Lack of good storyline.

This movie was so-so. It had it's moments, but wasn't the greatest.

Clever and entertaining enough to recommend even to members of the 1%

The film may be flawed, but its message is not.

As many other reviewers have correctly pointed out, this film has little to do with the previous two films in the REC series. Taken as a standalone horror/comedy about zombies taking over a wedding, REC 3 is a fun -- if a tad forgettable -- trifle. There's a lot of great gags and the gore effects are the best of the series. The performances are generally believable and the pacing is good. Yes, compared to the other films in the series, it suffers. But REC 1 & 2 set a high bar and this is far superior to other titles in the subgenre.

First i have to say that i had a lot of fun watching the first two REC movies. Those are real horror movies and very well made. That third one tried to be a prequel and just failed miserably. In The entire movie i felt like watching some trashy generic zombie film with forced jokes and not scary at all! I mean, the first two REcs were breathtaking with lots of jump scares and very good acting.This movie has nothing to do with them, since there are 0 jump scares, cringeworthy terrible acting and a storyline that is boring as hell. Come on, praying is the answer for the zombie apocalypse?? Nevertheless, the focus of the movie was in the love of both main characters who were getting married. There is zero connection between the actors and the love you forever, babe ending was just... AAH! The goddamn bride suddenly embodies goddamn Leatherfce and gets crazy with the chainsaw, but when she sees her beloved husband suddenly gets retarded and is bitten by the deaf grandpa who is older than Trump and Hillary combined. The only possible positive point of REC 3 is that if this was a movie without the REC name in it, 1 or 2 times its kinda funny, because of Jack esponja, the only worthy character in the movie! So because of that i would give 1 and a half stars.

SPOILER ALERT: If for some reason you don't want this turd sandwich spoiled for you stop reading now. I need stress something: I created an IMDb account specifically to trash this soul staining piece of crap. So if you liked it or whatever, then trust me this review is not for you. First off let's talk about Rec 1 & 2. Rec 1 took what was more or less a generic "viral outbreak" premise and spiced it up by framing it as a found footage film. That's what made it work. The story itself is kind of one dimensional, but presenting it from the perspective of a camcorder gave it an intense intimacy that is missing from a lot of horror movies. It also didn't hurt that they did a great job with the casting, particularly with the lead Angela Vidal (Manuela Velasco). Not only that, but the final ten minutes are some the most bone chilling in cinematic history, delivering on the set up of the entire film with a great payoff. That's all I'm gonna say about Rec 1.Rec 2 is a solid sequel. It doesn't have the fire of the original, nor is it as well paced, but it is entertaining and at the very least it looks sharper than the first one. All in all these two are must see for any horror fan, and I would even recommend them to people who are just looking to see a good movie. And then we got Rec 3.I was willing to cut this movie some slack. Then the groom makes a huge show of kicking the wedding video dude's camera broken, I guess cause he doesn't want people seeing his wedding turn into a zombie fest (?!). The movie then switches to traditional cinematography. Mind you I had no idea beforehand that they were abandoning the hand held perspective. So you can imagine my shock. Before I go on, allow me to explain exactly how stupid of a move this was on the director's part. Literally the ONE THING that set the previous Rec movies apart from other zombie movies is that they were found footage. That was their core mechanic if you will; everything, from plot structure to framing, was designed around this concept. That's what made it so cool and refreshing. So I can't imagine WHY Paco Plaza thought it was at all a good idea to do away with that! Without the found footage hook, all you're left with is a generic zombie film! That's it! Anyway, so they switch to traditional shooting. Now there is a LOT wrong with this movie, but for me, by far the worst grievance was the look of the film. It's one thing that they decided to shoot the thing with a film camera, what is unacceptable is how unbelievably bad the quality of picture is. Rec 3 looks TERRIBLE. It looks like a freaking Funny or Die video. I'm not joking. This is like some Iphone quality looking stuff. It's disgusting. It becomes abundantly clear exactly the directors stuck to found footage with the first two movies, and it's because they have no idea how to make a film that doesn't look like a freaking Disney channel original movie. Actually some of those probably look even better.The rest of the things wrong with this movie are covered pretty well by the other reviews on here so I'll just cover them briefly.This is one of the most tonally inconsistent films I've ever seen. One minute it's dead serious, the next it's campier than a Joel Schumaker movie. This is almost NEVER a good idea for filmmakers to try, unless that is how you naturally tell a story (see: Edgar Wright, Sam Raimi) or something that you've practiced over time (Coen Brothers). In lesser hands, we get crap like this that has no idea what it wants to be, and ends up being nothing. Even with the ending, they couldn't decide whether to play it straight or not. This is perhaps best shown by one of the final moments, when the groom kisses his dying bride in what SHOULD be a touching gesture, only to have her rip out his ENTIRE tongue with her teeth. Yeah. Going back the setting, I have to say the more I think about it, the more I like the idea of a zombie wedding. It's a shame though, cause the director does absolutely nothing with it. There was potential to do a lot of interesting symbolic stuff, like maybe have the bride have to kill her dad to signify her "losing a father and gaining a husband". The whole thing could have even been a metaphor for how marriage effectively cuts you off from your family and you're left to fend for yourself and your new family in a dangerous world. Stuff like that. But no, none of that is explored and what we get is the most boring, risk averse horror movie to come along in some time.I'm sure there's more I'm missing but this review is getting long and thinking about this movie is giving me a headache. Suffice to say, this movie is awful. Only watch it if you're curious as to how bad it is, and even then for god's sake do NOT pay money for it. Also, just to end this on a positive note, Rec 4 succeeded in saving the franchise from oblivion, and since Rec 3 feature none of the original characters and takes place in a completely separate location, I'm cool with this being the god awful spin off nobody talks about.

First of all let me tell you that I get that some people don't like this one and that they are disappointed about the third movie in the "Rec" series. I totally get it in case you were expecting a same kind of movie as the first two. I also thought the first two were way better. Nevertheless I am still rating the third one as a good movie. Totally different maybe, but still an entertaining zombie movie with some great slashing moments. And that's what it is all about when I am watching an zombie/horror movie. Compared to other movies in this genre this one certainly stands out. Okay the story might be a bit lame but are most of the zombie movies not like that? And all the actors were good also, so I can't subtract any points for bad acting. I think it deserves more points for a movie in his genre. But again I get it if you were expecting a continuing story after Rec 1 and Rec 2 then you're going to be disappointed...