Watchers III (1994) User Reviews

"I'm going to put a bullet so deep in your head your ancestors are going to feel it." Watchable Predator rip-off.

[poolandrews · 5/10 · 22 May 2006]

Watchers III starts over the harsh isolated jungles of Central America where a military plane drops two boxes which parachute down to the ground, one of the boxes opens & a large slimy clawed hand emerges... Nearby a young native boy (Ider Cifuentes Martin) is surprised to see a cute golden retriever just sitting there so the boy befriends him. Cut to a rebel camp & a genetically created killing machine does what it does best, it kills everyone in sight. Now cut to 'Leavenworth Military Prison, Kansas' where Major Ferguson (Wings Hauser) is being detained on false charges after he was involved with 'Project Aesop', the project that created the ultra intelligent golden retriever Einstein & the psychically linked genetically created creature known as the Outsider who were supposed to be the future of warfare. Colonel Sratten (Frank Novak) tells Ferguson that he needs him to head a team of marines into the jungle for a clean up operation & if he accepts all charges will be dropped & he will be free, Ferguson agrees & it's not long before he & his team, Benetti (Gregory Scott Cummins), Nat (Daryl Keith Roach), MacCready (John Linton) & their guide Gomez (Lolita Ronalds) are in the middle of the jungle & being systematically stalked & killed by the Outsider in a deadly experiment. Major Ferguson realises himself & his team have been set up & decides the best form of defence is attack...

This Peruvian American co-production was directed by Jeremy Stanford & was the third entry in the Watchers series of films which at the moment total four, Watchers III is watchable but hardly outstanding. The script by Michael Palmer was supposedly based on the novel by Dean R. Koontz but I'd say it was based more on the film Predator (1987) which Watchers III is a complete total & utter rip-off of. Everythings here, the Central American jungle, the fake mission, the team of marines, lots of shooting, the monstrous creature hunting the marines, the climax where the hunter becomes the hunted complete with exploding arrows & bobby traps, the native & even a scene when the creature tries to mend a wound & screams out in pain which echos around the jungle, it's all here including some very familiar character's & situations as well. It's generally considered that Predator is a damn fine horror/action/sci-fi film with a decent cast, good special effects, a cool monster, top-notch action scenes, a big budget & great entertainment value. Unfortunately Watchers III has none of those things, it has a cast of nobodies, it has horrendous special effects, one of the lamest monsters I've ever seen, cheap action scenes, a really low budget & it isn't going to have anyone on the edge of their seats. No, what Watchers III has is an ultra intelligent golden retriever, thanks a lot guys. Having said that I thought it was an OK film, it's not particularly bad but it's not particularly good either. It moves along at a fair pace & some fun can be had if you have low enough expectations.

Director Stanford does an OK job, the jungle location looks nice & lush & it gives it a certain atmosphere. He doesn't fair too well with the action scenes & they are far from exciting. Now onto the Outsider, this has to be one of the worst looking monsters I've ever seen, it has over-sized hands & fingers which just droop down & bend, it has huge feet, a normal body & a huge head which resembles a triangle of mud. It comes as no surprise that Gabriel Bartalos was the man responsible. There are a few decent gore scenes, a couple of cool decapitations, some mangled corpses, the skin is torn from someones chest & a fair amount of blood spilled in various ways.

Technically Watchers III is alright apart from that truly awful monster suit which has to be seen to be believed just how bad it is. Otherwise it's generally quite well made & competent throughout. The acting isn't up to much & my vote for best performance goes to Einstein the dog.

Watchers III is an OK way to pass 90 odd minutes, it's nothing new or original but it's watchable & I've seen a lot worse. To add to his seemingly infinite list of credits Roger Corman executive produced. The other Watchers films are, Watchers (1988), Watchers II (1990) & Watchers Reborn (1998).

For Wings purists only

[udar55 · 5/10 · 2 August 2007]

Exec. Producer Roger Corman's third attempt at adapting Koontz's novel turns out to be more DIRTY DOZEN/PREDATOR and less Koontzian (did I just invent a word?). The Outsider and Einstein the Golden Retriever are dropped in the middle of a Central American jungle. When things go awry, the Government sends in military prisoner Ferguson (Wings Hauser) and a few cellmates to clean up their mess with the promise of a full pardon. But can they trust that sneaky Government?

This is totally by the numbers movie making but it is short enough, gory, and features a good performance by b-movie vet Hauser to keep you interested. Hauser has such an intensity that he can make even dialogue scenes with a dog seem important. The rest of the cast just traipse around until they get their opportunity to be killed. Interestingly, the screenplay has a woman and native mute kid in the mix with the woman getting killed and the kid not doing anything. Strange. Even stranger, the evil Government (who truthfully sent Hauser there to be killed) never gets its comeuppance as all b-movies dictate. Instead, they get away with it, outside of losing The Outsider. I would love to hear Dean's thoughts on all of these sequels, if he has even seen them.

DANGER

[nogodnomasters · 5/10 · 25 June 2019]

They resurrected the Rubbermaid creature and smart dog for another adventure in the words. A group of military ex-cons are allowed to fight "The Outsider" with the help of a boy and his dog. Pretty boring "Predator" type stuff with a moronically crafted monster (see cover). You did good if you made it through the first two of the series. Watch all the Predator films instead. Could have MST potential.

Guide: F-bomb. No nudity. Forced grope scene.

They Make Money

[cool_splash1 · 15 October 2006]

One Watcher asked who makes these movies? Well who doesn't know Roger Corman or Loyd Kaufman, Full Moon etc. Also why are they made. Well probably because they are making money. What investor or company is going to want to invest in something that won't make it's money back. Yeah, they are cheesy and sometimes horrible, but they are still fun. When I watch a Roger Corman movie I know not to expect Lord of the Rings or the Godfather. I mean come on it's Concorde. Believe it or not there is a market for this or they wouldn't be hear. I mean dude Carnasour, Rapter, Deadly Outbreak, Cybervengence, The Outsider (which is basically a cheap straight to video remake of Westworld) When you hear the midi music that should really clue you in this is going to be a b-film. When you see certain actors that you know are considered washed up, TV movie or straight to video movie actors etc., when you even see chicks such as Shannon Tweed etc. you know you are about to watch a b-film.lol

Yawn.

[Vassago · 2/10 · 29 August 2000]

What, it got no Oscars? I wonder why? Well, I guess Dean's Watchers will never be made into a good movie... which does not really matter in this case, because it has nothing to do with the novel. It's YAPR (Yet Another Predator Ripoff). You've seen one, you've seen them all. This one isn't as idiotic as some of them (X-Tro 3...), but certainly not 1/10 as good as the original. Simply another below-average flick. Watch it if you can't get anything else, and don't have to pay for this one. Or if you're curious about the Watchers line and you're wondering "what are they going to screw up this time?". They didn't screw up too much, but they just didn't come up with any ideas.

A Low-Budget Clone of "Predator"

[Uriah43 · 4/10 · 26 August 2017]

Sent to prison on trumped up charges, an American Army officer named "Paul Ferguson" (Wings Hauser) is given a chance to receive a full pardon if he agrees to undertake a top-secret assignment. Essentially, a genetically engineered monster known as "the Outsider" (Carlos Gonzales) has gone on a killing spree in the jungles of South America and a squad of convicts are sent in to engage the creature. What they don't know is that they are nothing more than dispensable test subjects sent in to gauge the ability of the government's creation. Fortunately for them, a genetically enhanced Labrador retriever is also in this vicinity and it knows the Outsider better than anybody. Now rather than reveal any more I will just say that this film is basically a low-budget clone of the movie "Predator" but with a few items incorporated from "Watchers" and "Watchers II" to preserve its integrity. Unfortunately, the melding of "Predator" and "Watchers" doesn't really work nearly as well as it should due in large part to the low budget and poor acting overall. Even so, I didn't think it was terribly bad and for that reason I have rated it accordingly. Slightly below average.

Watchers ... 3???

[LivingDog · 1/10 · 23 April 2006]

I saw this Sunday afternoon and thought that there must be something else better on... like bass fishing with no bass in the lake! Then I saw a commercial that announced that George Lucas remade the Poseiden Adventure (calling it simply Poseiden). I guess that was worth watching this unwatchable movie.

Hey wait a minute ... I just realized that there IS something worse than Tim Burton's destruction of "Planets of the Apes" - WATCHERS 3...

And what's up with 3??? Does that mean there were TWO OTHERS?!?! Wow...

1/10

-Zafoid

PS: I have always wondered who makes films like these. They are straight to video, and then not even worth watching by anyone - including the director! So why are these made? Is this a "learning experience" for the some of the crew? ... the director? ... the actors? I just don't get it. Then again, why do I watch them!? :)

-Z

"I thought I saw a little kid and a dog?"

[lost-in-limbo · 3/10 · 2 August 2011]

Here's another Corman produced adaptation of Dean R Koontz's novel. Was it impressive… well let's ask the intelligent canine for an answer. One bark for No. Two for yes. Three barks for you got to be kidding me. Really you don't need to be super smart to figure it out. While using the same background story as its predecessors (a top secret experiment spawning a super intelligent dog is used as a beacon for a monster known as the outsider in what is a combat weapon), "Watchers III" felt like an odd one out even though its focus was on the experiment at work being test on some expendable ex-military convicts in a South American jungle and the Ferguson character from the last sequel making an reappearance (although under a different actor). The premise had a lot to work off, but instead it decides to be an extra ordinary wannabe second rate predator rip-off with many sequences, actions and dialogues lifted from that film, but without the aplomb. I couldn't believe how hackneyed it was, as you could probably start drinking game from it. Wings Hauser is a sight for sore eyes, as it is his awesomeness that makes it bearable. Stereotypical characters come and go, to only be scratched up or decapitated by its hideously wonky looking man in a creature suit. It's a different design compared to the previous entries and it doesn't look all that great. Think of "Xtro 2" and there you go. Hell it even gets its own sort of vision ala "Predator". There are moments of violence and gore, but they are boringly staged with its clunky execution and its derivatively lacklustre climax paints that well enough. While the film is short-lived, it can't finish any sooner because of how soporific the plan in motion just happens to be. Feeble, low-rent monster-on-the-loose nonsense.

"I like to know what the hell is going on?"

The Watcher in the Woods...well jungle

[Fraudzilla · 3/10 · 25 March 2022]

There are few movie series more repetitive than Watchers, however this third entry in a franchise nobody asked for actually takes the closest stab at originality you're going to find under the Watchers banner.

When I say originality, I mean for the series, because there ain't nothing original about Watchers III. This is as cookie cutter a Predator ripoff as you're ever likely to find.

The plot concerns a military officer named Ferguson (Wings Hauser) currently wasting his days away in military prison. He's offered the chance to lead a team of convicts on a top secret mission into the a Peruvian jungle to find out why they've lost contact with a base there. Of course this is a smokescreen, and horror's most mediocre double act Einstein the super intelligent Golden Retriever and the Outsider, his psychic-bonded mutant monster brother are loose in the jungle and the reason all previous personnel are dead. It isn't long before the team have adopted Einstein and are battling for survival against the Outsider.

Now, in addition to not being EXACTLY the same plot as the other 3 movies in the series, you may also have picked up that this also boasts a series first in the form of a degree of continuity. A soldier named Ferguson in trouble with his superiors was the leading character in the previous instalment, and while it's never explicitly stated, he also references a history with the dynamic duo of dog and devil. There's also plenty of stock footage, but this is Roger Corman, that doesn't inherently imply continuity.

What's interesting though is that despite this, he doesn't seem remotely perturbed by the fact the Outsider has completely altered in appearance. In the previous movie it was a largely bald but for patches of hair thing with a vaguely reptilian head that was so badly designed I don't know how to describe it. Here it's an entirely hairless, kind of crusty, exoskeleton looking thing with a massive, triangular crest at the back of its head. It reminds me of a mixture of the thing from The Fly II, the crustacean from Deepstar Six & something Screamin' Mad George came up for in the Guyver movies. It does honestly look better than what you see on the cover, but still far from good, which makes the decision to keep showing it in daylight all the more questionable.

I suppose it's to try keep things exciting, because it is an otherwise entirely bland affair, ticking every box on the way to genetic Predator-ripoff heaven. Diversely presented but one dimensional soldiers it's impossible to like, corrupt officials, shooting into the rainforest while shouting, it's all here.

Wings Hauser gets a good rep online in B-Movie circles, and while I've never been a huge fan (ok to be fair I've only seen a handful of movies he's in) he's...workable here. Which is just as well cause he's the best of an utterly contemptible bunch. It is a bit of a stretch to think he's meant to be the same character as Marc Singer played, although he is a fellow Beastmaster series alumni so I'll permit it.

As I said with the previous entry, I feel like if you're looking up Watchers III you probably already have a rough idea if you're gonna like it, and while it's certainly nothing resembling good, I've also seen much worse. You could probably cobble together quite a compendium of bad low budget horror movies set in the jungle made in the early to mid 90s, and this will slot perfectly in there.

This is bad and not really worth your time

[kevin_robbins · 2/10 · 1 June 2022]

Watchers III (1994) is a movie I recently watched on YouTube. The storyline follows a group of convicts sent into the jungles of South America to retrieve an escaped science experiment. A golden retriever happens to be running through the same jungle that appears to be willing to help them...

This movie is directed by Jeremy Stanford (Trantasia) and stars Wings Hauser (Rubber), Gregory Scott Cummins (Cliffhanger), Daryl Keith Roach (Crocodile Dundee: Los Angeles), Frank Novak (Watchmen) and Christian Meier (Terminal).

The storyline and execution for this movie felt like a Predator ripoff...plus a dog. The opening kill in the jungle was fun; but unfortunately, probably the best part of the movie. The creature in this looks terrible and I'm surprised they put it on the cover of the film (they must have thought it looked good). Most of the horror scenes were a poorly executed man in costume sequence with limited gore but some good blood splatter here and there.

Overall, this is bad and not really worth your time. I would score this a 2/10 and recommend skipping it.

Watchers 3

[BandSAboutMovies · 2/10 · 19 December 2021]

Oh yes, this third one was shot in Peru, executive produced by Roger Corman and has one of my favorites, Wings Hauser, in the middle of the never-ending war between mutant and mongrel. Yes, this time it's the deformed Outsider, which lives only to kill, battling Einstein, a golden retriever with an IQ of 175.

To stop the monster, Hauser is put in charge of a squad of military men and criminals. Now if you're thinking, "Would Roger Corman rip off Predator?" let me just say that yes, he would. He did. And he would do it again.

Written by the same man who penned Carnosaur 2, let me tell you, I will regret nothing on my deathbed except probably the time I spent watching this movie. Eh, who am I kidding? I'd watch it again if you asked with any nicety in your tone.

Pure "Predator" knock-off

[slayrrr666 · 8/10 · 23 April 2006]

"Watchers III" is a pure "Predator" rip-off.

**SPOILERS**

Major Ferguson, (Wings Hauser) an ex-special forces agent in jail, is asked to go into the jungle to recover important information regarding a crash of one of their cargo planes. With his team in place, Benetti, (Gregory Scott Cummins) Nat, (Daryl Keith Roach) Gomez, (Lolita Ronalds) and MacCready, (John Linton) head into the jungle and stumble upon a local boy (Ider Cifuentes Martin) and his pet, a Golden Labrador Retriever. When the team starts to get picked off by a strange creature, they have to mix their training and the dog's intelligence to get out alive together.

The Good News: Well, the film does get off to a great start here, with a pretty bloody attack less than five minutes in. It's the perfect way to open a film, as it gets the viewer into the film as early as possible. As opposed to the second one, the enemy creature has changed it's appearance all over, and this time has become a far more menacing threat. The minor design changes take it away somewhat from the Gillman previously seen and it now becomes a scarier creature. Still cheesy looking, but an improvement. We also get a large amount of gore in here. There is some amount of body dismemberment, one person has a chunk of their chest ripped off, exposing the bone plates underneath, and others are decapitated. The ways that they happened, though, is what's great about the kill. The head is closer to being ripped off more than anything, resulting in big bloody messes that look great. The impact of the story, which I'll explain later, is perfect for creating large scale action scenes, and this one has some good ones. The first forest trap is a good example, as well as the opening sequence.

The Bad News: It takes an extremely gullible person to not see the similarities between this one and "Predator." The jungle setting, the scared native pick-up, the events that lead the team members to get picked off, the rebel camp find, it all screams from having been lifted from it. This isn't all of the similarities, but it's just here to hive an example of what is in store. Add in a plot about an intelligent dog and switch the Predator for the creature in here and it would be pretty hard to tell these two movies apart. It's pretty obvious to see the resemblance between them. The gore effects were also pretty cheaply done at times, and while gory, hardly looked anything realistic.

The Final Verdict: If a movie's major crime is to be a cheap-o knock-off of another movie, then it's probably not that bad to begin with. It should be at least given a look see for fans of the series, but those that like a little more originality and creativity well definitely want to look elsewhere.

Rated R: Graphic Violence, Graphic Language and scenes with animals in danger

this film is only rescued because wings hauser is in it

[pauly27uk · 6/10 · 16 August 2003]

wings hauser carrys this film.

he takes over the character that marc singer played in the second film.

basicly if you liked the first 2 films you will like this one.

i consider this film to be a cheap version of predator.

* out of 4.

[brandonsites1981 · 11 September 2002]

Yet another attempt to remake Dean Koontz's novel into a feature length film is yet another failure. This so called sequel adds some elements of Predator into another tired entry lacking in decent special effects and suspense. This time around a group of soldiers fall prey to a monster that is linked to a super intelligent dog and kills off everyone in its way.

Rated R; Violence.

good movie, didn't know Christian meier was in this movie lol

[afll · 30 October 2014]

this is like predator, and if you look in the dictionary the word "adaptation" you will see that the movies are a very ver exaggerated adaptation of the novel, as a matter of fact the first movie only retained some of the original names of the novel, but their background where too far from being the same, i know that to adapt something, means changing the product so its suits better the intended public (i.e a french movie trying to take it to the American market, its changed so it fits the American viewer) but the adapatations of the novel are far from being relevant, anyway it only sucks story-wise, but it has good action,and the telenovela actor Christian meier played the role of the outsider (who would had imagined that)

the sh*t hits the VCR

[eer85 · 13 February 2005]

I finally got to see this movie after about 8 years of research (when I started, Internet was something off-limits for most of the people), just because I've been obsessed with Koontz'novel (and related movies) for quiet a while. I'm pretty disappointed for what I saw, but I also have to admit I enjoyed the experience: this is one of those so-bad-is-so-good cases. The fun begins as the movie starts, when you see WATCHERS 2 footage re-used as new material (a voice-over and a detail of two boxes and you've your prologue - this is the real and pure Corman spirit) and proceeds through the entire movie, with blue-screen as sky for helicopter insides and a gummy suit with toy-eyes for the "monster". As Notz, Stanford decides to show the Outsider pretty early, giving away any chance of suspense: it doesn't matter if you insist with shadows and POV after, since you have spoiled it before. This time, the creature design is really horrible, in a bad way: even its shadow is ridiculous. A furry thing like the Oxcom in WATCHERS would have been better (and scarier). This is the first real sequel to a previous entry in the series: it takes the character of Ferguson from the previous movie, even though the two story lines are a little bit in contrast (again, other WATCHERS 2 footage: doesn't matter if the creatures are totally different). The screenplay adds some other elements from the original novel (the cave, for instance - even if it was switched to the sewers in the previous film) but most importantly completely rips off the PREDATOR storyline and settings, so we get a squad of soldiers (all convicted) against the "evil menace". Actually, the plot wants to be a little bit more dramatic than the previous entries, but you can't take seriously a movie with a bad Halloween costume as the monster. It's a little pity, since Wings Hauser tries to but has the entire feature against himself. On a first sight, this flick looks gorier than the previous, but actually it is not: after a mutilated body, we don't see very much - in fact, another funny element it's the way the characters die. The action sequences are pretty cheesy too (like the end). Again, the real and only impressive thing is the dog's performances. The first WATCHERS remains the best (and we're not talking about a masterpiece!), for now.

Any watchers of this series still left by now?

[Wizard-8 · 26 April 2011]

Horror novelist Dean R. Koontz has expressed unhappiness about several cinematic adaptations of his novels (like with HIDEAWAY). Though I haven't heard what he thinks of what Roger Corman did with WATCHERS, I think it's pretty safe to assume that he's appalled, especially since Corman has used the rights to the novel to make several awful movies, including this one. Where to begin? Well, even though the end credits reveal this was filmed in South America, it sure doesn't look spectacular. The various jungle locations look bland and all alike. The story is pretty slow, with not that much jungle action and gore for the first half of the movie. When we *do* see the monster, it's a shockingly bad creation - just imagine the monsters you have seen in 1950s Corman movies, and you'll have a good idea as to how this unconvincing creation looks like. I guess some of the gore effects aren't bad, and it's always good to see Wings Hauser, but the movie ends up being overall a bad and boring imitation of PREDATOR. With PREDATOR freely available for rent or purchase, there's no reason to see this third-rate imitation.