. Chris Tucker was hilarious in it and if he annoys you then dont watch the movie. I was in a completley packed theater and every person was laughing so hard people were losing their breath. So obviously SOMEONE thinks Chris Tucker is funny. All the haters need to back off of this post."
No Need to Rush out and Buy it
Ravenskya | 01/04/2008
(3 out of 5 stars)
"I loved the first Rush Hour, and found the second to be amusing enough to purchase. This one however, just fell flat. The action scenes were not of the caliber, quality or ingenuity of the previous films, or of a standard Jackie Chan film. And as for the comedy, it really wasn't that funny. The movie felt as if large parts of the dialogue were unscripted in the hopes that Chris Tucker would "Say something funny" which never happened. Sure there were a few lines that made me smile, but nothing made me actually laugh. The plot would have been okay if it hadn't been used already in a previous Rush Hour (spoiler: bad guy is posing as a friend who sent you to get bad guy in first place) then you add in the tired old "It's his brother/sister/dad" part of the plot, which I hope was not supposed to be a twist, because I figured it out as soon as they introduced him.
The biggest problem with this movie is that it is a rehash of Rush Hour 1 without everything that made Rush Hour 1 so charming, which was watching the two of them get to know eachother. Chan takes the back seat in this picture to Tucker who, for some reason seems to be wandering blindly through the movie. The only good addition to the film was the French Cab Driver. Other than that, we just have a bunch of Tucker and Chan getting threatened, running away, getting caught, bursting into song, being attacked, chasing bad guys and bursting into song again. Which seems like the formula for most good action flicks (other than the bursting into song part) only this one just doesn't fit together as well and doesn't have the heart that the others did.
Is the movie overall terrible? No, it's okay for a Saturday afternoon on TV. I am just dissapointed by the overwhelming mediocreness of the whole film.
3 of 5 stars - It's Okay"
This partnership has finally run dry
A. Hutchinson | Bronx, USA | 08/30/2007
(2 out of 5 stars)
"This is officially the worst film out of the "Rush Hour" series, and I was sorely disappointed. I understand that these movies are not meant to be monumental in quality. That didn't stop me from enjoying "Rush Hour 1 and 2." But in this third installment, the jokes have all run dry. This sequel best showcases Chris Tucker's weaknesses as a comic actor. He is undoubtedly a very funny stand-up comic, but unfortunately even the funniest stand-up comics don't always make smooth transitions to film. The problem with putting stand-up comics in movies is they have the tendency to improvise whenever possible. The problem is that they have to improvise within the parameters of each scene. They don't possess the same freedom and imagination they have when using their material on stage. It doesn't help that a lot of Tucker's material was recycled from the previous two films. The film opens with Tucker dancing like Michael Jackson in the middle of a busy L.A. street. Why is he doing that? Because people thought it was funny when he did it in the previous two films. There's no valid reason for his character to be listening to his I-Pod, singing and dancing along, when he should be directing traffic.
Both Tucker and Jackie Chan seem to be going through the motions this time around. The chemistry is only barely there. Besides, the novelty has worn off by now. We get it. One's an Asian, by-the-numbers cop who doesn't speak much English and the other's a goofy LAPD detective who can't shut up. You can't expect to keep milking jokes out of that one premise.
There are some spectacular action sequences, but as a comedy the film doesn't quite click. The jokes in the other "Rush Hour" flicks were pretty cheap, but in this one it didn't even feel like the filmmakers and actors were trying. The plot involves the unlikely duo going to France, so naturally we're bombarded by every French stereotype imaginable. Stereotypes can definitely be funny. As I've said in previous reviews, political correctness is the enemy of comedy. But when you recycle the same tired old stereotypes we've seen billions upon billions of times, how am I supposed to laugh? When the characters get to France, they hop into a cab with a French cab driver who hates Americans....because he's French. With movies like these, why shouldn't the French hate us Americans? And of course, we're bombarded by more tired Asian stereotypes. In one incredibly lame scene, there's a Chinese character named "You" and another named "Me." Hahaha, how friggin' original! So we're treated to another tired rendition of the classic "Who's on the First" act, with Tucker asking the character, "Who are you?" "You." "What's your name?" "You." I don't think I need to go on. It was bad enough when Morris Day and Jerome tried to re-create it in "Purple Rain." We don't need to suffer through it again. I hope Abbott and Costello rise from the grave and punch Brett Ratner in the face.
On a happy note, the film did end with the song "War, What Is It Good For?" with Chan and Tucker dancing into the moonlight. That was one callback to the previous flicks that I can never get tired of. "
Another Example Why Holiwood Needs To Stop Making Sequels
James Duckett | St. George, Utah | 01/01/2008
(2 out of 5 stars)
"I liked the first Rush Hour a lot. The second one wasn't as fantastic but since they changed the location it made things kind of fresh. I think they went for the same formula on the third one by taking them to France after being in LA for a while but it just wasn't entertaining.
Sure, there were a few spots of humor here and there. When a French cab drivers insults Halle Barry in front of Chris Tucker his reaction made me laugh out loud. However, this movie just never grabbed me.
To be honest, this reminds me of this great teacher I had. When I first took his class he was funny and entertaining. What made him really stand out was his great repertoire of one-liners that had the classroom rolling. So when he was teaching another class I was excited to sign up and found that his silliness started wearing off on me and his "great repertoire" was actually the same old jokes from the previous class. Though there wasn't anything different, it was just boring anyways.
This movie is like that. There wasn't anything to keep this fresh, it was just a rehashing of the first two movies again. Even references to "Mu shoo" were there like the makers thought we would still be laughing at that joke. Come on, its old now. The only thing they did to try and keep this fresh was filming it in Europe but I think this movie needed more. Even Shrek needed to bring in new sidekicks to keep things fresh.
In the end, I never finished this movie. Halfway though my son asked me if I wanted to play Guitar Hero and I thought that would be more entertaining. After a few days I realized I never finished the movie and then realized again I had no desire to.
Unless Rush Hour still tickles your fancy I'd just avoid this one. Others described it as watchable and I think that is the nicest thing I can say about this movie. I mean, it wasn't horrible it just wasn't good."
Fans of the series may enjoy, but don't go out of your way f
terpfan1980 | Somewhere near Washington DC, United States | 01/27/2008
(3 out of 5 stars)
"Fans of the Rush Hour series may (will likely) enjoy this one, but for the most part this is just more of the same action and plot that was in the first two Rush Hour movies.
All too predictable, all too easy to figure out who the good guys are (and who they aren't) long before the movie even really gets going, like the earlier Rush Hour movies the fun for this movie is in watching Jackie Chan's excellent action sequences and in snickering a bit at Chris Tucker's attempts to copy those or toss in a funny line here and there.
I have to ask the studio if they really felt it was necessary to waste a second disc on this, and have to wonder about the idea that Blu-ray has so much room per disc and yet this movie was released on two discs and not one? I suppose it was just a choice by the studio, but I know that Blu-ray discs can easily hold much more content than just the movie, or just the movie and a commentary track and original theatrical trailer.
There are a good many extras available with this release, but those extras aren't on the disc with the movie. In some ways that could be considered a good thing as you might be tempted to watch the movie again instead of simply putting the extras disc in the player and not having to worry about it. It just seems a bit strange that the extras do come on another disc rather than having a single disc with movies, extras and everything on it.
Further confusion comes from the fact that the main feature itself only runs approximately 90 minutes. (In many ways that can be considered a good thing about this movie). At that relatively short length, one would expect there was plenty of left over space on the main disc to have included a lot of the content that was instead put on the second disc. I suppose the trade off would have been that a bunch of content that is on the second disc might have been left out entirely in the name of saving the plastic used for make the second disc. If that was truly the case, then in the words of Emily Latela, "never mind."
Is it worth the purchase? If you can find it discounted go for it. If not, try Unbox and watch it that way (and leave room in your cabinet for sets that are better than this middle of the road quality movie)."