IMDb > Thr3e (2006) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Thr3e
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Thr3e More at IMDbPro »

Write review
Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 9:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [Next]
Index 90 reviews in total 

40 out of 61 people found the following review useful:

Cliff Notes Version of the Book

7/10
Author: rockerrchick from United States
7 January 2007

There is no way this film can be confused with other thrillers. It's the movie version of the book Thr3e by Ted Dekker. The book is excellent and this film is an attempt to tell the complex story of the book simply. Being a movie, there is less time for the detail which made the book especially clever, but the film does tell the story reasonably well. If you have read the book you will want to see this movie. I really enjoyed seeing the story I'd read play out on screen. In fact the look of the cast was so close to the way I'd imagined that it took me back to my experience reading. If you haven't read the book or you aren't a big reader you may want to get the book on tape or see the movie twice. It's hard to get all the details in one viewing. I took my husband who hasn't read the book and he was a bit confused at first. The book is certainly a must read if you like thrillers and for me this film was a must see.

Was the above review useful to you?

19 out of 26 people found the following review useful:

An excellent movie, despite the reviews

8/10
Author: Cleo Sombra from United States, PA
15 June 2008

The reviews will lead to believe that this is a bad movie. Maybe you will dislike it. But if you take their opinion alone, you are seriously missing out.

To sum it up quickly, the movie revolves around a guy who is being stalked by a killer. The killer leaves him vague riddles and short time limits to solve them.

The story is a lot more detailed than I can really explain, but it is not confusing to follow. I would like to point out now that this is not a horror movie. If you are looking for blood and gore and nothing else, then move on. But this is definitely a suspense "hold-your-breath" thriller. Because I accidentally read some spoilers before watching the movie, I already knew what was going to happen. But I still sat at the edge of my seat, wide-eyed and excited. This is a psychological thriller to the max.

Yes, this is a movie with Christian undertones, but for those of you who are turned off by that, don't be. Most of the religious blah blah dissipates in the first 10 or 15 minutes. Overall in the movie, I didn't think there was a lot of overdone religion in it - though just a hair less of it would have made the movie better.

As a horror fan and a thriller fan, I think you should really check this movie out. Don't expect gore and blood and you'll love it.

Despite the negative reviews on here, give the movie a chance. You'll thank me.

Was the above review useful to you?

30 out of 49 people found the following review useful:

Not what I Expected

3/10
Author: dgale-3 from United States
6 January 2007

Honestsly, I felt as though this movie was a let down. After reading some reviews I was under the impression it was a seat gripping thriller, while after seeing television reviews I believed it was a horror story. In all I expected some jumping, possible shock induced gasping/screaming, not too much gore (if any), etc. Yet none of that fell into place. I realize there wasn't much room for character development because that could ruin certain aspects of the film, but neglecting plot? Completely uncalled for. More often than not I found myself trying to predict in order to fill in gaps. It was like a high school production of a "horror" film; I could have laughed in more places than been intrigued or anxious. It seemed dated, low budget and had many ridiculous scenarios that go along with classic predictablity. It was a let down, a definite non-must see, and nothing you'd miss out on. Save you're $10.25 for lunch tomorrow.

Was the above review useful to you?

16 out of 28 people found the following review useful:

Good, but not great...

7/10
Author: slumbersix from United States
5 January 2007

We had the chance to catch a sneak preview of this movie last night. My wife is a huge Ted Dekker fan so we decided to take up the invite. I tried not to have my hopes too high after seeing some other book to movie translation but they got raised when there was a preview for this movie on the television the night before.

With those raised expectations I can say I was a bit disappointed with the movie yet I enjoyed the movie thoroughly.

The story was based on the book Thr3e by Ted Dekker. A man, Kevin, is being tormented and hunted by someone who wants him to confess his sin. Kevin grew up in a very dysfunctional house, found a sweet girl to run away to, and eventually wound up in a seminary trying to further his education. The movie was filled with explosions, suspense, and a who-done-it mystery.

The main thing that was disappointing was the filming and special effects. Some parts were just really choppy and seemed to not flow together. Then the special effects while good were not great. One scene in particular sticks out in my was when the building blew up. You saw flames and then all of a sudden you seen a bunch of rubble "materialize" in the flames.

I'd recommend seeing the movie. Enjoy the story for what it is but not expect great filming. It was an enjoyable film for the wife and I but I can't say how you'll enjoy it.

Was the above review useful to you?

18 out of 32 people found the following review useful:

No no no ...

1/10
Author: jo__fraser from Canada
6 January 2007

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This movie was horrible. I went in expecting nothing and came out getting exactly that.

My brother and I went to see this movie on a whim and foolishly believed that it would be good based on other reviews and the synopsis. All in all, it sounded like a good time - how could they mess this up? Well, they succeeded. The first half hour is severely disappointing to the point of wanting to leave - the characters are underdeveloped, you barely understand what is going on because they are so unnecessarily emotional (based on the circumstances), and no time is given for the viewer to fully connect with the characters in order to evoke some sympathy for them. The next hour of the movie is simply the same thing over and over - dude gets a phone call, something blows up ... dude gets a phone call, something blows up. I believe there is more than one way to kill a person, don't you? I certainly hope so.

The ending is somewhat original (although, I have seen it done before) and the only "exciting" part (or at least the only part I sat waiting to see what would happen) occurred when the protagonist's childhood was uncovered. At least this made me understand why he was the way he was. And the only part that made me jump was a cheap thrill (something loud happens when you don't expect it). And that only happened once because you could predict what was going to happen the entire time anyway. Other than that, I sat there the whole time, waiting for it to be over, foolishly waiting for the fantastic ending that usually makes up for the otherwise really bad, cheaply made horror movie. I never got my ending and neither will you.

Trust me, do not waste your money on this movie. I got in for free and I was still looking for my money back.

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 6 people found the following review useful:

A Middle-Grade Film with Potential

6/10
Author: WanderingGaurdian from College Station
10 January 2007

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Thr3e is a thriller based on a book by Ted Dekker. The film centers around Kevin Parsons, a seminary student, targeted by a psychopath intent on making him "confess his sins."

While I enjoyed the film, the acting falls short on several occasions. Quite frankly, Laura Jordan could use acting lessons. Blucas is left to carry the lion's share of the film and fails at points, though he does a marvelous job during the climax. Priscilla Barnes provides support, believably portraying a bitter shut-in with a deep-set mean streak.The special effects leave something to be desired and the constant use of bombs as a murder weapon gets tired after about the 4th one.

Despite the rough edges, the movie is enjoyable. It's not a summer blockbuster by any means but it does well enough. If money is tight, wait till it hits DVD to watch. Otherwise, it's worth the $8 ticket.

Was the above review useful to you?

10 out of 18 people found the following review useful:

awful

1/10
Author: pll-4 from New Zealand
7 December 2007

The direction is totally sub par , the acting is labored and the plot is as thin as a gossamer , DO NOT waste your time or money on this shallow movie . I shudder to think what prompted the "Actors" to agree to do this movie . I can see some talent , but the script and direction is total crap. The story could have been a winner but the screen play was abysmal , I actually feel sorry for the actors having to act out as directed. I will never again waste my time viewing anything directed by Robby Henson! If he could stoop so low as to make this movie in this form then he is on my black list ! My advice to fellow movie buffs is to stay away from this movie and to be very aware that any future movie directed by Robby Henson should be avoided like the plague

Was the above review useful to you?

17 out of 32 people found the following review useful:

Like being dunked in a baptismal font of stupidity

1/10
Author: Craig McPherson from Montreal, Canada
4 June 2007

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I can't understand the compulsion for some evangelical Christians to produce movies, art, music etc. that mirrors that of the non-Christian world, yet tries to set itself apart in some spiritual or "family-friendly" way. In Thr3e, the first installment from Fox Faith (Fox's Christian-themed film division), we get a movie that wants to be Saw and Se7en, but because of the handcuffs imposed by the studio's "spiritual" bent, not to mention a just plain lousy screenplay, we end up with a movie that is several digits short on the quality/intensity scale of either (no pun intended).

Based on the book by "Christian" novelist Ted Dekker, this limp excuse for a horror thriller wants to be edgy and worldly, but dares not cross into territory charted by mainstream horror movies. As a result terror and tension are pretty much the only casualties of this worthless effort - that and your time as a viewer. Given that the engine that drives a movie of this nature is the level of fear, dread and tension built up by protagonists or innocents finding themselves in very real danger of losing their lives, this movie instead delivers a story about a serial killer in which virtually nobody dies, unless you count a dog and a no-name non-character at the beginning who is on screen for all of 10 seconds.

Buried somewhere in this mess is a purported "message" about the evil that is harbored within all mankind, but you really don't need to sit through 101 minutes of this tripe to walk away with that revelation.

Alan McElroy's screenplay appears to have been practically dunked in a baptismal font of stupidity, leaving leaps of logic that seemingly require the viewer to be imbued with a degree of mental retardation to swallow. For example, if the killer and Samantha were the product of protagonist Kevin Parson's (Marc Blucas) three-way split personality disorder, who was police psychologist Jennifer Peters (Justine Waddell) talking to on the phone, in the car, at the police station (I could go on), and if, as the film explains at the end, she was fully aware that Parson was holding transitory gab-fests with imaginary friends and enemies, why did this "psychologist" allow this loon to run all over town when in reality he should have been placed in a rubber room under observation? Equally, why didn't anybody at Fox Faith catch and patch this monster-truck sized plot flaw before the movie even went into production? The only advice I can impart to the folks at Fox Faith, screenwriter McElroy, and novelist Dekker, is that if you really want to make movies about psychos struggling with conflicts of faith and inner demons, sit down and study and reflect on the Kevin Costner film Mr. Brooks, which is everything this movie wants to be, and isn't.

Was the above review useful to you?

34 out of 66 people found the following review useful:

Loved it

9/10
Author: brosarl from United States
5 January 2007

If you have read the book, you will not be disappointed, they did a great job and I thought it was very tastefully done! I will definitely go see it again! Marc Blucas did an excellent job and even though I knew what was going to happen, I was still caught up in the present and not even thinking about the ending! I can't wait for Ted Dekkers next book to movie . . .HOUSE! The movie was very accurate to the book and I find that almost rare anymore. Even though it was similar to some other movies previously mentioned, I think they did a great job at putting a new spin on things. It was long enough without being too long and kept your interest the entire time. I wouldn't stereotype this movie as a 'christian' film, but there was religious content and I think believers and unbelievers alike will appreciate this film for what it is . . .the struggle between good and evil!

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:

Not bad but not really Christian

7/10
Author: jstar-6 from North Dakota
1 July 2007

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I am a pastor and when I heard Fox was doing Fox Faith to make Christian movies I must say I was excited. When a friend recommended this movie and I saw who wrote the book I was even more excited. However I gave the movie a 7 because it really wasn't a Christian movie. Aside from a few vague references to the Bible and to the power of God it really played out more like a psychological type thriller. It wasn't a bad movie and I hope Fox Faith does indeed make some films that are truly Christian but I don't think this one really counts. I am not saying it's a bad movie and I am not saying anything against the writer of the book or the film in general. I would say it keeps you guessing a bit and the end surprised me which doesn't happen with a lot of movies. So I would suggest it just for an older audience but don't expect it to be a Christian movie.

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 1 of 9:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot synopsis Ratings External reviews
Parents Guide Official site Plot keywords
Main details Your user reviews Your vote history