It's a good bad... and worth a popcorn matinée. While it's easy to lament what could have been...

By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

The movie turns out to be a little better than the average. Starting from a romantic formula often seen in the cinema, it ends in the most predictable (and somewhat bland) way.

And unnecessary sequel to a great 80s family movie. It was inevitable that following the success of a "Three Men And A Baby" that a sequel would follow. It was also inevitable that the sequel would be of inferior quality. Plot In A Paragraph: The three men (Peter, Michael, and Jack) are back and are still living with Mary, who is now five, and her mother, Sylvia. The group is split up when Sylvia announces that she is marrying an Englishman and that they intend to move to England after the wedding, taking Mary with them. The first movie had plenty of laughs and charm, this one is almost laugh free, and is vastly inferior.Tom Selleck has a certain charm but he will always be a poor mans version of Burt Reynolds. Ted Danson plays Sam Malone (from Cheers) just with a different name, which is no bad thing as he brings the movies one funny line. When Peter (Selleck) is shooting down every potential husband for Sylvia, Jack snaps "Jesus Peter!! We're not asking you to marry him!!" And every time I see Steve Guttenberg I can't help but wonder what happened to him and his career.

If there is anything we know its that perfect 80's comedies deserve at least one sequel. 3 Men and a Little Lady is the perfect epilogue to the original film. We get to see where everyone from the first film is and how their life ends up and it was well written and worthy. It didn't feel just like a cash in which it probably was. The first film was more of a comedy than this sequel. Certainly there are still some funny moments but this one has much more drama and romance than the first and that's okay. It works very well and we needed more character development from the three Dad's and from Sylvia who gets a full character in this one. I felt like with the first movie it was just full of 80's clichés and popular culture and I couldn't help but notice that this movie didn't have that vibe. Granted the movie was made in 1990 which is outside of the 80's window but somehow I didn't feel like it had quite the style the first one had. I suppose, they made the movie under the pretense that everyone already knew the characters and they didn't need to rehash who they were and what they did for a living and that is probably a wise choice on their part.Tom Selleck, Steve Guttenberg, and Ted Danson are back and in full swing in their old roles. The three of them still have great chemistry and are a little older, a little wiser and a little more mature this time around. Their personalities aren't quite as vibrant as the first film but they are who they were the first time around and that is a compliment. They don't outdo each other and they are great together. Nancy Travis returns as Sylvia but as a main character. I can't figure out why they chose to make her "English." Travis' accent is okay at best and its distracting. There is really no reason to make her British other than her return to England which they could have done easily in another way. Still she is good and has good chemistry with everyone. Robin Weisman, who never did much of anything else, is downright terrific as Mary. She's appropriately adorable and does a great job. Christopher Cazenove is our pseudo-villain looking to break up the beloved foursome. Cazenove is the perfect 80's comedy villain and he carries out his role very well.Taking over from Leonard Nimoy at the directing duties is the amazing Emile Ardolino. I say amazing in particular because of his duties directing the classic (one of my favourites) Dirty Dancing but also classic comedy Sister Act. He tells a great story and you can tell he wanted this to be much more than just a run of the mill sequel. It is fun and worthy and lives up the popularity of the first one. The two movies together make up a classic little series that must be seen. I for one would be thrilled to see them do a third part even more than twenty years later as long as they put as much work into it as they did the first two films. 7.5/10

This movie would have to be one of my all-time favourites. I watched it religiously as a child, and it had become a security blanket for me all the way through to adulthood. Whenever I am feeling down or out of place, this film always makes me feel good. The three men are all fantastic in their own way, and little Mary is just gorgeous. It has humour, romance and drama and it is just a really easy movie to watch. No matter how many times I see it, I still laugh at Ms Lomax and get teary at the happy ending. I also love the first film but this sequel far surpasses it. Highly recommended for people of all ages who just want to feel good. Oh, and I love the music in it.

This expected sequel is a change in comic direction from the first film, although its not enough to bring "Little Lady" up to the standard of '87's big hit.Baby 'Mary' has grown up now, and at five years old she's about to start school. However the story revolves this time around her mom, who is looking for the ideal husband and father to marry. 'Peter' (Tom Selleck) hopes it will be him, but he can't bring himself to tell her so.The new format, romantic comedy, brings fewer laughs and fast becomes quite predictable. None of the lead players do much, and if not for Fiona Shaw, who delivers some hilarious scenes as headmistress Elspeth Lomax, "Three Men and a Little Lady" would not have been much at all.Sunday, February 21, 1993 - T.V.