Overrated and overhyped

How sad is this?

Am i the only one who thinks........Average?

This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

I'm honestly baffled on why this movie is considered to be so good. I'm seeing all sorts of compliments for this film that I just don't think it deserves. They seem to be based on two main points, that the movie is somehow "atmospheric" or "psychological", and that it basically is like a Hitchcock film.The first compliment that I see quite often is that this film builds an excellent atmosphere. While this is true to some extent, as the sets are effective in conveying a sense of decay, any type of dread or anticipation just isn't there. Is watching a person film supposed to be tense? Am I supposed to think that he's just crying wolf? Am I supposed to feel helpless? If so, then these all failed horrendously for the following reasons. First, the sheer lack of momentum with the movie makes this 70 minute movie feel twice as long as it should feel. I was considering turning the DVD off by about the halfway mark the lack of energy was so bad. Any sense of terseness was drowned by the sheer lack of nothing going on. Two, there is no sense of whether or not Marvin is seeing things. You can clearly see that the Judas bugs exist, especially if you've seen any of the either movies before this one. I also don't feel helpless because the movie just fails at setting this up. Whenever he misses a key scene, it feels contrived, like it was forced to go this way. On top of that, he doesn't bother to call the CDC, which IS who you call in this series.I also see a lot of comparisons to a Hitchcock film being thrown about. Now, in the defense of the reviewers, the director himself brought this comparison up, so it's not entirely unwarranted. However, I see a lot of people effectively saying that because it's sort of like one of his movies, that it's automatically good. Now that's just nonsense; that's along the same lines as saying that "Jack" is a good film because Francis Ford Coppola directed it. Sorry, just because it bears similarities to another movie does not equate to the movie being any good.But what do I know? I'm the same idiot that liked Mimic 2.

This film makes no sense whatsoever, it doesn't work as a horror movie and it doesn't work as a psychological thriller.As other s have said, the film takes "Rear Window" and adds roaches. But it's not a very good copy of "Rear Window" and there's no real suspense or horror. And just when it might be getting somewhere, everyone starts acting insanely. The roaches finally appear and I start asking why is he doing that, why is she doing that, what are they thinking.Two thirds of the film is a "Rear Window" copy, where the main character is restricted to his bedroom due to the after effects of an illness, spending his time photographing everything he can see out of his bedroom window. The problem with this approach is that he CAN leave his bedroom, even going outside at one point. This negates all the claustrophobic tension, what little there is, and reduces the film to voyeuristic weirdness. Over the period of the film it becomes clear t hat there's nothing really wrong with him, but I think this is mainly due to a poor script and bad acting rather than a deliberate plot arc.When the roaches finally appear the main character suddenly seems unable to use the phone to call the police, having watched two people getting killed on the street. Instead he keeps watching events outside his window. Watching a roach creep up on his sister in the street, he again fails to use the phone to call her and warn her, even though we know she has her cell phone with her.And, of course, we have the obligatory "all females are useless and just scream their heads off at the first sign of trouble" cliché. Please, the world has moved on from the 1950's.As a slasher/monster movie this film is a complete failure. There are few deaths, nearly all shown in terrible lighting so there's nothing to see, and you have to wait at least an hour for the first real attack. If want a bit of gore, skip the first hour and watch the rest. You'll still understand what's going on, and still find yourself disappointed.I would think you could make this film for under a million dollars as you only need two rooms and one outside location, although I could have rewritten the story to only need one room. There's very little SFX involved as most of the film is just two or three people talking, and you could remove several people from the film and not notice the difference, thus saving on actors fees.Overall this is a poorly conceived, adequately executed attempt at film making from a recent graduate of film studies. As something to watch, I'd stick to watching paint dry.

I've seen quite a good amount of movies, a lot of them horror. It's my go-to-genre. I love it. I have seen a lot of movies, therefore I have seen a lot of pretty bad movies. Mimic 3 is the worst movie I have ever seen. After I had seen it, I threw the DVD behind my left speaker, and left it there for several months before I could muster up the strength and will to pick it up again and put it back with the other movies. I mean it, there is nothing good about this movie. It's so incredibly boring. Pretty much all that happens is the main character is spying on people on the street, from his window. Oh, and there is a bad looking creature somewhere in there, too. This is not a horror movie, it a gruesome mess of a boring sequence of barely live images. AVOID. No stars. If it was possible I could give this a negative score. Like minus 5 stars or something.

I have not seen either Mimic or Mimic 2, but this was on TV tonight so I gave it a try. It wasn't that bad actually, with a couple of decent performances and a script that focuses more on psychological fear rather than sudden loud noise scares. Perhaps what I enjoyed most about the film was its photography which was constantly superb, creating a very tense and eerie atmosphere throughout. The CG was not so good, but it served its purpose and was suitably kept to an absolute minimum. The direction from Petty as a whole was surprising for a low budget horror movie of our times, and the style reminded me of the risks earlier movies of the genre would take. Mimic 3 doesn't necessarily use the techniques as effectively but it is still a fresh breath of air and something different at least.Oh and this was the first movie I've seen to date where a character hides in a fridge, which I thought was highly amusing. This isn't a brilliant horror movie but it isn't terrible either and it at least tries some new ideas. I recommend this to real horror fans that don't take the genre too seriously and enjoy developed fear rather than an artificial 'BOO!' every now and again.