IMDb user comments for
Poltergeist III (1988) More at IMDbPro »

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Page 1 of 10:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]

Index

95 comments in total

---

20 out of 27 people found the following comment useful :-
Heather O'Rourke is the greatest (her best acting, IMO), 31 July 2005

Author: J_Malice from Louisville, Ky

Going in a different direction from the previous two movies in the series, this one took a few chances. The high-rise, mirrors, a new Kane(sad what happened to Julian Beck), etc. I loved this movie for those reasons. Not saying I didn't enjoy the other two because those were excellent, but it seemed like there wasn't anything in there to make them considered a horror movie except for the presence of ghosts with a little bit of suspense. "Poltergeist III" contained murder, suspense, tricky camera angles and most of all, the best acting I have ever seen from Heather O'Rourke. She was so adorable in her red pajamas and I truly believe she carried the movie with up to par performances by Skeritt, Allen, Rubenstein, Fire, Flynn Boyle and Wentz. Her presence on screen while watching this movie is so magnificent and very believable. When I was little, she was my first crush and I loved her, I only found out on 6-4-2005 that she passed away and it crushed me. I say this is the best of the series and I know I am the minority, but hey, to each his own. I realize the first movie is pretty much legendary for her famous line "They're Here", but I feel the acting here is better. The way they made the concept of the mirrors work is amazing and I thought it was a great attempt a something new. I gave this movie a 9/10 because of how much I enjoyed Heather O'Rourke's performance. Check it out.

---

7 out of 8 people found the following comment useful :-
One of the Worst Movies I have ever seen, 2 June 2003

Author: Michael P. Gallen (gallenm1@lasalle.edu) from Philadelphia, Pa

Poltergeist III is truly one of the worst movies I have ever seen. The plot is illogical in terms of the rest of the series, as the poltergeists have developed different powers and methods than they used in the rest of the series. Furthermore, the main actors, Skerrit and Allen, are given virtually nothing to do except run around and look vaguely spooked. They cannot show the attachment to Carol Anne that was demonstrated by JoBeth Williams and Craig T. Nelson in the first two movies. Lara Flynn Boyle, making her major film debut, is virtually unrecognizable with a fluffy 80s hairstyle. Finally, one supporting character, a doctor, remains skeptical of the poltergeists far too long to be credible.

---

6 out of 7 people found the following comment useful :-
A little flawed, but acceptable, 3 October 2006
Author: slayrrr666 (slayrrr666@yahoo.com) from Los Angeles, Ca

"Poltergeist III" is easily the weakest of the series.

**SPOILERS**

Staying in Chicago with relatives Bruce, (Tom Skerritt) and Patricia Gardner, (Nancy Allen) and their daughter Donna, (Lara Flynn Boyle) Carol Anne Freeling, (Heather O'Rourke) is trying to start life over with a new family. Almost as soon as they get settled in with each other, strange phenomena begin affecting the family at different locations. They are misinterpreted by her school teachers as something wrong with her, and think she needs to be treated accordingly. Carol Anne was telling the truth, as Reverend Henry Kane, (Nathan Davis) tracks her down and uses his spirits to help him.

The Good News: A sequel to one of the greatest films ever made isn't a big challenge, and this one at least attempts some new ideas. The move into the urban area rather than the suburbs in part 1 or countryside in part 2 is more than welcome and allows for some traps that might be from an unknown source. That is the main source of scares in the film, when an unexpected action occurs from a familiar object. The most obvious is the appearance through the door. It's a striking scene that really leaps out of the screen, as does the gag in the garage. The series of hallway mirror gags are some of the most suspenseful ones in the entire series, and is quite imaginative and clever. The film really picks up once the spirits attack, as all sort of great scenes come up and the pace quickens. The last thirty minutes are undoubtedly the best of the film. This alone makes the film exciting and watchable.

The Bad News: Aside from those, there really wasn't a lot else going on. It just lags a lot in the beginning with needless and uncommonly grating exposition that is hard to get through. It's what really hurts the film, as it just makes the it a chore to sit through. The cheesiness of the film is also a hurting factor. With no real jump scares in it, it has to rely on it's moments to get the job done, but after that, there's really nothing to the film. It's a real shame, as this had a lot of potential, but with one cheesy, over-the-op scene after another just wears you out. The middle section is the most obvious example, as too much time is spent on the initial discovery of the haunted apartment. The teen antics on display are also a great distraction, feeling entirely out of place and in no real help to the film. It could've easily been taken out with no real damage done. There's several other small little scenes here and there that weren't all that great, but those can be dealt with on an individual basis.

The Final Verdict: This is a fun movie if that's what you're looking for, but it's cheesiness with no doubt ruin it for those looking for more of a serious time like the first one. It's worth a rental for fans to determine whether it's okay or not, but it's not without a little groaning moments along the way.

Rated PG-13: Violence, Language and children in jeopardy

---

15 out of 25 people found the following comment useful :-
Bad on all counts., 28 May 2003

Author: AthenianRun from Michigan

What made the first Poltergeist so appealing was how likeable the characters were. For the 3rd installment in the Poltergeist series only Heather O'rourke (Carol Anne) and Zelda Rubinstein (Tangina) are hold overs from the original cast. If O'rourke and Rubinstein were smart they would have skipped particiapating in this bomb of a movie also.

Though the special effects were somewhat interesting this movie suffers from a bad script and bad acting highlighted by the actor who plays Dr. Seaton, who may have given the worst acting performance ever. There are far too many characters in this movie who are uninteresting and that you have a hard time caring about.

There is a certain sadness in watching this film knowing that Heather O'rourke died a few months before it's release. A double for Heather is used to shoot the final scenes of the movie which creates an odd and choppy ending.

This movie is a sad final chapter in the Potergeist series. The people behind the 2nd and 3rd installments were never able to recapture the magic from the original Poltergeist. It's even sadder that the cute and innocent little girl passed away at such a young age.

---

4 out of 4 people found the following comment useful :-
Break the mirror!, 13 October 2007

Author: tex-42

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

At times, watching Poltergeist 3 is like watching a bunch of different movies at once. You have John Hughes style teen angst with Lara Flynn Boyle, you have yuppie love problems with Tom Skerrit and Nancy Allen and finally you have the horror film with Heather O'Rourke.

There is definitely an interesting concept hiding in this film. Carol Anne has been sent by her parents to live with her aunt and uncle in a Chicago high rise so she can attend a special school to deal with her emotional problems. At school, Carol Anne has been forced to talk about her experiences during the first two films, and this has brought back the Reverend Kane, the ghostly villain of Poltergeist 2. In a neat touch, Kane tries to get at Carol Anne through mirrors by taking possession of various peoples' reflections, and draining the heat out of the apartment building. Tangina arrives to try to intercede, but another ghostly battle begins to get Carol Anne back.

It is clear that this movie was lower budget than the first two, and as such, the effects, while very creative, are not as good. The script also suffers, dragging for a good portion of the movie, and not really developing the characters. Also, the words "Carol Anne" are said ad nauseum to the point where you almost wish the ghosts would just take Carol Anne and go.

This is the weakest of the three Poltergeist movies. The movie isn't terrible, but it certainly is not good either.

---

5 out of 6 people found the following comment useful :-
Overall Disappointing Sequel, 22 November 2001

Author: Moviemasterh80 from NJ, USA

Poltergeist III was overall disappointing sequel which is nothing new! The third ghost film has Carol Anne living with her uncle and aunt in a skyscraper apartment building of some sort and now goes to a private school for "gifted" children and has a bald headed psychiatrist who can really test your nerves. OK! Whats up with the obsession with the mirrors in this one! It's an original idea but the villain known as Kane (introduced in the better sequel) gets on your nerves also as he keeps calling Carol Anne's name over and over and over. That's not spooky that's stupid and annoying. The thing with this one is that it resorts too much to the 80' slasher cliches; gore, violent disgusting images, teenagers acting like fools getting into trouble, and very lame dialogue! The first two lacked these qualities which made them good! They avoided the cliches while still being entertaining. This one is about half as entertaining as the first (don't get me wrong! it is entertaining at times but not enough!) and the ending is rushed and pointless. Check out the critics' slamed reviews and the failing box office numbers. You'll see what I mean! 4 out of 10 I'm being a little generous!

---

6 out of 8 people found the following comment useful :-
Yet another rehash..., 24 June 2000

Author: gridoon

The change of setting and the introduction of some new characters breathe some life into this watchable sequel, but the general familiarity and a very messy script weaken the whole. One thing is for sure: after this third entry, the series had run completely out of steam.

If you get bored, try to distract yourself by watching the excellent effects, and by counting how many times the name "Carol Anne" is heard throughout the film. Maybe more than 100 times!

---

7 out of 10 people found the following comment useful :-
"Carol Anne?...Carol Anne?!...Carol Anne!!", 22 October 2006

Author: moonspinner55 from redlands, ca

A dreadful excuse for a thriller, ending the once-popular "Poltergiest" trilogy on a shameful note. A young child, continually dogged by evil spirits, brings her reign of bad luck to a Chicago high-rise when she goes to live with her aunt and uncle (apparently her real parents had had enough). There was nothing in the original "Poltergeist" that suggested Heather O'Rourke's character Carol Anne was the reason the spirits were taking over that house. She was just a pawn in their plans. This movie makes it seem like Carol Anne was the sparkplug to the whole thing! Actually she's the pawn in a new game: that of sleazy filmmakers hoping to squeeze more money out of the public with an obviously-inferior product. Effects, script and acting are all atrocious. NO STARS from ****

---

7 out of 11 people found the following comment useful :-
Dr. Seaton, You Rock., 6 February 2005
Author: drhackenstine from United States

Strange little sequel filled with annoying characters and some horrible dialog. Poltergeist 3 is not really all that bad, it just suffers greatly from those two flaws. Story does wisely by switching the setting from the suburbs to the big city. The character Carol Anne now resides with her aunt and uncle and snobby cousin in Chicago, where they live in a high rise. Soon, ghosts start popping up again. This movie has some of the stupidest lines in it, it's often hard not to grin. O'Rourke did a good acting job in the first two films. Here, not so good. I think that may be the fault of whoever wrote the go-nowhere script. A lot of the characters lines in this seem forced or overacted. Especially the character of Dr. Seaton. The special effects are impressive though. The makers used a lot of mirror tricks that really pull the movie through it's stupider moments. However, the chopped off head of Kane scene was atrocious. I guess this movie suffered because of severe budget cuts.A lot of scenes in this movie feel a bit lame(the kid who busts up through the ice and runs into the window, the "break the mirror" scene,the kid who flips off the security camera, etc., etc.). Nancy Allen, who plays the aunt, does not look happy to be involved in this. Weaker entry in the series, but it is watchable. Seems a bit rushed. Features annoying teenagers you would find in a Friday The 13th movie. A guy rips off Lara Flynn Boyle's cheek. And whats with that growling window pane in the end? Ya gotta see it if you saw the first two. Two stars.

---

3 out of 4 people found the following comment useful :-
The supposed final installment..., 7 December 2005
Author: Prolox from Canada

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

In this somewhat more darker in tone, but really none the better sequel, little CAROL ANNE is sent to live with her Aunt & Uncle in a neat apartment building, only to find that the evil REVERAND KANE has found her once again & along with other pesky ghosts, sets out to claim her & destroy all who dare oppose him, but the small little lady/Ghost Hunter who helped Carol Anne in the past is back as well to put a stop to Kane once & for all. In terms of acting/directing, POLTERGEIST 3 succeeds, as well as delivering several spooky moments to rival that of the first two, but when compared to the first two films, POLTERGEIST 3 is the least in the series, as you can tell by watching it that this series has gotten old really fast (I mean they were bound to run out of idea's but so soon?) not that Poltergeist 3 is a bad film, like I said above, it's well acted & well directed, the special effects still steal the show & there are several spooky moments, but the film lacks the magical edge established in the first two. A TV series supposedly based on the series is really an in name only series. Rumor has it that a POLTERGEIST 4 is in the works & if it's true, than hopefully it will get back to the feeling of the original.

*** stars

---

---

Page 1 of 10:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]

Add another comment

---

Related Links

Plot summary	Plot synopsis	Amazon.com summary
Ratings	Awards	Newsgroup reviews
External reviews	Parents Guide	Plot keywords
Main details	Your user comments	Your vote history