Feast III: The Happy Finish (2009 Video) User Reviews

I'm not hungry any more.

[BA_Harrison · 4/10 · 5 December 2012]

Ask the best chefs in the world and they will say that 'presentation is everything'; it's an old adage that I really wish director John Gulager had applied when serving up The Happy Finish, the final chapter in his Feast trilogy. Style and attention to detail are in short order, the film being dished up with all the finesse of a pig farmer with a slop bucket; if it was the third course in a meal, it would result in a severe case of indigestion.

Like Beluga caviar, Marmite and Spam, the film's main ingredients—extreme gore, female nudity, offensive humour, rubbery monsters, and random perversion—are an acquired taste, but Gulager's scatter-shot approach results in a chaotic mess that even seasoned fans of trashy horror will be hard pushed to stomach. There are one or two tasty morsels on offer—some decent effects and a couple of genuinely funny gags—but these are completely smothered by the irritating editing, half-baked ideas, unlikable characters, moronic moments, and truly bizarre directorial choices (an entire scene lit by a strobe?!?!) all of which serve to kill the appetite quicker than a short, curly hair in your mashed potato.

Stick with Feast and forget about the second and third movies

[siderite · 6/10 · 13 August 2014]

The third and last Feast part didn't seem as bad as the second, possibly because it was more about running away from the monsters and less about trying to make the characters look funny. It is difficult to enjoy a movie when you can't make yourself to care about any of the characters. And when the gore and weirdness goes completely over the top, you just stop caring.

Bottom line: Feast was a movie I recommend to all my friends, but the second and the third installments are just bad. It is "I wish I would have cleaned the house instead of watching it" bad. It's really depressing to see a movie bring some originality in a tired genre only to try too hard by making sequels that lack the soul of the first and exaggerate everything that didn't matter in the first place.

Not as good as the first film but better than the second. Its more bloody mayhem as the survivors try to stay alive.

[dbborroughs · 5/10 · 7 September 2009]

Third film in the series starts a few minutes before the end of the second and deals with the survivors of the monster invasion of a small town trying to get to safety. Its a bleak black gory occasionally humorous film that is better than the second one but not as good as the first. Plot wise there isn't much to say beyond that. What I can say is that some of the madness of the first film returns. The on-screen description of everyone and their chances is back, as is a tighter reign on the on screen happenings. I don't think the film makes any more sense than the second, but at least the film doesn't get lost in long sequences that go on for no good reason. Since seeing it last night I'm wondering if this is better served by just jumping from the first film and letting your mind fill in all of the blanks. I don't know. I know if this and the second film had been cut together they might have made one really good film instead of two just okay ones. I do like the very end song which is wonderfully bizarre in a good way. Worth a look if you saw the first one and don't mind tasteless blood and guts.

This the part where the brother usually dies. Listen.

[lastliberal · 10 November 2009]

Better than II or worse then II? There is some debate on that.

At least we can clearly see the monsters in this one.

The gore is worse than ever with decapitations, and the monster eating the head whole, and then, I kid you not, eliminating the uneaten head.

If you have epilepsy, you might not want to watch the last 10 minutes or so. It flashes on and off and it made me dizzy.

It was better that Feast II, but not by much. It was a gore-fest with lots of action, but it was hard to follow exactly what was going on most of the time.

The ending was a real shock!

Jumbled chaotic mess of a movie .

[mes666 · 1/10 · 5 July 2009]

This movie is the worst of the series, and that's saying a lot . First of all the editing in this movie is confusing and erratic . During the action scenes, its nearly impossible to see what the hell is going on . The combination of the excessively shaky camera, poor lighting, as well as the camera zooming in far too closely, make this movie extremely hard to follow . I had to pause the movie several times just to rest my eyes, and avoid possible seizures . The acting is not that good, but it could just be the mediocre script or perhaps both .

I love gory movies, but whats the point if you cant see anything ?

Don't waste your time on this, you have been warned .

One course too many

[thekarmicnomad · 3/10 · 30 May 2010]

Loved the first two, very unpredictable and amusing.

This one feels formulaic and dull. You can't really tell what is going on (as mentioned elsewhere) most of the scenes are in darkness with flashing lights and shaky camera work.

I had to constantly prize my finger away from the fast forward button as the characters twittered on or trudged down another pitch black sewer.

It feels like this film is the unwanted runt of the litter, undernourished and unloved.

The ending was so bad I wonder if the director has grown bored of the Feast franchise and hammered nails into its coffin so he wouldn't be bugged about making a fourth.

A Not So Happy Finish

[Rindiana · 3/10 · 30 November 2010]

After the demented roller-coaster ride in part two, this boring and literally unwatchable appendix is quite a let-down compared to the earlier installments.

Despite the far-fetched ending, which is so absurd as to be actually funny, we've got more of the same, but with diminishing returns (and badly lit at that.) The newly introduced characters aren't that much of a big deal, either, and the blissfully short running time reflects the uninspired nature of the whole schlock parade.

It was time to end this carnage.

3 out of 10 (h)armless karate kids

while it's kind of gross sometimes,it does entertain

[guinevere_tomas · 7/10 · 21 March 2013]

Let me start out by saying i am not a horror film fan. I've watched the classics but some how given up on a lot of modern day scary films,as they rely too little on plot and more on nudity,gore, violence and the latter.

Now by saying that, I've watched all three Feast films. I was skeptical,as the reviews had me expecting very little from the films. Let me say,they're not as bad as people give them credit for. A lot of it is gross,and some of the situations are tacky,but i believe the creators of this film are giving the audience the intelligence to know that it's meant to be gross,tacky and out of good taste. With that being said, the movie was quite entertaining. I liked the new characters added to this one,as it follows directly after the second film.

The movie's distasteful points I'm ashamed to admit i found a lot of humor in. I learned that comedy does not need to be intelligent or witty or even crafty to find it funny. If you're expecting Schindler's List or even The Ring, you're definitely not going to get it here. But if you're expecting entertainment packed in a horror-comedy film about disgusting monsters eating humans and killing everything in sight,you will not be too disappointed.

Movies are supposed to entertain,and i think sometimes we get caught up in what's considered a "Good" movie, that we forget that if bad ones didn't exist,we would have little to distinguish the two.

But overall,i'd give it a 7,i would've given it more had they given the new characters more screen time ;p

The very many problems with Feast 3: The Happy finish.

[jhpstrydom · 4/10 · 16 February 2010]

Even though I have seen all the FEAST films this one is the first of the series I have commented on, I liked both FEAST 1 and 2 but this one, was too overdone and by that I mean the outrageous gross out humor, in the first one it was gross true but it was always unexpected, in two where they took it up a notch it was also still unexpected even if it was more gross, now with three there was no humor it was just gross and when the film gets around to the part where our favorite group of survivors starts to crawl around in the sewers, its so dark the only thing you can make out during the action scenes is screams and roars because you can't see anything.

If you look at the acting you'd probably say these people need to find another profession but if you look at the material you'd think if any of these people can keep a straight face in a film like this they deserve an Oscar.

Overall, this film had the potential to be hugely entertaining, but the execution was simply put to stupid to make it so, and thus it is the weakest entry in the series

still deliver the goods

[trashgang · 7/10 · 28 February 2011]

I was looking forward for part 3 and the final of Feast. Again it's all in the same way of course of part 1 and part 2. A lot of gore again, bad jokes, tits and all what you want but sometimes it drops a bit. Don't get me wrong, it is still a good flick, but in the sewer it drops a bit, takes too long for me but overall again you will have a big laugh with farts and the way some are killed. Also you have to watch it while the end credits are running, the movie is still going on. Some people really have a problem with this trilogy, just watch the reviews, the first got a lot of reviewers and from then on it drops. If you really want a good feast than just watch, sigh, Feast. Even the ending is great. Nothing to do with the storyline but still the director got away with it. Really, an underrated trilogy!

Completely pointless waste of time.

[bjjnedan · 1/10 · 26 July 2012]

The Happy Finish is just plain bad. It's pretty much just like the first two, except much, much stupider. And..., the hot chicks that made the 1st one memorable and the 2nd less so, died off. Much like 2, I wanted every single person, except for 1 hot chick, to die a very horrible death. Everybody is just plain retarded. Nothing about this movie, or even the entire trilogy, makes any sense. Everything, the acting, the special and monster effects, the plot, the ending, the dialogue, every single f***ing thing about this movie is just plain stupid. Think about any trilogy and remember how bad the 3rd movie was in comparison to the 1st and/or 2nd? Well..., this is a whole new level of terrible. For some very stupid reason, the Feast trilogy seems to have a cult following. That makes me sad to know there are so many stupid people in this world and fearful of where life on Earth is headed.

Well they did not really keep us hanging between two and three now did they?

[Aaron1375 · 8/10 · 25 February 2009]

Yes, just a few short months after Feast II, here comes the happy finish to the trilogy. And while this one is not as good as the first one, it is a bit better than two. The focus of this one is comedy more than horror, though there is plenty of gore and once again boobs to keep me entertained, but then I am a pervert who likes a good gory movie. The story has our group of survivors right where they were after the last movie and like the last movie they have to do a lot of stuff to try and survive. They have no need to fear though as a butt kicking gun touting hero, a prophet, and a martial arts master come to the aid of our tired and beat down gang. They have to go through many obstacles on their way to finding a way past the deadly creatures that feast upon human flesh. From the rooftop where we left them, to the sheriff's office, and to a drainage pipe. You will get to see one person tired of the abuse get out of the film fairly quickly, lots of deaths, the use of gunpowder to stop the bleeding, and an ending that made me go "what"? It is far from perfect as the tunnel scenes were a bit dark and they used night vision camera's a bit to much. Still the cast is still funny in a strange way and I like the way it follows the first movies format of introducing the characters and the previous movies combined. It is nice in this entire series that the monsters are a combination of costume and makeup rather than the computer generated monsters of the science fiction channel too. I don't understand why the score is so low here on the same level with the abysmal "Automaton Transfusion" as that piece of crap had no sort of ending whatsoever and the effects were not good even for a low budget movie. Though people here probably took pity upon it because it was a beginner film maker who made it.

Ballsy climax...

[poe426 · 7/10 · 1 March 2009]

As breathlessly anticipated, FEAST III brings the most monstrous menage a trois in the history of skinema to a fitting climax... It's a balls-out, balls-to-the-walls wallbanger. Literally. Characters come and go with wild abandon. Monsters come and go. "Short Bus Gus" is easily the funniest "hero" to hit the screen since "Short Bus" Stiller (and Robert Downey) in TROPIC THUNDER. It was sad to see "Tats" go, but, if the prior two FEASTs are any indication, her death may only be temporary. (And the indication that there may be a fourth entry in the series is encouraging.) FEAST III is a fistload of fun, no doubt about it. (And I, for one, wouldn't mind seeing the origin of the monsters done like a black and white 1950s SF shocker. It could be titled FOUR PLAY...) If you liked BUBBA HO-TEP, you'll love the three-course meal that is the FEAST trilogy.

Ending

[kosmasp · 4/10 · 27 May 2012]

I haven't read up on the making of, but this one feels like it was shot back-to-back with part 2. Actually it feels more like a successor (in tone and story-wise) to its predecessor than part 1 does with any of those two sequels. If you take into account that the first one was the best one, that isn't really a good thing though. But we have our written introductions back, which is a nice thing. Still worked best in the first Feast movie though.

The subtitle of the movie is happy finish, but I kinda have a feeling they wanted to use "endings" instead of finish. I might be wrong, but that would have been more of a fit (especially thinking of "sloppy seconds" and its meaning). Some nice ideas and one theme towards the end, that reminded me of something out of a Monthy Python movie (and the Holy Grail that is). And because you can't satisfy everybody with an ending, we get the "wtf" treatment here. Same director as the other Feast movies

yeah

[suenteus_po · 26 August 2009]

When it comes to a true relic it's hard to give a review. All I can say is that this (literally) piece of s**t is good cinema.

Where this lacks in structure it makes up in substance. The substance being not the cruelty or injustice of the world, but the driving force of all humanity: fun and love.

Kaufman said that the cinema is a dead art form. Pure hubris. Of course that was after the fact that he'd just created one of the more meaningful pieces of art: Synecdoche New york. Cinema just needs to go boldly where no one has gone before.

Beyond theater, no matter how much as it hurts. Saying farewell to Shakespeare causes physical pain, but sometimes the pain is good. Or like on tn the case of a modern human being, necessary.

In cinema there's nothing to bind us. Nothing to keep us apart. The cycle begins again when nothing is given. Well, except our endless appetite for sex and violence.

Rubbish

[pulpgnome · 1/10 · 22 July 2009]

Would someone please give Gulager a script worthy of his talent? It is clear in all three "Feast" films that Gulager has genuine talent as a director, but the Feast scripts are increasingly puerile. The writing is neither funny nor clever, though it is clear that it thinks it is. Give Gulager a script like The Man Who Wasn't There or In Bruges and let him shine.

No more Dunstan and Melton scripts...please! Even at the most basic levels, these screenplays are flawed. For example, in Feast II (subtitled "Sloppy Seconds" for no other reason than it makes nine-year-olds titter), characters behave inconsistently--one moment they risk their lives to save another and the next they are chickens who toss kids to monsters to save themselves--actions are implausible, and dialog is juvenile. Pouring gore onto the actors doesn't make up for a flawed story. And...there is no story here to speak of other than a bunch of cartoon characters running around getting eviscerated by monsters. If it weren't for Gulager's contribution, these films would be among the worst ever made.

Feast III:The Happy Finish

[Scarecrow-88 · 2/10 · 19 April 2009]

I was for sure the third film couldn't possibly be as painful as the second one, and boy was I wrong. Just the underground strobe light sequence where you can't decipher what the hell was going on as infected humans, a monster, and our lone survivors are duking it out, I went for the Tylenol. This film deals with those left alive at the end of the second film, dealing with the monsters as they discover three new characters along the way. One is a prepared and confident leader type whose fate is sealed when he attempts to show Secrets how to shoot a pistol. One is a very talented martial artist whose arms are both eaten off leaving him little help to anyone. The third is a prophet who seems to have the gift to ward off the monsters, only to discover that it's the screeching sound of his ear piece causing them to move away. The prophet talks the remaining members from the second film into going underground in the sewer tunnels and this idea, while seeming like an ideal strategy, doesn't help them as infected human freaks, demented and violent, are wandering around. And, behind them comes a monster. Those that remain include Biker Queen(Diane Goldner), Secrets(Hanna Putnam), Greg(Tom Gulager), Lightning(Juan Longoria García), Bartender(Clu Gulager), and Tat Girl(Chelsea Richards). Following the Prophet, they encounter far more danger than possibly realized. At the start of the film, they are able to finally get inside the sheriff's office, getting their revenge on Hobo(William Prael)who kept the building locked tight, by beating him to a pulp. When they realize that this will only service them temporarily, the gang splits up after exiting. Discovering Hobo's meth lab(..in a school bus buried under the earth), Biker Queen and Tat Girl finally believe they will be able to finally flee the premises, encountering engine problems. That's when they meet the Prophet, watching him command the monsters to scatter, and follow him into the sewers.

I don't know what director Gulager was attempting to accomplish with the ending, regarding the giant robot, but I was at my wit's end with the movie anyway. You get plenty of bloody carnage, but seeing what's going on is a major factor I struggled with. I soon just gave up caring and followed the mind-numbingly brain-dead flick until it's conclusion, breathing a sigh of relief as the Elvis impersonator was singing some song in Mexican as the credits rolled. For those that care, Slasher(Carl Anthony Payne II)gets anal raped by a monster who impregnates him, creating a hybrid human creature spawn! When the movie moves underground, almost all of it is incomprehensible and dark. There's some use of "nocturna vision", but even that is shot in such a haphazard manner, I doubt few will be satisfied. And, as the first two films proved, these characters have little worth, so their deaths couldn't come fast enough. John Allen Nelson is Sh#tkicker, the hero stereotype Gulager gets rid of just for the hell of it and Craig Henningsen is Jean Claude Seagal, the kickboxer who doesn't hold onto his arms very long. Josh Blue barely registers as Prophet, under a cloak, he mumbles directions and occasionally tells the monsters to take a hike as others complain of how noisy his hearing aid is, not knowing that it's loud frequency irritates the beasties. Greg goes almost the entire film with that pipe jammed into his face, and Bartender attempts to cauterize Claude Seagal's wounds like in Rambo III blowing the poor kid's other arm off!

Happy that it is Finished!

[Coventry · 2/10 · 3 September 2018]

Watching "Feast III" was a bad idea, not just because I knew from beforehand that I was going to hate it, but also because it's been nearly 10 years since I saw parts one and two. As it's a back-to-back sequel, "The Happy Finish" immediately picks up where "Sloppy Seconds" left off, and frankly I didn't have any recollection of who the lead characters were. Obviously, the script isn't rocket science, but I nevertheless missed out on the copious references towards the previous installments. The only things I remember were that I loved the first "Feast" (refreshing and exciting) but that I absolutely disliked "Feast II" (pretentious and boring). And, since I read in most reviews that number 3 is basically just as annoying and redundant as part 2, I probably never should have bothered.

Even though John Gulager's first film was a clever and original horror gem, the sequels seem exclusively aimed at trash-fanatics with an extremely bad taste in cinema and a weakness for vulgar and infantile toilet humor. If you fancy watching rancid stuff like anally getting raped by monsters or swallowed human heads coming right back out of the rear end, you can't afford to let "Feast III" bypass. However, if you have a tiny bit of dignity left, you'll be eye-rolling the entire time and resisting to push the "stop" or "fast-forward" button. Maybe I've become a sourpuss over the years, but I fail to see what's funny about a bloke stumbling and driveling through the entire film with a metal pipe through his head. And, if the tastelessness doesn't turn you off, the downright lousy digital effects and amateurish editing will!

Yeah, kind of like Part II

[bowmanblue · 7/10 · 10 July 2014]

If you like cheesy (and gory) horror then you'll probably have seen the original 'Feast' film. It was nice and compact, with plenty of claret spewing all over the place, not to mention a few surprising moments which deliberately defied convention. Then came the second chapter, which did its best to 'up the ante' and be more outrageous and generally more violent. It succeeded, but somehow it lost all its charm.

'Part III' was made back to back with Part II and therefore feels exactly like the second half. Sadly, although it too contains extreme violence and black humour, it doesn't compare to the original. Just like Part II, the characters are unlikeable, the monsters look like big men in rubber suits and the story sort of ambles from set-piece to set-piece.

When I'm the mood for a story like 'Feast' I'll watch all three. Parts II and III have their moments, but the original was best and always will be. If you're just a casual horror fan, stick with the first one and avoid the second pair.

http://thewrongtreemoviereviews.blogspot.co.uk/

Entertainment value record low, dumb down value high

[torstensonjohn · 3/10 · 9 June 2018]

Simple few sentence review. The series OTHER than the original is utter garbage and a complete mess. The final in the series Happy Finish is just plain dumb.

Weak final entry but still enjoyable

[kannibalcorpsegrinder · 7/10 · 20 April 2015]

Forced to find new battle strategies, the dwindling number of survivors are caught in a race through underground sewers in an effort to finally escape from the marauding creatures once and for all.

On the whole this one turned out to be a minor disappointment compared to the others in the series. The biggest problem with this one tends to be the rather shortened length of time here, barely running a full hour despite a non-stop pace that features a ton of action throughout here. This tends to make this feel more like it should've been built together into the second entry and tacked onto that one rather than being shuffled off into a new effort as several scenes from that could've been taken out and replaced with the action of this one to make for a seamless transition. That tends to make this one feel a tad worthless and expendable with not really needing to be featured at all which is quite disappointing overall. Still, this one really gets a lot to like throughout as this one tends to continue on in the series' penchant for over-the-top extremity throughout with not only the scatological references and intensely sexualized nature of both the creatures and the survivors but also in regards to the gore which is again quite gruesome and endearing. In addition to limbs being ripped off and entrails splattered across the ground but also there's vicious stab-wounds, tons of scratches and clawed up bodies, decapitations and bodies bursting from the inside out among other vicious tactics which is quite fun here. This rampant amount of gore comes from the nearly-relentless pace featured here with the attacks continuing on throughout the film with the race through the car-yard, a battle in an underground hole and the numerous battles in the sewers providing both action and suspense as the vicious creatures create several encounters here that are quite enjoyable including the blazing final battle in a strobe-light-lit rave scene that's quite thrilling and exciting. The creatures still look good, there's a lot to like here, but those few small problems do hold this down.

Rated Unrated/R: Extreme Graphic Violence, Extreme Graphic Language, Nudity, plenty of scatological references and gross creature humor.

Finished

[thesar-2 · 5/10 · 3 March 2013]

Without a $100 million budget and at least one explanation, Feast III: The Happy Finish is, in fact, finished before it began.

Not that I had too much of a problem with this all-but unnecessary completion to the Feast trilogy, but it certainly overstayed its welcome in Texas.

The biggest problem, without going into obvious finale spoilers or comparing it to the one movie I sorely want to as that would be a dead giveaway, was that the writers were so concerned with going the opposite way for the "surprise factor" (as seen in the first two installments) that myself or any viewers of the series knew exactly who was going to die and pretty much when. Even in part II, it was partially unclear who would live, be triumphant, prevail against the demons or last the longest at least. Here, since they failed to change anything up, bull's eyes were immediately placed. And that was marginally sad.

HELL – after you finish part II and you merely see III's subtitle, you know what's coming.

I digress; it's sad, because by this point in absolute chaos, desperation and continual disappointment for our antiheroes and their fates, you'd wish for just one break, one tiny amount of satisfaction in these people's plight. Sure, they're pretty much all scum – as the series proclaims all individuals on screen, with the exception of maybe one or two from the original, but you get to the point of: "Oh, come on…enough going the opposite way and show that it can't rain all the time."

Part III didn't just start immediately following the tragic finale of Part II, it reversed a bit as if anyone who's made it this far forgot what happened before. The remaining survivors continue to fight the terrible creatures running amok in an instant ghost town in Texas. They continue to fight, scramble, make more enemies than friends, get eaten…you know, they feast-usual. But, this time, they're met with a Obi-Wan prophet of Doofus proportions who apparently can magically ward off the creatures.

Will these lowlifes meet certain doom? Will the creature learn to speak and say "Why didn't anyone ever just come out and ask us: 'Hey, how did you guys come into existence?' We'd love to tell you our side of the story…" Will there actually be a HAPPY FINISH?

The movie's below par and below the first two chapters…but, it's really not the worst horror movie I've seen. It's loyal to the "fan," it's more of the same for that "fan" to enjoy and if you did like the first two, you'll enjoy the newest chapter.

Now, will there be a Part IV? Here's my take: They would literally need a $100 (or more) million budget and a finale's finale with full disclosure of the events of the films.

So, I guess the answer is: hell no. Feast fans: just sit back and enjoy what will inevitably be the final chapter.

It doesn't get much better/worse than this

[jacob-noergaard · 8/10 · 22 February 2009]

If you are looking for art, this isn't the place. Then again, Feast 3 is a really decent splatter movie. We got wonderfully stereotypical characters, good presentation and decent camera work. An awful story and great effects. I laughed and I enjoyed the effects immensely.

Now, the movie is of course enjoy even more if you have already seen the other movies. But basically, it's about these people being hunted by a bunch of gruesome monsters. The amusing part of them being the fact that they have rather large... erm... reproducing organs.

People nice in hilarious ways, there is plenty of exposed boobs and the movie is certainly not for the squeamish. But as much violence, gore and blood there is, just as much humour it's got. I mean, come on, it's got a martial artist named "Jean-Claude Segal"! Just how serious do you really think it is? In the end, the production value is dead serious, though. Just about all effects are well done and it's clear that the crew was enjoying themselves.

Great effort for a STV movie with a relatively small budget.

Feast 2b

[TdSmth5 · 6/10 · 10 March 2009]

Filmed back-to-back with Feast II, this one continues where part II left off but this one has a couple of surprises. It starts with yet another unnecessary disgusting scene. There's a silly intro presenting us all the characters with some lines that don't really do much to describe them but make clear that this movie will be all about who ends up alive or dead. The group of survivors from part II decide to come down from the roof, when a stranger arrives crashing into the jail. He's all action and wants to shoot his way out of town. But out of the suddenly something hilariously surprising happens and that plan cannot be carried out.

They end up splitting and some find a buried bus that they then use to get to the surface but the bus, of course, dies and they're back on the streets. This bus scene is poorly conceived, executed, and shot. There's even dirt on the camera lens. When almost all seems lost a strange character appears who can control the monsters- or so it appears. He guides them into the sewers.

In the sewers they run into a karate kid, who also meets an outrageously funny fate. But there are also some type of partying cannibal people making things difficult. And suddenly, as if 10 minutes of the movie were missing, they're back on the surface.

This movie adds some interesting characters because part II sorely lacked them and also some funny twists. The ugly chick who was the main character isn't so important here, thankfully. In fact, there is no main character. And the monsters who were scary in part I are reduced to bad latex jokes and the story often makes no sense.

This was NOT a happy finish!

[jack_face · 15 December 2011]

Feast III: The Happy Finish continues directly from where the last one ended. It's like they were filmed simultaneously. Had to be. Honey Pie's final fate is decided in the very beginning and we're treated to a very nice crapping scene that's quite literally right in your face. Best line of the movie? There's 2. One is during an argument where a female gang member said, "(starts with a 'b,' rhymes with itch), I will (rhymes with suck, starts with an 'f') you up!" It ain't what she said, it's how she said it. Awesome stuff! The other is when a new character is introduced. He said, "I got the gift, (starts with the letter 'f,' rhymes with maggots)!" You'll see what he's referring to when you see this. This movie would be just like the 2nd part with more absurdities and new characters that add to that mix.

It's a continuation through and through but some scenes tend to drag out, like when they were in the sewer. Some made little sense, like the mutated humans. It got to the point where it was almost without direction because stuff was happening that didn't lend much to story progression and it's the same creative team who did the first 2. You expect a certain level of quality. The beginning and middle of the movie are what they should be. The end is where everything starts going south. From the survivors fighting their way out of the mutant herd, to biting away at one of the monsters as if they were monsters themselves, to the worst ending of any movie I have ever seen. Yes, I said it, THE WORST ENDING TO ANY MOVIE I HAVE EVER SEEN! The ending just makes everything else that happens prior seem meaningless. You forget about all the humor and other good stuff because it's just that bad.

It's almost like they ran out of ideas and just put something together for the sake of completeness. A better ending would have been the monster at the end being benevolent and it did seem that way. And then they could have went out into the city safe zone where they were trying to get to and proceeded with the plot. Not the pure garbage that was given to us. I don't know what anyone involved with the ending of this movie was thinking. No one spoke up or said anything? No one told the writers that this was stupid? Did them or Gulager really have something to do with this? It just makes not one shred of sense in comparison to EVERYTHING that came before it. I don't get it. Oh yeah, there's nudity in this flick too. One of the biker chicks bites the big one and you're treated to some really good, close-up boob shots if you like that sort of thing.

From Feast I all the way to the middle of Feast III, you'll be completely and totally entertained. But the last act in Feast III, I don't know, man. I don't know what happened there. I'm purposely not saying what happened because if you haven't seen these flicks yet, you need to. Despite the horrible (not happy) finish, I'd recommend getting all of these as a set on DVD/Blu-ray. They're all worth paying for and all worth watching back to back to back. Enjoy the first part, don't eat when watching the second one, and be prepared for the crappy finish to the 3rd. They're even considering a fourth part. After the fiasco with part 3's climax, please don't do it unless you plan on exploring the origins of the creatures. Feast III gets 4 out of 10 stars. Would have gotten 6 but the ending really is that bad.