<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" version="2.0"><channel><title><![CDATA[Why?]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><em>Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Beverly Hills Cop III</em></p>
<hr />
<p dir="auto"><strong>dronkersmike</strong> — <em>10 years ago(October 27, 2015 11:51 AM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">Why?<br />
No taggart and Bogomill<br />
Bad guys can't shoot for <em>beep</em><br />
Why are the bad guys printing dollars when the parc is open?<br />
After Uncle Dave got shot, Foley could have killed dewald. Why didn't he do that?<br />
Annihilator 2000 pfff<br />
Uncle dave got shot in the stomach, but the next day he is doing fine. And the rest of the guys are in a wheelchair. Uncle dave is superman<br />
Why didn't Fullbright kill foley after the chase at the beginning?<br />
Wtf was upp with that stupid spider attraction?<br />
Come on people!! How can you say that this pos is better than part2</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/topic/216674/why</link><generator>RSS for Node</generator><lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 May 2026 05:04:48 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://filmglance.com/discuss/topic/216674.rss" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><pubDate>Sat, 02 May 2026 00:20:24 GMT</pubDate><ttl>60</ttl><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to Why? on Sat, 02 May 2026 00:20:27 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><strong>tub51461</strong> — <em>9 years ago(December 24, 2016 02:03 PM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">Don't forget in the beginning: Dewald was wide open after he shot Todd twice in the back and Foley could have drew his gun and shot him point blank in the chest in those few seconds.  Of course, that would have shrank the story down to the first 10 minutes and we wouldn't know Sanderson or Fulbright's role in this either at least not the way this film was written.<br />
Eddie Murphy's no fool.  He knew better, but apparently he didn't take on producer credits for this film, so we lost some of his better known wise ass shticks.</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1820333</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1820333</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[fgadmin]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 02 May 2026 00:20:27 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to Why? on Sat, 02 May 2026 00:20:26 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><strong>steve8171968</strong> — <em>9 years ago(August 12, 2016 07:50 PM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">I agree. I saw this in the theater when it came out in '94, and I didn't think it was as good as the first 2.</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1820332</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1820332</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[fgadmin]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 02 May 2026 00:20:26 GMT</pubDate></item><item><title><![CDATA[Reply to Why? on Sat, 02 May 2026 00:20:25 GMT]]></title><description><![CDATA[<p dir="auto"><strong>TampaOutlaw84</strong> — <em>9 years ago(July 16, 2016 11:47 PM)</em></p>
<p dir="auto">I thought it was okay but its clearly the worst of the trio.</p>
]]></description><link>https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1820331</link><guid isPermaLink="true">https://filmglance.com/discuss/post/1820331</guid><dc:creator><![CDATA[fgadmin]]></dc:creator><pubDate>Sat, 02 May 2026 00:20:25 GMT</pubDate></item></channel></rss>