Spy Kids 3-D: Game Over

User Score
5.4

Mixed or average reviews- based on 88 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 36 out of 88
  2. Negative: 27 out of 88

Where To Watch

Stream On
Stream On
Stream On

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling

User Reviews

  1. Dec 31, 2011
    4
    Spy Kids gets worse and worse with every new installment: the acting, the plot, the dialogue. The only thing that gets better is the special effects. Apparently, that is all people care about anymore.
  2. Oct 17, 2011
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The idea of 3-D is wisely used for "Spy Kids 3-D", but the other components, such as the story or acting, kinda lowered the bar for this film. Expand
  3. ChadS.
    Aug 1, 2003
    6
    Sylvester Stallone isn't Eddie Murphy, or Peter Sellers, that's for sure. It should've been fun to see Rocky stretch, but Stallone is neither convincing, nor funny, playing multiple characters. Unfortunately, he seems to have the same amount of screen time as Alexa Vega; sadly, under-utilized here. Since Antonio Banderas appeared in some of Pedro Almodovar's earlier Sylvester Stallone isn't Eddie Murphy, or Peter Sellers, that's for sure. It should've been fun to see Rocky stretch, but Stallone is neither convincing, nor funny, playing multiple characters. Unfortunately, he seems to have the same amount of screen time as Alexa Vega; sadly, under-utilized here. Since Antonio Banderas appeared in some of Pedro Almodovar's earlier films, Vega's coma felt like a homage to "Talk to Her". As for the film, "Spy Kids 3-D: Game Over" doesn't feel like a sequel because the kids don't get to be spies. It's preferable to the last installment because "Game Over" isn't really competing with the brilliant original. Get rid of the real world sequences that brackets the video game section, and you got yourself a spiffy short film. The 3-D images are great but they look less impressive out in the Texas exteriors. Expand
  4. AlB.
    Aug 4, 2003
    6
    We took our six y.o. daughter to see this, and while *I* enjoyed it greatly, she didn't, and was even a bit afraid of the 3D stuff. I disagree with those who didn't see any 3D - perhaps your glasses were broken, or didn't fit right, or perhaps your theater's projectors were out of focus. I thought the 3D was well done. Not a great movie by any means - but at the same We took our six y.o. daughter to see this, and while *I* enjoyed it greatly, she didn't, and was even a bit afraid of the 3D stuff. I disagree with those who didn't see any 3D - perhaps your glasses were broken, or didn't fit right, or perhaps your theater's projectors were out of focus. I thought the 3D was well done. Not a great movie by any means - but at the same time, it wasn't 90 minutes of "When will this thing end?", which is my usual reaction to bringing our daughter to the theater to see a "kids" film. Some funny lines for the adults as well, which caught me by surprise. :) Expand
  5. Cmeyer
    Aug 20, 2003
    4
    My 9 yr old niece and i went to this movie looking for a good time ... and for the MOST part we had a decent time. BUT ... the 3-D really was bad. It made me dizzy and my niece's eyes hurt throughout the whole movie and a few times we had to remove the glasses and just watch it as is. the story and all was fine and the ideas and imagination was wonderful. But overall, the film let us My 9 yr old niece and i went to this movie looking for a good time ... and for the MOST part we had a decent time. BUT ... the 3-D really was bad. It made me dizzy and my niece's eyes hurt throughout the whole movie and a few times we had to remove the glasses and just watch it as is. the story and all was fine and the ideas and imagination was wonderful. But overall, the film let us down. If it WOULDNT have been 3-D an would have been done w/CGI it would have been a wonderful film. Expand
  6. BonehoC.
    Mar 3, 2004
    4
    If this movie wasn't in 3D it would get a big fat 0. The story really sucks. It can also be really corny. The 3D effects are really good, but most of the time the 3D glasses don't work. They also hurt your eyes. They did mention Halo though, and that's cool.
  7. CameronS.
    Apr 6, 2004
    5
    It burnt my eyes and wasn't much fun. Seriously, how did anybody enjoy the 3D aspect of the film, it is jarring and it makes all the potentialy pretty colors thinner and nasty looking. I do have some desire to see if the film is good looking at all on the 2D DVD.
  8. EricG.
    Jun 29, 2006
    4
    Yeah, there were some good action sequences and all, but mostly, this movie was uneventful and, maybe between you and me, slightly boring.
  9. PatrickD.
    Aug 23, 2005
    4
    THe main thing that ruined the movie was the THey have a lot of lines such as "If you win, I get bonus points." It's following the same trail as JAWS.
  10. UtharW.
    Sep 16, 2004
    4
    Insulting to the video game industry. The creators of this film have obviously never played Half-Life.
  11. Mar 13, 2011
    4
    The movie wasn't funny or gripping. But I don't hate the movie which is why I'm gonna give the film a 4.
  12. Oct 7, 2013
    4
    The plot is very stupid and the acting is weak but I will give Spy Kids 3-D this They actually use 3-D. From start to finish they actually use quite a bit of 3-D and it is fun to watch, For that alone it's worth watching but do not go into it expecting a good movie but it really isn't.
  13. Jan 12, 2013
    4
    It's bad .. it really is ... GAME OVER.
  14. Dec 22, 2015
    5
    "Spy Kids 3- D Game Over" was a film entirely regulated by the visual and special effects , especially the 3-D vision was to overcome but it was not, even as we are left to wonder 8 years that was the last of the saga of Spy -Kids ?.
Metascore
57

Mixed or average reviews - based on 30 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 15 out of 30
  2. Negative: 2 out of 30
  1. Overall it's a harmless disappointment, hampered by the thin story and a surprisingly dreary looking video-game setting, heavy on the floating platforms, cartoony future-cityscapes and goofy gadgetry.
  2. 100
    There are no boring, expository sequences; no depressing, grown-up politics. Instead, Rodriguez gifts us with a kaleidoscope of energy and invention.
  3. A good example of complex Hollywood wizardry placed in the service of sharp, intelligent family entertainment.