Problem Child 3: Junior in Love (1995 TV Movie) User Reviews

Same mistake as Home Alone 3

[frosty-44431 · 2/10 · 13 February 2021]

No no no. It just doesn't work without the original characters. Avoid.

Worthless drivel

[Maedhros35 · 2/10 · 27 May 2007]

At the time of writing the movie has a resounding 2.2 score and it justly deserves it. Synopsis: the "Problem Child", Junior, fancies a girl, beats (literally) three rivals only to find that the girl was not worth the fight.

I'm sorry to say, but the movie contains no single shred of humor [1], the story is bad and the acting is wooden. I don't think the focus group of the movie (6-9 years old) might like it, and it's simply not to be recommended.

[1] Unless you think hanging someone to the ceiling ventilator by their braces is funny. Or hitting someone with a tree on their head.

Nowhere as good as the first 2

[mitsubishizero · 4/10 · 3 April 2018]

This's a good example of why some sequels shouldn't have been made: Problem Child 3 does get its laughs in but for the most part it falls flat hard. Less than a handful of the cast reprise their roles from the first 2. Sadly, John Ritter and Michael Oliver weren't on the list. The kid that fills Oliver's shoes (or at least tries to) as Junior just doesn't fit the bill. He's ok but you know that old saying " Ain't nothing like the real thing". Basically, the plot is about Junior wrangling with adolescence as well as his feelings with a girl named Tiffany and her suitors. I have to admit it is funny seeing Junior dish out punishment to his rivals and anyone else that crosses him but aside from that the story seems a little flat. William Katt as Ben's not bad but he doesn't bring the same energy to the movie like John Ritter did. Gilbert Gottfried on the other hand is one of the few saving graces of the movie as their's not much else to this.

Bottomline, it's not a good movie as it doesn't live up to the first 2 at all.

Never make sequels without the original star in their own role

[rdoubleoc · 1/10 · 15 May 2020]

Never make sequels without the original star in their own role. Problem Child and Home Alone are great examples.

Terrible, even for terrible

[Azza-awsomeness · 1/10 · 28 June 2007]

This would have to be the worst comedy I've ever seen. The first two were masterpiece's, the first set up Ben Healy and Junior and the second set them up with the perfect partners on both accounts.

Then this came along. Not only did they ruin the original characters by not having the original's play their roles but they also *bleeped* up the story completely by Taking out Trixie, Her mother and Big Ben's new wife.

The jokes are bland and unoriginal compared to the first two and the story is worthlessly crap.

Only watch it if you have a choice between watching it and a documentary on cloth fibers.

Not the same without John Ritter

[juliafwilliams · 15 June 2004]

Let me guess, John Ritter was not available or did not want to do the part anymore, so someone searched for another actor to play Ben Healey and William Katt was as close as it got. Sorry, but without John Ritter, the film, albeit a television film, is simply NOT the same. Also, Michael Oliver was at the point of growing up (let's see, by calculations, he was about 11 or 12 when this installment was released) and the television biggies had to hire someone close to Master Oliver's character and presence). William Katt played Ben Healey, John Ritter WAS Ben Healey. Problem Child 3 does not have much in the way of substance.

While I cannot sing the praises of the first two installments, Problem Child and Problem Child 2 will be another great way to remember Mr. Ritter's great art of comedic timing.

I miss you, Mr. Ritter. You left this world too soon.

This one blows!

[vciccarello · 1/10 · 26 April 2018]

Why make a third Problem Child? The first two movie were alright but what was the purpose of another movie? Junior's voice is even more annoying, Big Ben is in this movie and Junior's father is somehow Big Ben's son.

Forget about this movie, watch the original two instead.

Holy flaming tortillas...this movie was terrible!!!

[TheLittleSongbird · 1/10 · 22 April 2010]

I liked the first Problem Child, despite its problems, the second Problem Child had its moments but it wasn't that great in my opinion, but this was trash! If you thought Home Alone 4 was bad, and it was, worse than bad actually, this is just as bad. It is right down there with the worst movies I have ever seen. Two major problems are that the camera work and the direction(or shall I say lack of it) are very straight-to-video quality and the film is incredibly juvenile and obnoxious. The script is awful, the kid is annoying, the jokes are non-existent, the situations are inane, the plot is daft and the other characters are cardboard thin. Not to mention the acting with Justin Chapman everything his character is, annoying, obnoxious and stupid. Jack Warden and Gilbert Gottfried saved the first two films, but with such dreadful material, they are completely stuck here. Overall, pointless and terrible, my advice to you is to avoid this. 1/10 Bethany Cox

Who needs it??

[ei553 · 1/10 · 28 October 2001]

This movie is stupid! I really hate it a lot! It is the pits! DO NOT RENT IT!! I mean, this trilogy lives up to its name. It is aptly-titled, and there is no need for a fourth one, as evidenced by the poor reviews, telling kids it's OK to misbehave as usual.

GRADE: F

Why you should not waste your time on this film

[Bermie98 · 1/10 · 6 May 2004]

I wouldn't recommend this for anyone. Everything that was good about the first 2 was destroyed by this monstrosity. John Ritter made the first 2 movies what they were. His brand of subtle, neurotic humor brought a touch of class to 2 gross out humor movies. William Katt is terrible as Ben Healy. He tries to be quirky like John Ritter but falls miserably short. This film could have stood a dose of Amy Yasbeck as well, as she was great in the first 2 playing completely different characters. I'm sure she took one look at the script and went running, though. Justin Chapman is OK as Junior, he does adequately with the script he was given, but I will only ever see Michael Oliver in that role.

Once again, people can't stop messing with a good thing. The cheesy special effects, the low budget filming, and the embarrassing script make one wonder why people even take on projects like this. Nothing about this film was original or funny and it is a complete waste of time.

Why God? Why?

[Rattrap007 · 1/10 · 7 October 2001]

This is one of the signs of the apocalypse! Junior is the anti-Christ! Ok maybe not. But this film, along with the first 2, deserves to be buried where no one will ever have to see any of this junk ever again! This movie is totally unfunny. Why would ANYONE want a kid like junior? They need a follow up of him being in juvenile detention as a young teen. That is where most likely a kid like that would end up.

Notice the scout troop is called Prairie dog scouts. Obviously the Boy Scouts of America paid big money to keep their name out of this stink burger. This movie needs to be on Mystery Science Theater 3000.

Avoid at all costs! 0/10!!!

come on, take a joke

[look_at_me_kimmie · 10/10 · 11 April 2005]

Okay, so it's not the best piece of cinematic history, and it's not as good as the other Problem Child films, but i've seen this movie since i was under 10. It's light hearted, funny, and when you're a kid, you don't have the expectations for a film. So, i think kid's would enjoy this movie more than adults. RATING: 10 for funniness, 8 overall, Also recommended are Problem Child (John Ritter), Problem Child 2 (John Ritter, Much funnier than the first and the two children - Junior and Trixie - are hilarious) and The Crazysitter (with Beverly D'Angelo, Bev and the kids make this another funny (not Oscar worthy) film to enjoy and take it easy). So come on, and take a light hearted joke of a PROBLEM CHILD!!

GOOOOD Film

[osbornechyna-1 · 7/10 · 17 May 2008]

I fall in love with this film when I was 4, and it still good! In the way to my opinion, I don't think this was an sequel to the others at all. Come on, he just a child and I enjoy the film today still! My favorite character is Tiffany, she a nice girl! And of course, Junior Healy, I like this kid who play the boy on this film. I HATE THAT DOCTOR PEABOY, He weird! From the other to films of Problem Child was great, good, and a good film to watch! Remember this was the last Problem Child film, and I will remember this film when I grow up! I love to watch with my mom!

Anyway, this film has lots of laughs but you got to a met it not a good story, but it is great to watch with children! 7 out of 10

By far the worst of the trilogy

[meloda · 1/10 · 27 September 2017]

As a kid, I loved Problem Child 1 & 2. Now as an adult, both of those are pretty bad. However, they can still have good moments watchable. This movie, on the other hand, was just a complete waste.

The worst part of all is that as corny and cheesy as the first two movies were--at least the second movie ended very well and on a great note with Ben falling for a lovely woman with a daughter. They should have picked up where they left off and made them a family--yet they totally wrecked the story by making it so the ladies are not even in this movie. It's no wonder John Ritter didn't want to take part. It has a horrible plot, is not even enjoyable, and even as a kid I never liked the third movie.

This movie was made for TV; and is nothing but slow and boring. Do yourself a favor and don't waste your time. If you have absolutely nothing better to do, you don't have a DVR, and can only watch live TV; Problem Child 1 or 2 is slightly worth watching if that's all that's on. Don't even bother watching this one; you're better off twiddling your thumb and staring at the wall all night!

What a terrible movie

[moondoggy88 · 13 August 2000]

I cannot believe how stupid this movie is. The first to Problem Childs were okay, but this one was REALLY bad. There was no plot whatsoever, and the dialogue was unbelievably terrible. Ok, so Junior's being driven home by his dad after paralyzing his teacher. His dad says, "There's been a lot of accidents lately," and Junior says, "It's that time of year," and gives a retarded chuckle, then realizes his dad is mad, so he says "So you don't like me anymore"?!!!??!!!!!! That was the lamest thing I had ever seen in a movie. It's obvious the scriptwriter took no time into making the script make sense. I give this movie a 0, but if I could give it less I would say -1,000.

Pure, undiluted pain

[culwin · 1/10 · 7 October 2001]

I could only watch this movie 3/4 of the way through before I couldn't take it anymore. This is just as bad as 1 and 2 (you can't get worse than the worst). Unbelievably, this movie is worse than 99% of the movies on Mystery Science Theater, and deserves its place on the bottom 100 list. I wonder what the kids in this movie will think of it when they grow up? Why someone would actually spend the time and money to create something as awful as this is beyond my comprehension.

Fails at every level

[stormhawk2021 · 1/10 · 2 August 2017]

I really am curious as to why they kept making these horrible films. This is yet another painfully unfunny and strained comedy that has nothing to offer to the viewer. The Problem Child 1 was good, the 2 was okay, but the 3 was execrable. The use of comedy is awful, and the comedic elements aren't good, while they're supposed to be funny. This film offers nothing new to the series; it only offers more awful, unfunny comedy for the viewer. This film was just as bad and it had no redeeming factor whatsoever. This third film of 'Problem Child' saga has a bad script, bad cast and overall bad jokes that really aren't funny. This is a painful film to watch and it just didn't have anything whatsoever to make it funny. This is one of those sequels that should never have been made, and the filmmaking here is sloppy and director Greg Beeman can't make anything funny, as they had done Dennis Dugan or Brian Levant. Add to that a bad script, and you have a pointless, unworthy third film to a franchise that never was funny in the first place.

William Katt takes over for John Ritter, who starred as Ben in feature editions; Justin Chapman replaces Michael Oliver as Junior. Repeating his role as Ben's father is Jack Warden. Murph, Junior's bully in the second film, in this one, it seems that they buried the hatchet. Gilbert Gottfried, who played different roles in each of the first two films, here plays a third: a sadistic, inept orthodontist. When laughing-gas-inhaling Nurse Kiki (Kelli Thacker) inadvertently posts an X-ray of a horse's mouth instead of Junior's, Gottfried diagnoses "appaloosa gingivitis nervosa." And that's one of the funnier lines. The acting is either overblown or wooden throughout, with the exception of Katt, who's all but invisible; perky Carolyn Lowery, who plays a psychiatrist and Ben's potential love interest; Gottfried, of course; and Warden, who's wasted. The rest of the actors were just terrible, especially Jennifer Ogletree, whom played the role of Tiffany. It was clear that Jennifer had no previous acting experience, and it really showed up in this only and mediocre entry in the series.

Problem Child 3 is a misfire and is one of the worst comedies that you can watch. Avoid this film if you can because there is nothing good here whatsoever. If you're looking for something funny, look elsewhere.

This movie should have never been a TV movie

[MTyson66 · 1/10 · 23 September 1998]

I can't believe they made this a TV movie. Why would anybody be in love with a rotten kid? Problem Child 1 and 2 were bad enough. I have to ask the question that didn't the people that made this movie learn from the ratings at the box office for Problem Child 2 that people are getting tired of a movie about a bad kid that seems to never get disciplined?

Kinda makes you wonder what the world would be like if it weren't for something called a trash can...

[MovieAddict2016 · 1/10 · 14 June 2003]

If you bought this movie, toss it away. It's horrible. Awful. Only so many words can describe it. The cast is all different save Gilbert Gottfried, who is "fried" in this movie, and a few others. But you can tell they've had enough of the Problem Child, and why they continue to make spin-offs of something that never was is beyond me. Two sequels and a television show. The first was kind of funny in a guilty pleasure way, but c'mon, enough is enough!

0/5 stars -

Awful

[leejjones-92486 · 2/10 · 22 March 2020]

Watched abit of this for the first time last night wish I had not,Junior was a little brat but in this he is sadistic plus it has no continuity with the other two I hope it payed the bills for the actors.

Not as good as the first two

[abbazabakyleman-98834 · 5/10 · 21 December 2022]

The third film in the trilogy does not feature neither John Ritter or Michael Oliver, but William Katt and Justin Chapman are decent enough in the roles. Gilbert Gottfried, Jack Warden, and Eric Edwards (in a dual role), at least, give the film some hope, even though their roles are extended cameos, than anything. For continuity, the writer dropped the ball by abandoning the storyline involving Annie Young and her daughter Trixie.

The movie was intended to be released theatrically for Christmas 1994, but was dumped onto the NBC network in the following spring as a movie of the week and subsequently got occasional air play on the USA Network with the other two films.

Extremely Bad Movie

[addicy · 1/10 · 15 October 2022]

I watched this movie when it aired on tv. All I can say is this movie lacked originality. No John Ritter and Michael Oliver = no hit.

If they wanted to do a TV series after the second film. I can see Ritter, Yasbeck, Oliver, Ivyann Schwan appearing on such series. Example: The 90's tv version of "Uncle Buck" was plain awful. No John Candy in the lead role.

William Katt's version of Ben Healy was a wuss. Justin Chapman was less convincing as Junior Healy, John Ritter and Michael Oliver had that on screen chemistry. These two actors didn't.

We're was Annie and Trixie from Part 2? There's no mention of them ever again. I wonder why? Ben said that Annie was the one for him not LaWanda.

Only see this if you're a Gilbert Gottfried fan like me.

[Pelicano · 10/10 · 13 June 1999]

This movie has a lot of problems.

The plot goes like this:Junior falls in love with a popular girl(yes you heard right,Junior has a romantic side) and he tries his best to get her to notice him.Which includes dancing class,boy scouts and a hockey team(with disaterous results.) It isn't that bad a movie,but what I think is the best part is the scenes with Gilbert Gottfried. So if you're not a Gilbert(or any other cast member)fan,I suggest you sleep on this one.

Fav quote:"Kiki,remove my trousers!"~Dr.Peabody,after inhaling laughing gas.

Not too bad

[MrsKat38 · 7/10 · 10 August 2019]

It's definitely not as good as the first two movies. But I actually thought it was very cute. After reading the reviews I didn't completely agree with everybody. I guess it is just me but I liked it.

Rate 0 out of 0

[terminator-mjc · 1/10 · 21 January 2021]

This movie should not exist at all.

There isn't anything quality about this movie. It's watered down of the mischief and it isn't at all funny. Two people return in the cast, but they don't at all help this movie for being any better.

The kid that was in some episodes of Full House is in this movie and he is still irritating. He acts the same in the movie compared to Full House.