The film was still a fun one that will make you laugh and have you leaving the theater feeling like you just stole something valuable and got away with it.

A clunky actioner with a handful of cool moments.

The movie really just wants to entertain people.

One of the film's great tricks is that, for a time, you think it will go down a rabbit hole of unrealistic glorification.

The original Ginger Snaps was a masterpiece, and the second was more hollow, but entertaining on its own right. However, this third one is at least weird.So, there were two movies, and they wanted to sell them in a DVD-box of a trilogy. So they needed a third one. However, the second movie ended in a way that's impossible to continue. I'm happy they at least admitted this, unlike other sequel-makers (like Highlander and The Crow). Instead of making a kind of a spin-off instead, however, they decided to make a prequel. Not a wise choice, and here is the result.We go back to the early 19th century, to the supposed beginning of the werewolf-curse. Ginger and Brigitte Fitzgerald from the originals had ancestors, also called Ginger and Brigitte Fitzgerald, who even looked exactly like them. At least that's the idea that generates the least retrospective plot holes. Still, upon meeting them in the first minute of the movie, you are already in a state of head-scratching. They come across a trader fort under siege by werewolves, and get stuck there with a bunch of weird people.So, after the first movie's ingenious metaphor of growing up, and the second one's less original, but still somewhat fresh conflict of one's environment sabotaging one's survival out of stupidity, this flick presents the much more overused horror trope of the isolated house, or fort in this case. This hurts the movie a lot, because it feels familiar, while Ginger Snaps supposed to be fresh, like something you haven't seen before.Humor is also gone. The first movie's sick and twisted humor was reduced in Unleashed to a few jokes, though those were truly perverted and still funny. This one lost it all.I wouldn't say it's a terrible movie. The effects finally got realistic (as the soul fades from the trilogy, the creatures get more and more solid). The chemistry between the sisters is still there, and it's still good. This is the saving grace of the movie, because all other characters are shallow. The hunter's potential is never used to its full, the fort's inhabitants have been used in millions of other movies, with only the captain and the truly entertaining priest showing something beyond the clichés. Admittedly, the shot that opens the climax, when Ginger lets the werewolves into the fort is the most beautiful scene you'll ever see in any Ginger Snaps film, but this is not enough, as a Ginger Snaps film should be way much more than a few cool scenes and loving sisterhood.The main issue, however, is the way this movie treats the originals. When I watched this, I felt it was made by people who never saw the first movie. So now there is a curse that strikes down ten generations later? The whole werewolf problem in the first movie was a result of bad luck! It had nothing to do with the family being cursed! Also, to fill out the runtime, the sisters get a new quest to save the bitten Ginger: kill the werewolf who bit her. Then the curse will be gone. What??? In the original, the werewolf that infected Ginger was dead within five minutes. And in Unleashed, Brigitte carried an infection she got from Ginger, whom she killed in the first movie. Based on the logic of Beginning, at least the sequel shouldn't have even happened, but even the original is questionable. And why do ancestors of the original sisters look exactly like them? Why do they have the same name? Why doesn't Ginger transform like in the original? Why does this 'curse' strike only almost two centuries later?All in all, this movie is acceptable only if watched BEFORE the original. It will still raise plenty of questions, but less than if you see them in the convenient order. It could work if it wasn't set in the universe of Ginger Snaps. This way, however, it is like a family of police members having a criminal child.

Okay, I love Ginger Snaps, its my 2nd favourite film of all time and it tops a great deal of many of my "favourites" list (such as favourite horror film, favourite werewolf film, favourite "teenage misfit" film) so for Halloween, I decided to marathon the series and...when playing this back to back with the first film, the problems really do show.Now, if anyone here has read my new review for Ginger Snaps 2, you may be aware of this but both sequels have pretty big problems that carry over, this, I feel, could've been avoided had they either a) consulted John Fawcett and Karen Walton on this instead of Fawcett just being the guy who gave them the money they needed to do the film or b) waited between sequels so they could see how the first sequel did and knew what to fix. The first, these sequels are boring. They don't have character development, the plots are almost strung together and, of course, the second problem, they change the mythology, the second film made it so instead of it being about puberty, it'd be about drug addiction. Considering The Company Of Wolves exists, I understand why making a movie set in the 19th century about werewolf puberty wouldn't REALLY fly but I gotta admit, I don't get what THIS metaphor is. Ginger sleeps a lot, hears blood and is found out by leeches...thinking it over, I think they just REALLY wanted to make a bad vampire film but was roped into the whole "forced trilogy" thing. The third, the characters are idiots. Sorry to spoil the ending so early in my review but the native American gives Brigitte over to the people at the fort who are more than happy to burn her alive for her "sin" of having a werewolf sister and yet, when Ginger leads a pack of werewolves into the fort, the Native American looks surprised when Brigitte stabs him to become a werewolf with her sister, her sister that is commented on frequently as being the only "thing" she has left.So the movie opens up with Brigitte and Ginger (the NOT characters from the first and second film, I'm actually a bit grateful for this as you're not really RUINING any of these characters if they turn out to be idiots) coming across an attacked Indian tribe with one survivor who prophecizes to kill a boy or one will kill the other. Considering what I wrote above, I'm not sure yet whether that was a "clever twist ending" or promising the audience something and then flat out lying to them. Brigitte then gets her foot trapped in a bear trap. A Native American (the one described in the previous paragraph) helps her out and takes her to Fort Bailey, we then come across...stereotypes of movies like this. There's the well-intentioned Doctor, the angry Priest, the defensive fort owner trying to keep a grip on everything (but sabotages himself in a way I'll come back to a little later), the angry misogynistic racist guard (he's also the only character to be blatantly racist apart from the priest...thanks for realism!) and..."the others". I'm not joking, thats their development.So after realizing the fort is full of crazies, Brigitte and Ginger get worried but decide to stay because a bed is better than a log under a tree. Ginger, however, goes wandering in the night and finds a deformed boy who bites her...this is the son of the "defensive fort owner trying to keep a grip on everything"...a werewolf. So...he could've bit everyone in their sleep and the Fort would've descended into a bloody mess? A werewolf attack happens, a few people get bit and the priest is all too eager to blame the Fitzgerald's and he traps them in a room with a werewolf. This lasts...a few minutes until the Native American saves them. Oh and by the way, a quick note, sorry about demoting the characters to just the stereotypes I just mentioned but...that IS the only way I remember them.The deformed boy escapes and Ginger tries to kill it to follow the Native American's prophecy. The rest of the fort find him first and the leader kills his kid to show authority. They kick the Fitzgerald's out because it becomes all too clear that Ginger has been bit. They seek out the Native American that warned them about the prophecy, she explains that Ginger should've killed the boy before it bit her (to paraphrase the first film "How was she supposed to know that?!") and they make Brigitte go into a trance to see the future and it shows her killing Ginger and from there, the other Native American takes her to the fort to partake in the ending I described earlier. Honestly though, its a good ending. Its the highlight scene in these sprequels. Brigitte then becomes a werewolf ala hand wound used to parallel the first film.This film, I thought, was better than the second. Why? Its not REALLY a Ginger Snaps movie. I see this as basically what would happen if the rights to Ginger Snaps went to Roger Corman and he wanted to put his own unique spin on the film. On those merits, its not awful but the problem is its boring. Something like this should, at least, have a "base under siege" feel to it (a group of people trapped in a building, or fort, trying to fight the monsters with a group of red shirts and then death, death, death, death). This has NONE of the paranoia that you'd associate with that (or if it does, its not written well). The werewolf transformation isn't interesting, the characters are virtually just stereotypes and the plot just isn't interesting enough to carry itself. I'll say, though, the two leads did somewhat make this interesting to watch but aside from that, nothing.

After the success of the superior werewolf thriller "Ginger Snaps", it seems Lions Gate rushed to churn out two sequels in the shortest amount of time possible, those being the frightening "Ginger Snaps 2: Unleashed" and the disappointing "Ginger Snaps Back: The Beginning". Where "Unleashed" was a bit of letdown compared to its predecessor, it made sense and it followed the storyline well and even managed to wrangle up a boatload of genuine scares. Then there's "Ginger Snaps Back", the weakest and wholly unnecessary entry into the series. It should have stopped with "Unleashed" but the writers have decided to give our doomed heroines Brigitte and Ginger one last go around.This time Ginger and Brigitte (a major plus is that Katharine Isabelle reprises her role as Ginger whereas she was missing in the second film save for a few scenes) are wandering around in the Canadian wilderness after being stranded in the early 1800's. For some reason it's a prequel that has nothing to do with the story that was developed in the first two films, so what's the point besides some cheap werewolf scares? When they come across a wrecked Indian camp that depicts carnage and brutal murder, they hastily make way to find shelter. That's when they find a strange fort in the middle of nowhere that some soldiers reside in, and that's where the nightmare begins. At night, a pack of vicious werewolves continually attacks the fort outside the thick log walls, and by day things take a nasty turn for Ginger when she is bitten... again. It's all apparently a foreshadowing of the events in the first film but none of it is needed. There's no tension or intrigue where there was in the first and second, plus any trace of black humor that made the first film so ingenious is not apparent anywhere. The editing and cinematography seem rushed and at times I found the film almost incoherent. A huge disappointment that further ruins the integrity of the first. They should leave Ginger and Brigitte alone now.

The original "Ginger Snaps" was a fun, affecting coming-of-age tale disguised as a werewolf movie that introduced us to Ginger (Katharine Isabelle) and Brigitte (Emily Perkins), two of the most endearing horror heroines in recent memory. "Ginger Snaps Back"--a prequel of sorts--takes a decidedly different route from its predecessor, transposing the Fitzgerald sisters from the present day to a 19th Century Civil War base, where it turns out The Curse is alive and well. I have to give the filmmakers credit--as opposed to slavishly sequelizing the first film for a quick buck, writers Christina Ray and Stephen Massicotte and director Grant Harvey have revamped the original "Ginger Snaps" mythos into a mostly successful period piece. "Back" is beautifully photographed, with excellent sets and costumes; the inhabitants of the base (including a general hiding a deformed son) are clichéd, yet ultimately well-drawn; and the undercurrent of themes--from serious Indian spiritualism to the importance of family to the dangers of fundamentalism (among others) are subtly incorporated. While the film's anachronistic feel threw me for a loop, the well-intentioned performances (sans any self-referential irony) kept me watching...above all, Isabelle and Perkins display the same sisterly devotion that gave the first "Ginger Snaps" its humor and heart--there is an undeniable power to their on-screen interaction that sustains "Back" for its duration.