Candyman: Day of the Dead (1999 Video) User Reviews

Unnecessary Sequel...

[MetalGeek · 5/10 · 15 October 2010]

"Candyman 3: Day of the Dead" is a prime example of a horror series going to the well one too many times. At the time of its release in 1992, the original "Candyman" was one of the most ferociously nasty horror films in a number of years, and while the 1995 sequel, "Candyman: Farewell to the Flesh," wasn't quite up to par with the first film, was at least watchable. The disappointing "Candyman 3" isn't utterly horrible, but it is, at best, unnecessary.

Tony Todd (and his cool-as-hell, gravelly as grave dirt voice) returns for a third go-round as the hook-handed, ghostly maniac, and this time he's brought back to life by his last surviving relative, his great-great granddaughter "Caroline," an artist who lives in the Barrio section of Los Angeles. Caroline is inexplicably portrayed by former "Baywatch" babe Donna D'Errico (of all people!), who can't act worth a damn but boy, does she look good running around in a tight tank top and black panties, so I honestly had no complaints about her performance. After she displays Candyman's paintings at a local art gallery, Caroline makes the mistake of saying her ancestor's name five times into a mirror and soon Candyman is running around the streets of L.A., popping up amidst swarms of bees, carving up her friends, asking her to "Be...my...victim," et cetera, et cetera. A pair of racist cops are convinced that Caroline is behind the string of murders and are intent on putting her away for the crimes, so in order to clear her name she has to stop the Candyman once and for all (with some help from an actor friend and his adorable young daughter), set against the backdrop of the annual Dia de los Muertos ("Day of the Dead") celebration in East L.A.

On paper it sounds OK, but the film unravels quickly. The movie is so cheap looking compared to the other two entries in the series that it could pass for a SyFy Channel or Lifetime Original Movie. Apparently the film was shot in a mere 20 days, mostly during daylight hours as the budget wouldn't allow for nighttime shoots, so even when scenes are supposed to be dark and scary, they look far too bright and unrealistic. Tony Todd does the best he can with what he's given but even he looks like he's simply going through the motions. As I previously mentioned, D'Errico can't act, so her Minnie Mouse-ish screams of terror will provide tons of unintentional comedy. There's a few decent gore scenes and some T&A sprinkled throughout but overall "Candyman 3" never comes close to giving you the feeling of darkness and dread that the original had in abundance.

I suppose if you're a fan of the series, "Candyman 3" is worth a look as long as you can find it cheap (like I did) but unless you're a Candyman completist you can safely give this one a miss.

Average third instalment that was at least better than I expected.

[poolandrews · 5/10 · 16 October 2009]

Candyman: Day of the Dead is set in Los Angeles where the busty Caroline McKeever (Donna D'Errico) lives, the great, great granddaughter of the notorious urban legend hook handed killer Daniel Robitaille (co-producer Tony Todd) also known as the Candayman she has been having disturbing visions & nightmares about him. Caroline's friend & art gallery owner Miguel (Mark Adair-Rios) has persuaded her to loan original paintings done by Robitaille for an exhibition, the paints stir up memories & get people talking about the Candyman myth again & when Miguel is found brutally murdered the next day Caroline is sure the Candyman is responsible but the police are not convinced. As the Candyman visions get more & more terrifying Caroline must find a way to overcome her fears & lay the Candyman to rest once & for all but with the body count steadily rising will she be next?

This straight to video third instalment of the Candyman series based on the character created by Clive Barker was co-written & directed by Turi Meyer & in all honestly wasn't anywhere near as bad as I was expecting, in fact I would go as far as to say that Candyman: Day of the Dead is actually alright. The first Candyman (1992) dealt with the myth & legend of the Candyman himself, the second one Candyman: Farewell to the Flesh (1995) dealt with the Candyman trying to get reincarnated while this one starts off like the paintings are going to be the major plot point but the script becomes a sort of Halloween (1978) clone as the Candyman goes after his sole remaining relative (who happens to be a pretty blonde chick with big breasts). Unfortunately there's never really enough explanation given as to why he goes after said big breasted blonde chick, as far as I could ascertain it's because he wants her with him or something like that & as such I didn't really care that much. Add to that a silly plot twist involving a Candyman worshipping cult who get written out no sooner as they appear, a racist bad tempered cop, a murder investigation & a man wrongly accused of the killings & there's just that little bit more story & depth than one might expect from a straight to video continuation of a horror franchise although how does Candyman manage to randomly show up at certain points (when the story needs it) despite no-one saying his name five times? I mean, you know, I thought that saying his name five times was essential. At 90 odd minutes the pace is alright, there's enough blood & gore & the character's are alright to make this watchable at least if nothing else.

There's more than a few annoying fake scare scenes where people wake up just as something nasty is about to happen & the prolonged scene where Caroline hears her friend screaming & upon rushing to her rescue finds out that she was rehearsing for a part in a horror film is groan inducing & just plain cheesy. This was gorier than I expected, there's some nice blood gushing slit throats, people are impaled on hooks, ripped up bodies are seen & someone gets a large hook thrust through their mouth & it exits out the back of their head. There's also a strange egg yolk scene in which a bloody Bee emerges from it in another of those fake scare moments. To add to the general exploitation level as well as some good gore effects there's quite a few naked breasts on show if that sort of thing interests you. The films subtitle Day of the Dead refers to some sort of tradition but doesn't really have any meaning to the film itself apart from the very last shot.

The production values are pretty good & the film looks nice enough I suppose with good special effects. The acting is alright with ex Baywatch star Donna D'Errico looking quite nice here although it's hard to believe she is related to Tony Todd.

Candyman: Day of the Dead isn't too bad a film, sure it's no masterpiece or anything but there's a bit more story, a bit more character & a bit more gore than usual for this type of straight to video horror. You could do worse but then again you could do better.

Pathetic end to the Candyman series

[scottmar · 3 November 2001]

I realized that I had never seen any of the Candyman movies, so I rented all three, and watched them one after another. The first two were really good. But this? The dark atmosphere has been thrown out the window. The awesome Phil Glass score is gone. Having a Baywatch chick as your lead?!! C'mon. This movie has no class. It was obviously thrown together by hacks. Heck, there's a shot of a building, where they obviously threw an orange filter over the sky in color correction, but it covers up the top of the building as well! This movie just looks cheap, which is a shame considering how well the first two were made. Candyman says "Be my victim" so many times it borders on self parody.

All I know is that the girl had huge boobs and couldn't be taken seriously

[Smells_Like_Cheese · 2/10 · 28 November 2006]

I was kinda looking forward to seeing how they ended the Candyman trilogy and the story actually looked entertaining. I remember when I was younger getting a peek at the movie on HBO, but I think I remember falling asleep, so it was at least something I could put to rest of what the rest of the movie was about. Candyman 3: Day of the Dead turned out to be an ordinary sequel with nothing to remember and it wasn't up to par with the original Candyman.

Caroline, the great great grand daughter of Candyman, is still haunted by the dreams of what her family and Candyman had to go through. No one believes her of course that he is still real, Candyman is back though and he is murdering her friends one by one while she gets the blame. She tries to uncover the legend and figure out what he wants from her, but she might end up loosing the only true friend of her's.

This film was sadly typical and even for a horror movie it was plain pathetic, I do like a little cheesiness every once in a while, but for a great story like Candyman, this was really sad. Well, I can see why they didn't make a fourth installment to the Candyman series, big surprise there. Well, at least I'm done... or am I? *Insert cynical laughter here*

2/10

There may be lots of blood, but this blade is more blunt than it is sharp

[TheLittleSongbird · 2/10 · 28 January 2019]

'Candyman', itself a well done adaptation of Clive Barker's excellent source material, still holds up very well. Find it well-made and genuinely scary with great performances from Tony Todd (terrifying) and Virginia Madsen (in a difficult role) and a goosebump-inducing score from Phillip Glass. Didn't find myself though caring very much for 'Candyman: Farewell to the Flesh', where almost every component (though there were redeeming merits) was executed the opposite to the original.

As much as it pains me to say it, for me 'Candyman: Day of the Dead' is even worse. It is as far removed from the first 'Candyman' as one can get, if it weren't for the title character and Tony Todd it could easily pass for something else entirely because it sure didn't feel like 'Candyman' and more like a knock off from SyFy or The Asylum. 'Candyman: Day of the Dead' also is an insult to Clive Barker (saying this even when trying to take it on its own terms), is even more pointless than 'Farewell to the Flesh' and it doesn't even have the redeeming qualities that that sequel had (the setting, score and Todd).

The least bad thing about 'Candyman: Day of the Dead' is Ernie Hudson Jr, who comes over as quite assured. Sadly, he is not in it an awful lot.

One cannot appreciate the setting, which is nowhere near as colourful or atmospheric here, because the film looks so cheap, even for direct to video. Everything looks so drab, while the editing nauseates and the gore and effects are so afterthought-like in how they look. There is nothing goosebump inducing about the score, which came over as monotonous and repetitive. Even Todd isn't a redeeming quality here, describing his performance as going through the motions is being far too kind, he actually looks and sounds like he had gone a long period of being sleep-deprived.

He is nothing though compared to the catastrophically bad Donna D'Errico, who has no presence and is supremely irritating. Again, the characters are uninteresting and unrootable, with motivations that are either vague or illogical (both at times too). The dialogue is repetitive and long-winded, with the cheesiness far too much that you feel like you're being assaulted by it.

The story is the biggest problem, and for the same reasons that doomed the storytelling of 'Farewell to the Flesh'. The complete lack of risks and originality further adds to the constant feeling felt throughout the film "why does this exist?" Furthermore there is no tension, suspense or dread, killed by a deadeningly sluggish pace, the mind-numbing and quite insulting stupidity and everything being so predictable. Not only does it feel watered/dumbed down because of this lack of atmosphere, but the over-reliance of cheap-looking gore gives the film a cynical, mean-spirited edge and cheapens the atmosphere.

To conclude, despite not caring for the second film this was even worse and something of a disgrace to Barker. 2/10 Bethany Cox

A chore to watch, from its abrupt start to its lazy finish

[aidanratesmovies · 2/10 · 2 July 2021]

An incredibly dull muttled mess, Candyman 3 Day of the Dead somehow manages to be even worse than the second film- while also somehow having nearly no plot at all. This film is a complete mess, and honestly at times I didn't even know what was going on, or supposed to be going on. The editing in this film is atrocious, as if they shot a bunch of random scenes and filled in the gaps as best they could before the film finished wrapping. The acting is atrocious, especially from lead actress Donna D'Errico who is unfortunately just about one of the most needlessly oversexualized characters I have ever seen in film. The script is a mess of cliches, dull writing, and incredibly dumb twists. There are so many predictable moments throughout that it proves to be quite frustrating, not to mention they use footage from the same scene nearly 5 times throughout the course of the film when they really didn't even need to use it once. The kill scenes are hilariously bad, forced, and unnecessary- and the film itself is so tonely confused and mean spirited that its a wonder how they even finished the script to begin with. It's more entertaining than the last film, but hardly enough to gain the ironic fun as many bad horror movies are capable of. In the end, Candyman Day of the Dead is one huge disaster of a finale and truly one of the worst sequels ever made.

My Rating: 2/10.

Candyman Day of the Dead: Further reason why Candyman faded away

[Platypuschow · 4/10 · 3 December 2017]

The Candyman returns once again to torment and kill a distant relative for further undisclosed or vague reasons.

This time it's Baywatch alumni Donna D'Errico taking the lead and boring the hell out of us for the films 90 minute duration.

Granted this is a marginal step up from Farewell To The Flesh (1995) but still spotlights why the Candyman franchise died such a death.

I've never understood how Tony Todds Candyman became so iconic, how do people place him alongside the likes of Freddy, Leatherface and Jason when he had just 3 rather mediocre films to his name.

I'd like to see Candyman reborn, whether a 4th film or a reboot I don't mind but we a) Need Todd to remain the titular role and b) New writers.

The Good:

Wade Williams

Donna D'Errico is far better here than I've seen her before

The Bad:

Plot is still pretty messy

Things I Learnt From This Movie:

Remaking the origin scene and making it different makes about as much sense as nipples on men

Donna D'Errico is allergic to bra's

Even worse than Candyman 2

[filmbuff1970 · 4/10 · 24 May 2002]

I liked the first one.the second was poor and not helped by the narration by a DJ.This is far worse with a very low budget,a terrible script.and for a horror film minus scares chills and thrills.The acting is bad and the movie is just rubbish.1 out of 10

Not bad, but not anywhere near as good as the first

[BandSAboutMovies · 5/10 · 21 December 2021]

Many years ago, the agency I worked at had the account for the Pittsburgh Public Theater and was doing an ad for August Wilson's King Hedley II. Tony Todd was in the lead and the team working on it couldn't figure out who should do the voice-over for the commercial. I pushed really hard for them to consider Tony Todd to be in the commercial and despite being the youngest writer on staff, I pushed myself hard to get to write it.

Somehow, I made it happen.

When it came time to record the commercial, I was told - in no uncertain terms - to not mention any horror films that Tony Todd was in. He was a real actor.

Todd was excited to record the commercial, as he was excited to be in Wilson's play, so it all worked out. We were to take him to lunch, then the record and somehow, I got to go to that as well.

We were ten feet down Penn Avenue and someone yelled, "Hey Candyman!"

Todd instantly laughed and walked over to greet the fan warmly.

"I was told not to bring that up," I said.

"Ah, man. It's cool. Those movies have done a lot for me. The first one is great. And the second one, well, you do the sequel, right? And the third one, well, my daughter has college..." he laughed.

Let me tell you, there's nothing more amazing than hearing Tony Todd read your words. Seriously, he was a one-take machine, even on a :60 radio commercial.

There's also nothing more frightening than hearing Tony Todd's voice order a salad.

The film takes place in 2020, twenty-five years after the events of Candyman: Farewell to the Flesh, and artist Miguel Velasco is putting on a Candyman-themed gallery show. If this sounds like the 2021 Candyman, well...

One of the people that comes to the show is Annie Tennant's daughter Caroline (Playboy Playmate of the Month September 1995 Donna D'Errico), who is a direct descendant of the legendary killer. She says his name five times and soon Miguel and his girlfriend Lena (Rena Riffel, Penny from Showgirls and the director, writer, producer and editor of Showgirls 2: Penny's from Heaven) are dead from the hook of the Candyman.

Annie has died, a victim of the Candyman in her old age, but before her death, she told Caroline to destroy the myth. The man blamed for the killings, David, falls for her and takes her to meet his clairvoyant grandmother, who informs our heroine that she must find the good within Candyman to destroy the evil.

But what if Candyman isn't just a supernatural force? What if he's someone else?

Candyman 3: Day of the Dead is better than I thought it was when I came back to watch it again. It's nowhere near as good as the proceeding two films, but it's still an enjoyable watch.

Also - I love Tony Todd because when Lionsgate wanted to make a Candyman and Leprechaun crossover, he shot it down instead of taking the money. Thanks for being the best, Mr. Todd.

Far better than it's reputation

[kannibalcorpsegrinder · 8/10 · 31 October 2014]

Taunted by numerous stories and rumors over the years, a woman's attempts to disprove the Candyman legend inadvertently releases him upon her friends and forces her to try to stop him from continuing on.

This actually turned out to be quite a bit of fun and is much better than expected. One of the better elements here is the fact of this one managing to tie in the family legacy incredibly well, perhaps even better than any of the other entries throughout here. The relationship itself is one thing, but bringing in the visions of the mother as well as the connection through them makes this one so entertaining and manages to really connect this one quite well. That brings up the main storyline point here with this one brining the blood and gore through some rather inventive and enjoyable encounters here. The more chilling and enjoyable ones are based on the nightmares so this one's more thrilling moments come from the supernatural elements like the opening attack in the bathroom, the confrontation with the deformed mother coming from the bloody tub despite being in the public bathroom and the finale in his hive-home for the final struggle causes this one a lot of fun as this all comes off as exciting, extended action scenes build around pretty big scares. Other scares, as in the patrol car ambush or the gallery attack show-off the ability of this one to use the supernatural antics in the real works do it makes for a series of pretty intriguing and chilling scenes that also bring about some nice fore as well. It does have a few flaws, the main one being the rather overdone manner where the killer's targets toward the main victim here spends the whole film tormenting them instead of actually doing something about it. Despite the repeated claims of wanting her as one of the victims, he never really makes any effort to go after her and instead utilizes the psychological torment of going after her friend and family to get the job done which really makes no sense since he clearly has plenty of time to go after her instead. Otherwise, this one comes off just fine as it is.

Rated R: Graphic Violence, Graphic Language, Nudity, and a brief, mild sex scene.

This is an absolute must see, but a step down from the first two

[kevin_robbins · 6/10 · 18 August 2021]

Candyman 3: Day of the Dead (1999) is currently available on Hulu. The storyline for this picture involves The Candyman tracking down one of his descendants and trying to convince her to join him in eternity. He will try to frame her for a series of murders so she has no choice. Can she escape the Candyman? This movie is directed by Turi Meyer (episodes of Buffy and Smallville) and stars Tony Todd (Candyman), Donna D'Errico (Brooklyn Nine-Nine), Alexia Robinson (Total Recall) and Lupe Ontiveros (As Good as it Gets). The storyline buildup in this one was pretty average, primarily because the main character's acting was horrific. The gore was still pretty solid and Todd was awesome as always. I actually really liked how this movie ended. The first 2/3rds of the movie was blah but the last 1/3rd was pretty solid and worthwhile. Overall this is an absolute must see, but a step down from the first two. I'd score this a 6/10 and recommend seeing at least once.

'Bee' my victim.....

[FlashCallahan · 1/10 · 12 February 2012]

The ghostly serial killer returns once again from beyond the grave this time to haunt a Los Angeles art gallery owner named Caroline McKeever, a distant relative of the Candyman.

In order for him to claim her soul so she will be next to him, the Candyman goes about killing all those associated with Caroline in the usual gory ways with his hook and making it appear to the authorities that Caroline is the one responsible for the killings....

Tony Todd said in an interview in 2003 that he didn't really care for this movie.

And I wonder why? This film has to be one of the worse sequels ever to such a good first movie, and sadly, even from watching it from a 'straight to DVD third movie, so it could be cheesy fun' angle, the film has no redeeming qualities to it.

First off, the lead actress D'errico (the one from baywatch) has the most annoying scream in the world,and soon you wish she had a hook in her throat.

Secondly, Todd looks beyond bored, and in some scenes, it's as if he has had a drink, because words cannot explain his facial expressions.

It's plot is ripped from the first movie, right down to the best friend, and the inclusion of a silly twist at the end, makes the film even more ludicrous.

It's not even a film you can laugh at. It's one of those movies you will find yourself giving dirty looks, and hating yourself for watching it.

A couple of good slasher scenes, plenty of cleavage and a poor ending.

[bilbobanta · 24 November 2000]

Did this film really have a chance at beating the hook stabbing prequels? I was pleasantly surprised at how good the follow up to the first was, however the third...well.

After avoiding this movie for ages, not wanting to be disappointed, I finally popped by my local video shop ( I may have gone to see it at the flicks if I had been given the chance ). Sat down with a mate who hadn't seen the others and watched him squirm, not from the horror but from boredom.

A poor low budget remake of the others this certainly was. A gripping glorious gore fest this was not.

We now find that Candyman had time to do a couple of sketches of his voluptuous lover (he's no Picasso) during his slave(?) days. Thankgod the writers kept his horrible demise the same.

Well I wasn't expecting the Earth, but how about a complete self parody instead of this, at least we could have laughed aloud in the correct places, like Scream. Was it supposed to be funny?

Some good ideas: an insensitive lover who had to get it, a subway scene that didn't stand a chance against 'American werewolf' but was still enjoyable, a great cop death and plenty of honey.

Okay it was bearable. Just. Maybe they'll repair the damage with another; until then I'll conveniently forget this one. Watch the others again instead.

Instantly forgettable sequel rehashes the first film's plot

[Leofwine_draca · 4/10 · 21 December 2015]

And so we have the second sequel to a film that worked best as a stand-alone horror outing. Clive Barker's mix of fairytale and the macabre made 1992's CANDYMAN a splendid little movie, evocative and atmosphere and a breath of fresh air amidst the latest NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET or Friday THE 13TH sequel. Sadly, the rules of movie money-making never change, and so two unnecessary sequels followed that added absolutely nothing to the story and served only to besmirch the original's reputation.

CANDYMAN 3: DAY OF THE DEAD offers by way of story a straightforward repeat of the first film's plot: a young woman is haunted by a ghostly killer who nobody else believes exists. She's subsequently blamed for the murders carried out by this ghost, and she must find a way to stop it before either a) she goes mad, b) she faces a life in prison or c) she herself dies. The law of diminishing returns means that everything on screen is a lesser imitation of that which has come before, and the excruciatingly predictable script means that there's nothing in the way of originality or genuine scares here.

Director Turi Meyer had little experience of filmmaking before this, but the direction can't really be faulted – even if it is a little bland. No, the biggest problem lies in the casting of former Baywatch starlet Donna D'Errico as the heroine. D'Errico is a horrible actress, excruciating when it comes to her 'fear' scenes, and she's just paraded around in a variety of tight-fitting vest tops and knickers. Nice body, shame about the talent. The supporting cast are all very bland, with the exception of the sorely underused Ernie Hudson, Jr. – son of the GHOSTBUSTERS actor – who seems to have inherited some of his dad's talent. And then there's Tony Todd, who is menacing and brilliant as the Candyman, and the only real reason to watch this. Todd is one of those actors generally stuck in B-movies who always give a decent performance, and Danny Trejo is another. He isn't required to do anything other than stand around and whisper 'be my victim' but he even does that well.

There are some repetitive gore sequences here, generally involving people being impaled by Candyman's hook, as well as a plethora of nude scenes in a bid to attract some (male) attention. Sadly, these don't distract from the crappy script and general tired air surrounding the proceedings. CANDYMAN is a good film, but the sequels are best forgotten about.

Candyman: Day of the Dead

[Scarecrow-88 · 3/10 · 30 August 2016]

Candyman's ancestor, Caroline (Donna D'Errico) is an artist in Boyle Heights, LA, allowing her great grandfather's paintings to be shown in a gallery in the hopes of highlighting the man not the myth. But her gallery presenter (the building is his) wants to instead publicize the myth in order to call attention to the show and orchestrate potential revenue. Miguel (Mark Adair-Rios) urges Caroline to look into a mirror and say Candyman's name five teams if she doesn't believe in the myth, and through this action appears to have genuinely resurfaced him from whatever beyond he belongs. An actor hired by Miguel, David (Jsu Garcia; A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984)), appears as a Candyman nut with hook hand to scare up the attendees and Caroline as a pub stunt. When Miguel and a model (Rena Riffel) are found murdered thanks to the Candyman, Caroline (she found them) becomes a possible suspect, but David is specifically under suspicion. When Caroline's actress roommate / pal (Alexia Robinson) is gutted by the Candyman and literally dropped her in her arms, she becomes the official arrest for the supernatural killer's crimes. Meanwhile, Candyman calls out for Caroline to come to him, take her own life, and join him (wherever that is). A racist cop (Wade Williams) with a short fuse temper is out to get Caroline for the murder of his partner (yet another given the hook-gut treatment). It will all culminate in some old warehouse where the paintings stolen from Caroline's gallery and Candyman await. It seems there's a Candyman cult in LA who want to summon him, having showed up at the gallery and become totally enthralled by the mythos.

Plot is a mess, too much of Candyman yapping constantly in one visit to Caroline after another, a significant interest (not that this bothered me too much) in showing lead Donna D'Errico's bust and walking around scantily clad, diminishing results in the special gore effects this go-around, and a laughable finale where all it takes is tearing up a painting of Candyman in order to harm him; Candyman: Day of the Dead is a pitiful proclamation that the series was not on life support as much as totally flatlined. No atmosphere or a Philip Glass score to save it this time. Todd owns this character and even if tasked to talk too much instead of smoothly emerging in and out of the story (less is more was always beneficial in letting Todd be appreciated when he appears instead of getting him as much as possible to the point where the power in seeing him deteriorates), the actor still has a presence and chemistry that is undeniable. The use of bees to suffocate Riffel and how they emerge from Todd's mouth and rotted torso are a bit much. Much like Pinhead, a series of films which feature Candyman gradually rusted his sinister sheen. D'Errico is definitely nice to look at, and her tight T-shirts emphasize her impressive chest while her performance always seemed secondary in importance. Virginia Madsen she is not. Major sin: not making the Day of the Dead more colorful and alive a backdrop, even though D'Errico goes through a crowd while Wade Williams gave chase with police behind him. D'Errico constantly fainting and collapsing every time Candyman is close becomes more than a bit tiresome. While Todd's made a lot worse than this (the 2000s became a decade where he would take whatever role would come his way), Candyman: Day of the Dead marked a disappointing conclusion to the franchise (it started out so well, too). Sadly the end of the 90s led a decline in quality parts Todd would be offered after. Williams, as the cop from hell, is clearly a purposely abusive and overtly violent dirtbag representing bigots on the force in LA. When the very first scene has D'Errico in short shirt and panties walking into a bathroom, it is obvious the film will desperately beg for the audience's attention...her figure certainly doesn't hurt.

Are you kidding me?

[mrashtastic89 · 1/10 · 8 March 2021]

Where do I start? No characters at all, writing that makes me cringe, sequences where I'm like: What is happening, and an idiotic story. The one star I gave it is for Tony Todd, aka the only good part of this movie.

easily the weakest of the franchise

[disdressed12 · 3/10 · 26 May 2008]

while i actually liked the first two Candyman movies,i didn't' like this third and(so far Final)installment.i found it boring and repetitive and i didn't like the story very much.there's a lot of filler here,which suggests to me that the filmmakers didn't have enough of a story for a complete movie.i also wasn't too impressed with the acting.there was a lot of overwrought theatrics.as well,there were some things in this movie that did not fit with the previous movies,basically throwing out certain aspects of the lore.maybe i'm just imagining things,but this is my opinion on things.finally,this movie has none of the style of the second movie.adding it all up,this third installment in the series is much lower in quality on all counts.my vote for Candyman 3:Day of the dead is a 3/10

How could anyone condone this Schlock??

[CoBEn2000 · 1/10 · 1 July 2000]

This movie was truly horrible. How anyone could compare this to the other 2 is beyond my scope of imagination. Farewell to the flesh was by FAR the best one of the series as it explained the story behind Candyman very thoroughly. This movie was mindless T&A and nothing more; Donna D. couldn't act her way out of a paper bag with her overacting and inability to wear a BRA!! There's one scene where she thinks her friend is being attacked and I had to laugh cause it sounded so bad (turns out the friend was just 'acting'). The plot was taken almost directly from the last 2 movies, different actors and loads of unnecessary boob shots (I don't think ANYone wore a bra in this movie) The scary and ominous voice of Tony Todd has been replaced with what sounds like a cheap effect discarded from Lion King. The only thing that I can credit this movie for is the gore, it lived up to its predecessors. There's also one scene during the festival when a cop is running after Donna, it seems reminiscent of another movie....oh yeah Double Jeapordy!! wow where do these people get their ideas, I sincerely hope this is the LAST Candyman movie cause they destroyed it with this one.

The franchise that should have ended in 1992...

[paul_haakonsen · 3/10 · 16 September 2021]

Granted, as I was not particularly impressed with the 1992 "Candyman" or the 1995 "Candyman: Farewell to the Flesh" movies, then I wasn't really holding much of any hopes or expectations to the 1999 movie "Candyman: Day of the Dead". Yet, I sat down to watch it, since I hadn't already seen it, plus I was going through the back catalogue in order to warm up to sitting down to watch the 2021 remake later on today.

And just as I had expected, then the 1999 movie "Candyman: Day of the Dead" from writers Alfredo Septién and Turi Meyer was as bad as the predecessor. So the franchise wasn't really seeing a much needed uplift with this third movie in the installment. And "Candyman: Day of the Dead" was a pretty dull and boring experience. Again with the horror elements being almost non-existing throughout the course of the entire storyline.

And I didn't really understand why the writers went back to made changes to the backstory of the Candyman character. Sure, this was an urban legend, so of course it could be subject to changes in between the travel from mouth to mouth. But come on, you don't re-write a backstory like that.

I wasn't particularly impressed with "Candyman: Day of the Dead", much less entertained by what director Tury Meyer churned out with this semi-pungent slap to the face of a movie.

The best thing about "Candyman: Day of the Dead", and we all know that, is simply Tony Todd's impressive frame, appearance and voice.

My rating of "Candyman: Day of the Dead" lands on a bland three out of ten stars.

Weakest link in the Candyman chain.

[DigitalRevenantX7 · 3/10 · 2 December 2015]

Caroline McKeever is the last surviving descendant of Daniel Robitaille – the infamous hook-wielding ghost known as the Candyman. Living in Los Angeles, Caroline agrees to have an art exhibition featuring Daniel's paintings & even lets the host use the "Candyman" legend to spice up the show. But she accidentally invokes the Candyman, who proceeds to kill everyone around her in order to force her to surrender to him.

CANDYMAN was one of the 1990s' sleeper hits & an exceptionally well-made film, although it wasn't without its flaws. It spawned two sequels, the first of which was CANDYMAN: FAREWELL TO THE FLESH, a passable sequel of sorts. Candyman: Day of the Dead is the third & final film in the trilogy & follows the series tradition of having a similar plot to the first two.

Candyman: Day of the Dead is probably the weakest link in the Candyman chain. It uses the same tactic that the first two films used, of making a whole heap of false jumps in order to attempt to soften the viewers up. This tactic only worked in the original because we weren't expecting anything to happen, but became overused in Farewell to the Flesh to the point that it nearly collapsed under the strain. Day of the Dead, on the other hand, attains some minor atmosphere & a couple of good moments – particularly the part where Donna D'Errico is forced to climb over the body of a dead cop killed by Candyman while in handcuffs & inside a parked police cruiser.

But with that said, Candyman: Day of the Dead is a shoddy piece of work. The first two films were equally visceral & intellectual but this one uses cheap T&A & a heroine who spends most of the time in her underwear in order to appeal to the lesser discerning horror fans – the same type of fans who relish Roger Corman-styled cheapies with the same formula. In addition to that, the film's formula of the Candyman stalking his relatives is getting a little worn out by this point.

I was never expecting this sequel to make anything new with the formula & was going into it with little expectation. Well, I got exactly what I thought I would get, although the film's chances were lifted a little by the level of ethnic Hispanic culture used in the film. That was an interesting ploy that elevates the film slightly. And I still laugh at the exceptionally long stump arm that Tony Todd's hook-wielding ghost has. Although it is probably due to the series' exceptionally well-conceived concept that I still can't bring myself to try the "Candyman" chant in front of a mirror.

Good Gore, Bad Acting

[Sham33 · 8/10 · 21 July 2007]

Oh, how can I star? This movie was so awful. I love the first two Candyman movies, they were creepy, scary and they had a plot. In this third installment there is no good acting. Donna D'Enrico should leave her career. I was very sick of hearing her stupid screaming. The only one right in this movie was Tony Todd. Oh, and Tony Todd said in some interview that Candyman 3 was a load of crap. Leaving the awful acting, the stupid ending and almost everything about this movie behind, it was OK. Imean, I liked the gore and the performance by Tony Todd. God, they even missed the excellent soundtrack by Phillip Glass. Bad, bah, bad sequel. I know it was inevitable, but now they should make a Candyman 4 to end the story, cause it's a shame that THIS CRAP was the end of the series. But, what can I say? What's the end of the series in Halloween, Hellraiser and The Texas Chainsaw Massacre? They have been remade cause those series had no salvation. Look at Halloween: Resuurrection, Hellraiser: Hellworl and Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Next Generation. If you want a creepy, scary well-done movie, just watch the original Candyamn, and then if you liked it, go watch Candyman: Farewell to the Flesh, but stop right there. Candyman 3 is a big mess: 3/10

Bee-lieve.

[BA_Harrison · 6/10 · 6 August 2013]

The first Candyman movie was a classy slice of pure horror based on an original story by celebrated author of the macabre Clive Barker; Day of the Dead, the third film in the series, is pure trash from the writer of Leprechaun 2 and Sleepstalker—but that's not to say I didn't enjoy it…

Curvaceous, platinum blonde Baywatch babe Donna D'Errico is the star, and she spends the entire film in outfits specifically chosen to best show off her physical attributes (opening with a scene in which she is wearing only panties and a tight vest). D'Errico's amazing bod isn't the only good thing about the film, though: several other women also get their clothes off, including the tasty daughter of a confederate colonel who gets it on with Tony Todd, and a slutty model who covers her boobs in honey and gets stung to death by bees. In addition to the gratuitous female nudity, there's also a fair amount of gore, a gang of hilariously naff punk Candyman cultists, D'Errico in a ball gag tied to a chair, and Tony Todd hamming it up for all he's worth. It might not be art, but it sure ain't boring.

Worst of the series

[damienj-46746 · 5/10 · 9 February 2022]

This is definitely the worst film in the series but not the worst film ever. The story is still (at least) somewhat interesting and even the the execution it lacking, it still tries to explore worthy topics that are still relevant today.

An ok end to the Candyman saga...

[mrbean_83 · 30 December 2001]

For some reason, the third part of a trilogy always disappoints me, if only slightly. And that's just what Candyman 3: Day of the Dead does: slightly, not heavily, disappoints.

It seems that Caroline (the now-grown-up daughter of Annie from the second film) is on her in LA. She owns Daniel Robetaille's (the Candyman) paintings which she has chosen to show at the gallery of an aspiring artist.

Tempted by her friends, she says the Candyman's name five times because she feels she'll be doing him justice by proving his supposed non-existence. Although nothing happens while she is at the gallery opening, her life later begins to unravel as she finds the vengeful spirit slaughtering everyone around her (he killed her mother years before), with only Caroline appearing to be suspect.

Co-produced by Tony Todd, this somewhat hokey (and hopefully FINAL) entry to the Candyman films is not that bad. Although I consider anything to outwit its bland and tepid predecessor, this is not much better with acting (Donna D'Errico's Caroline is a shrieking wimp at best), and our heroine seems to exist only to scream, fill out a tank top, and see her friends slaughtered in extremely gory fashion.

The Latin "Day of the Dead" festival has almost no relevance in this film, as its concept is only used in one scene I can think of, but then again, it wouldn't have been wise to just call this entry "Candyman 3" and leave it at that. Let's hope after this fairly decent entry that film makers will do what they should...leave it at that.

Rating: **1/2 out of ****