The Butterfly Effect 3: Revelations Reviews

Page 2 of 22
February 27, 2015
A very good movie and quite creepy and spooky too. Rachel's performance in this movie was so good that she deserved the Grammy of 2009. :)
January 17, 2015
Same shit, bad scooby doo resolution.
½ August 1, 2014
I think its silly that they can take concepts like this and make mediocre films out of them, and then sequels, and then the put the third one on a horror collection that your forced to watch.
½ May 8, 2014
Worst of the 3, and the second one sucked.
½ February 26, 2014
on its own not bad but as a sequel not so much
October 23, 2013
Actually surprisingly decent. Almost crosses over into horror, and I liked the surprise ending.
September 27, 2013
Interesting installment. The mystery and suspense aspect of the film are great. Surpasses the quality of the second film and consequently exceeds expectations.
March 31, 2013
such a bad movie, that does not scares and with a really bad plot that doesn“t explains itself very well and is really disappointing
March 10, 2013
After receiving new information regarding his girlfriend's murder, Sam attempts to use his time-shifting powers to save her, but his meddling in the past unleashes a ruthless serial killer instead. Now, he is caught in a deadly game of cat and mouse as each victim he tries to save in the past only leads to more deaths in the future. THE BUTTERFLY EFFECT 3 is more careless than ever when it comes to continuity, and presumes that any audience that is already willing to accept time-travel will blindly buy in to its many plot contrivances. While this is to be expected in a film of its type, the main problem is that there are no real clues left anywhere in time that help to identify the killer. The entire build has only been a set up for the cheap and unforgivable twist in the end. Add to that the weak overall performances from Chris Carmack and the rest of the cast, and it becomes that much easier to avoid THE BUTTERFLY EFFECT 3.

-Carl Manes
I Like Horror Movies
½ January 30, 2013
As with the second movie, the only thing that ties this to the original is the concept of "jumping" back in time. The story is fair and not too hard to figure out, however one nuance of the twist didn't occur to me. The acting is fair too. The effects on the poorer side (the blood looked like chocolate). Not really worth your time, but close.
½ January 30, 2013
Los actores son atractivos y hasta cierto punto la historia logra enganchar pero se torna tan laca y retorcida que es risible
½ November 10, 2011
Hate it never watching it again, it's not a good movie, the first one was a good film, I expected better, I don't want it on DVD, it starred Chris Carmack, Rachel Miner and Melissa "Miss Horrorfest 2007" Jones
½ December 30, 2012
So much better than 2 was. And considering I didn't have to take Ashton Kutcher seriously it may have even been better than 1. 1 had a lot of potential it didn't live up to. This one had less potential, but fulfilled what it had. The acting was essentially believable. The storyline was pretty predictable, but I wasn't bored. So. Yeah, I feel accomplished now that I've finished this series.
December 29, 2011
Did see it on You-Tube
Not Great
Just oke
Oeps , did see it allready , second time then ...still 3 stars
September 25, 2012
What if? What if? Ever since Kootcher came into the seen in 2004 I have been enthralled with these movies. These movies are very entertaining but seem to have a higher meaning to take away from them. This movie teaches something in my opinion and that is closer. A lot of people live their lives wondering what if? Holly Brix takes a pessimistic approach while giving the answer in this movie. I think the deeper meaning to take away from it is that everything happens for a reason. The twist at the end was predictable but still enjoyable. I look forward to seeing more Brixā(TM)s work. I also think she should retire the series so it does not get out of hand!
September 2, 2012
Fast paced and mostly interesting but its problems lie in the fact that all the pieces don't fit together by the end leaving you wondering if you missed something or the script had holes.
August 27, 2012
Not bad but shoudnt be called the butterfly effect 3
½ August 27, 2012
The Butterfly Effect series should not have gone past the first film. This movie was horrid, unstinting and unnecessary.
August 13, 2012
They've lost the concept...Not that I'm surprised but still. Even though it might have been to obvious if "he" had been the killer himself it would have still been better. And the happy happy ending is just messing it up more. The whole idea is that you can't make everything alright at least not if your ARE the one jumping.

And NO I don't buy the cliffhanger at all.

Why make this sequel? Why? The concept is, I'm sorry was thrilling and the first movie had (although weak) Matrix vibes.
Page 2 of 22