Good story, Not enough for a whole film

good back-story, and good acting

To all those who have watched it: I hope you enjoyed it as much as I do.

Strong acting helps the film overcome an uncertain premise and create characters that hold our attention absolutely.

Again Like Highlander II, don't look at this like a sequel, only a stand alone, nice beautiful story, nice scenery, nice music, beautiful well done.

If you are sitting down to watch Highlander 3, I will assume you have already watched at least one of the previous films and know what to expect.If for some reason this is your first Highlander film then. Welcome, pull up a chair, grab some popcorn, a tasty beverage and prepare yourself for a poor film, poorly written, poorly acted and full of effects that are far from special.The best part of the film is the guy who has been trapped in a cave for 400 years but has no problem living in the world of 1994. Make a list of the things he does in 90's New York with no problem despite being from 16th century Japan.This film might have been good if it was trimmed down and turned into an episode of the Highlander TV show but then again, maybe not.Featured on Episode 58 of The Emerald Reprobates Podcast

Connor McLeod, the immortal highlander, seeks out an immortal master of illusion in order to learn the magician's art. He is unknowingly followed by an evil immortal, Kane, who want Connor's head. They fight and Connor gets away while Kane is trapped in a cave. Now in the present Connor's peace is destroyed once again as the evil Kane is released from his imprisonment and the struggle of the Gathering begins again. Using Connor's loved ones and his acquired powers of illusion, Kane lures Connor in for a fight where there can be only one winner.....So according to this movie, the second one didn't exist, and Connor is back on his own, and for some reason he has a son.I can't see why they ignored the second one, at least that has a talking point, and gets people irked for on reason or the other. This on the other hand is boring, and Peebles is so camp and over the top, he ruins the whole film.Lambert looks bored and misses Connery, and Unger, just does a diluted version of Madsen in part 2.I remember the poster for this in the UK 'Dazzling Special Effects' say Empire. I respect that magazine a lot, but whoa, we're they wrong with this. Even for 1994, they are the pits, Super Nintendo looked better than this.With this and the second one (which is gold compared to this)' this has to be one of the worst franchises ever made.It's ripe for a remake, and I hate remakes.

In my own words, I can say that this was a big improvement over Highlander 2. Its not as good as the first but a good solid entry into the Highlander saga. The story was OK, the cast was good, the special effects were still amazing and pretty much every way better than the previous crap movie. Christopher Lambert is back and he still has that glow for this character of Duncan Macleod. Now for the villain, Kane (not to be confused with the WWE superstar) he was a good villain but not as bad ass as Kurgan. Mario Van Peebles did a good job playing this relentless, cold-blooded, masochistic villain. Now for the female role, whoa! Deborah Unger! What can I say about her? Bold, Blonde, Beautiful and Banging! Now that's a major improvement over the other 2 female leads. (Not that it matters) Anyway, I do praise this movie for being a big improvement over the second film but its not as good as the original and others may not agree with me on this, but it is worth the time watching. This one was for the real highlander fans. Overall, 7 out of 10.