Top critical review
3 people found this helpful
The worst of the lot...
on 5 December 2011
I quite liked the first installment, was disappointed by the second one, and didn't like the third. I almost rated it one star, but refrained because there were a few good ideas, although poorly used or even not exploited at all. The idea of a civil war breaking out and the character of General Luc are quite good. Unfortunatly, both seems to have been plucked out of thin air, with little or no explanations provided as to the whys (why the Civil War, to begin with?), and whos (who is allied against who and why?) and how come (neither Octo V nor any of his generals seem to have seen anything coming?). We don't even know what happened to Octo V. Is he "dead" or not?
As usual for me, Gunn's minimalist writting style and lame dialogues are not enough to make a good story or, rather, to mask the utter lack of a credible story. Neither is the talking Gun. Some bits, such as the last stand of one of the characters (I won't be more specific because I don't want to come up with spoilers) and the insurrection within the capital city, are not bad, but they cannot compensate for the other flaws.
As usual also, what passes for the story just drops of, making you wonder if there is going to be yet another sequel. Should this be the case, I might be reluctant to buy it...