TheRetroCritic

Having proven themselves to be an action movie duo worth sticking around for, Mel Gibson and Danny Glover joined forces again for Lethal Weapon 3 in 1992 and the film did reliably well at the box-office but how did the film compare to the franchise's previous two outings? It's easy to forget how serious in tone the first Lethal Weapon was, with Martin Riggs (Gibson) having suicidal tendencies and all, but if you were to skip the sequel and watch this third instalment right after the original you'd probably think you had somehow stumbled onto a live-action cartoon version of Shane Black's cop movie classic by mistake. Indeed, while Lethal Weapon 2 pushed the comedy aspect of the two main characters' unlikely friendship a tad more, this movie is mostly a straight-up lolfest with the exception of a couple of more emotional scenes. By giving Joe Pesci's mouthy informant/real estate agent Leo more screen-time, the film runs the risk of turning the character in

One year before Die Hard , a little film called Lethal Weapon came out and gave us a solid mix of 80's cop action and Christmas spirit. The film spawned several sequels, of course, and became one of the action franchises to follow. But how does the very first film hold up? Probably the darkest film in the franchise, Lethal Weapon focuses more on Riggs' (Mel Gibson) depression and Murtaugh's (Danny Glover) family life than the actual crime plot at hand, which almost feels like a subplot at times. The villains, Gary Busey's Joshua, a tough ex-army guy turned ruthless killer, and Mitch Ryan's General do pop up now and then, offering the odd action beat but all in all, this first film is more of a character piece about the slow building of an unlikely friendship. A lot of emphasis is put on Riggs' suicidal state following the death of his wife as we see him get dangerously close to killing himself and almost jeopardising various cases. Luckily, he's