VeteranLight I don't have all the words right now but this film is a work of art.

Console best movie i've ever seen.

Derry Herrera Not sure how, but this is easily one of the best movies all summer. Multiple levels of funny, never takes itself seriously, super colorful, and creative.

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

InaneSwine Utterly shocking, one of the worst film sequels ever made. Not only does it have virtually nothing to do with the other two films, it doesn't even work as a standalone film. It conforms to every zombie film cliché around. God only knows what the fourth one will be like. REC 3 is absolutely terrible.

Daniel Rodrigues First of all, I like to state that I'm a "sucker" for zombie movies... Always been, always will be...It was with great expectation that I received this one. I loved REC and REC2, and I thought "Wow, nice... REC3... man, this is awesome". After watching it, this were my thoughts: 1. It's not REC material. The story-line takes a curve, here. The only connection to REC, is the dog, that bit the vet.2. There's only a short sequence filmed in "first person view", or shoulder cam. After that, the whole movie is filmed "third person view", the normal way.3. Yes, the movie is a bit of a "let down" compared to it's predecessors, and even to it's successor, but, then again, if you compare this movie to Hollywood-garbage from the last decade, this one is a jewel, a work of art. It should be rated slightly below Dawn of the Dead (the remake - I don't compared anything to the classic zombie flicks from the 70s and the 80s, because those were 10 out of 10 indeed), or even Shaun of the Dead, but still, it is superior to Land of the Dead, Zombieland, Scout's Guide to Survive a Zombie Apocalypse, and even Dead Rising Watchtower and Dead Rising Endgame - keep in mind that I enjoyed every one of those movies.So, try to watch this putting it's title in the "back of your mind", and watch it without making any connections to REC franchise, and you will certainly have a very nice time... This movie, for me, a serious 7.

american_hxc 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.

packor If you're expecting a movie similar to Rec 1 and Rec 2, you won't find it here. This movie is a gore movie made as a side story to Rec. It contributes nothing to the Rec story and only uses the Rec "zombies" as a basis. In fact, this movie resembles a B movie more than anything else. It has meager amounts of gore, adventure, romance, and comedy, and doesn't specialize in any of them.The movie is fairly enjoyable, as a non-serious film. It basically revolves around a crazy newly wed couple inside a mini-wedding- zombie-apocalypse. This couple does all sorts of extremely crazy things for the sake of staying together with their beloved. The bride, in particular, was wild and fun to watch; while the groom more like a desperate man who would do anything for his wife.I do have a complain to make about this movie. Just like Rec 2, this movie is severely lacking... in sense. For Rec 3, the directors threw all sense out the window. At the very beginning of the film, it is made clear where the source of this particular infestation comes from. It is from the Groom's uncle, who was bitten at the vet's the PREVIOUS day(and I say previous, because the wedding starts early in the day, and if you were going to attend an all-day wedding, you have no business going to the vet's early in the morning. He also got bitten by a "dead" dog, which means that the vet massacre had already occurred before he got there). Following Rec's logic, it takes less than an hour for any infected person to "zombify". Yet the uncle does not turn until night time, which is at least 18 hours after being infected. Then, after recording one of his uncle in his transformation phase, a teen immediately goes inside to record the party. Only minutes later, the uncle begins the zombie attack, and then a bunch of other zombies appear from outside for no reason. It is completely illogical for the uncle, who hadn't even finished turning, to be able to convert so many humans and proceed into the building in a mere few minutes.Onto the knight rescue operation. His assistant throws on chainmail and took a shield and yet does not even pick up any form of weapon, which is totally ridiculous. At the control room, he takes off his helmet and used his mace, and does not bother to bring them with him when he leaves the room. I'm sure he still had his sanity with him, so there's no reason how he could be so stupid that he forgets to re-equip himself.Finally, the PA system scene. His ability to suppress the zombies is all well and good, but I find it seriously hard to believe that there are speakers scattered throughout the whole front courtyard.Though there are plenty more logic mistakes in this film than Rec 2, they matter much less and aren't really an annoyance. The newly wed's antics are fun to watch, and it doesn't get boring. Neither the gore nor action are outstanding. If you want to waste some time with a silly movie, this movie will fit the bill. If you're looking for a serious watch, then you will be disappointed.