Warner Bros. Pictures | Release Date: May 23, 2013
5.4
USER SCORE
Mixed or average reviews based on 507 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
183
Mixed:
186
Negative:
138
WATCH NOW
Stream On
Stream On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characteres (5000 max)
3
DC4CardsJun 19, 2013
Uggh...not a good movie. Never got the negative reviews from Hangover II as I still found it funny despite it being a "Remix" to the first Hangover. This one has a brand new plot, not recycled, however it is just not funny. Found a fewUggh...not a good movie. Never got the negative reviews from Hangover II as I still found it funny despite it being a "Remix" to the first Hangover. This one has a brand new plot, not recycled, however it is just not funny. Found a few laughs but overall it is easily the worst of the trilogy. Expand
4 of 4 users found this helpful40
All this user's reviews
3
Forrestgump1Jun 4, 2013
"What should have been a finale instead felt like a waste. The Hangover Part III, dares to try something new and actually falls flat, with no motivation, no interests, and more importantly, no comedy. it's a lukewarm finale to our beloved"What should have been a finale instead felt like a waste. The Hangover Part III, dares to try something new and actually falls flat, with no motivation, no interests, and more importantly, no comedy. it's a lukewarm finale to our beloved wolf-pack." ..D+ Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
3
nutterjrJun 21, 2013
The joke has irrevocably worn out. This time around, they even forgot to make a comedy but instead they went for a thriller that has a couple of jokes (all of which you can see by watching the trailer).
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
1
thanosMay 30, 2013
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This movie wipes out all humor from the first two movies. By the time it ends you've come to the conclusion that Alan is a certified mental patient who should be locked away and that Chow is really an evil murdering, criminal. Even the "jokes" remind us that Stu could have AIDS but never cared enough to get tested and that Alan's selfishness led to his Father's death. Its a morbid film with very, very few laughs. Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
2
CaestusJun 6, 2013
A disapoitment. You just get the feeling that the filmmakers really had no idea, what to do with the third movie. Two or three scenes were funny and that was it.
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
3
RealMuthaFJun 5, 2013
I don't know what I expected after the worse-than-the-first-movie sequel and all the trailers to this one. Perhaps, funny jokes, more screen time devoted to Doug (Justin Bartha), and less to Zach Unpronounceablakis and the Chinese moron... OfI don't know what I expected after the worse-than-the-first-movie sequel and all the trailers to this one. Perhaps, funny jokes, more screen time devoted to Doug (Justin Bartha), and less to Zach Unpronounceablakis and the Chinese moron... Of course, all of that was quite silly of me, the series dropped the bar even lower. In fact, this isn't even a comedy any more, but an action/adventure movie with some humorous moments. The opinion of this movie is basically based on your opinion of Zach Whateverakis and his character. If you, for some awkward reason, liked him in the previous parts, this movie may very well entertain you. If you didn't, like me, and hate his utter bloody stupidity, then you'll be mostly bored with this movie. It's watchable, but I wouldn't recommend spending your hard-earned money on it. Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
1
DeitiesforsaleJun 11, 2013
Before I watched this people told me "It's better than the second anyway." So there was born my expectation of a slightly mediocre film as the second to me, was just, a stocky attempt at rehashing the first...no more, no less... However. ThisBefore I watched this people told me "It's better than the second anyway." So there was born my expectation of a slightly mediocre film as the second to me, was just, a stocky attempt at rehashing the first...no more, no less... However. This was not better than the second. Not by a long shot. Expand
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
3
emnixJun 5, 2013
Not very funny at all. Really its not. It just tries to be but the steam on this train ended about halfway through number 2. Watch it and try laugh and enjoy it.
2 of 2 users found this helpful20
All this user's reviews
3
DarkCriticMay 30, 2013
The wolfpack returns for the last couple of drinks of the final trilogy of The Hangover, Part III. After the disappointment of The Hangover, Part II that the sequel wasn't that great for the audience, now there's another disappointment thatThe wolfpack returns for the last couple of drinks of the final trilogy of The Hangover, Part III. After the disappointment of The Hangover, Part II that the sequel wasn't that great for the audience, now there's another disappointment that the third film is getting less that wasn't that funny or even entertaining. The story is about Alan (Galifianakis) is moving away from his father's death and his three friends Phil (Cooper), Stu (Helms), and Doug (Bartha) are planning to take Alan to intervention at Arizona. Little to know that the drug dealers including Marshall (Goodman) wants revenge for the Wolfpack because Mr. Chow (Jeong) is escape from prison at Thailand and steals the gold from his men. Three men are chasing the most annoying stereotypical character at Mexico and they think will agree to work with Mr. Chow's plan. Three men are returning back to Las Vegas and do same rehash over again like the first one including Stu's old wife, Caesar's Hotel, and more that came from. The characters are awkwardly unfunny and Alan turns into a stupid selfish person since the last movie that he did all over again to make huge mistakes. The Hangover, Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
3
Nesbitt10May 24, 2013
In "The Hangover III," the mystery comes from a reinvented formula; there is no wedding or missing groomsman. No actual hangover to speak of, and a lack of scenarios fueled by alcohol from which to recover. Instead, the film is produced asIn "The Hangover III," the mystery comes from a reinvented formula; there is no wedding or missing groomsman. No actual hangover to speak of, and a lack of scenarios fueled by alcohol from which to recover. Instead, the film is produced as more of a caper than a comedy. Despite not being 'good' movie: a litany of crude humor that becomes repetitive that falls flat for a majority of the film, the third act does provide a few moments of genuine charm and appeal. And yes, this is a real stretch, but I'm trying.

The latest misadventures by the antisocial man-child Alan (Zach Galifianakis) cause buddies Phil (Bradley Cooper), Stu (Ed Helms), and Doug (Justin Bartha) to stage an intervention. But on their way to hand deliver Alan to a mental health clinic in Arizona, they experience an intervention of their own. The group is captured by crime kingpin Marshall (John Goodman), who needs their help in tracking down the fugitive Mr. Chow (Ken Jeong). Mr. Chow stole $21 million in gold bricks from Marshall, and pressing the "Wolfpack" into service may be the only means of recovery. In the meantime, he'll hold Doug for safekeeping.

"The Hangover III" is the most sentimental, (hence the finale), and yet the darkest of the franchise where the eccentricity doesn't always work as well as it should. To it's credit, there are some escapades and plot twists along the way (from Tijuana to Vegas), and it's never out right boring, all set to a bizarre soundtrack that incorporates Hanson, Danzig, and Schubert.

You get the feeling director Todd Philips would rather be making a straight-up action movie, as opposed to creating a string of comedic episodes. The onscreen disaffection of Bradley Cooper and Ed Helms reeks of paychecks already spent, leaving Zack Galifianakis to fill the void with material that works better around the margins. Ken Jeong reprises his role as a lunatic criminal with the bare minimum of effort. He appears more animated in the Bud Light commercials when compared to this outing. The post-credits epilogue does provide a truly twisted array of images, a fitting send-off for a series recognized as being the highest-grossing R-rated comedies of all time. This is in fact the end and it is what it is. We've had some good laughs. Let's part amicably.
Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
2
GeologistMay 27, 2013
It's 100 minutes of bad sex jokes, lazy acting and lazy production. It was almost like the director said before shooting, "Okay, let's get this over with."
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
2
maddog0516May 28, 2013
If you love these actors looking at each other not entertaining or doing anything you may like this film. But if you expect an exciting or funny film, you will be extremely disappointed. Yes this does tie up the trilogy but in the worst wayIf you love these actors looking at each other not entertaining or doing anything you may like this film. But if you expect an exciting or funny film, you will be extremely disappointed. Yes this does tie up the trilogy but in the worst way possible. Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
2
ceefrostyJun 5, 2013
Woah! Pump the brakes Todd Phillips! Yes, "The Hangover" was funny. That doesn't constitute making that same movie over and over again. The jokes have now been over done, and I don't know if I'll ever be able to re-watch the original withoutWoah! Pump the brakes Todd Phillips! Yes, "The Hangover" was funny. That doesn't constitute making that same movie over and over again. The jokes have now been over done, and I don't know if I'll ever be able to re-watch the original without being reminded of the garbage that followed. Even "Due Date" felt like a carbon copy of "The Hangover". Try some originality my friend. Definitely #skipit Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
3
Niallmc123Jun 13, 2013
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This movie is a disgrace to the franchise as there simply is no Hangover I thought that there would be another wedding for the fat guy as in the end he gets married anyways Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
0
marcopoloJun 21, 2013
Wow, I thought being a Friday night, I would sit down with my two kids, 9 and 12, and watch hangover 3, we saw the first two and thought they were funny. Who in their right mind thinks it's funny that a giraffe loses it head on the freeway.Wow, I thought being a Friday night, I would sit down with my two kids, 9 and 12, and watch hangover 3, we saw the first two and thought they were funny. Who in their right mind thinks it's funny that a giraffe loses it head on the freeway. It just goes to show how sick society has become, especially in the U.S.A, where so much violence is except-able, that this can be classed as comedy.
With no encouragement from me, my two kids did not want to continue watching the movie and I don't blame them. If there is a fourth hangover, I will not buy it and I hope I'm not the only one who feels this way.
Expand
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
2
FreakwoodJun 30, 2013
People try to tell me that "Hangover III" is a good one guess what. It isn't. Odie Henderson wrote that it's more like "Alain's Eleven" and that actually nails it. Besides of that fact, it has nothing to do with a "Hangover"-movie at all.
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
3
MurozakiJul 10, 2013
The movie tries to take a different direction from the previous, but it only makes it unfunny, silly and really boring. Still, it's nice to see Galifianakis.
1 of 1 users found this helpful10
All this user's reviews
0
Chris_DKJun 4, 2013
Biggest disappointment I have seen lately, the title does not even fit the movie. The plot of the hangover movie is usually the guys gets drunk and have to find a missing person they have lost. This is nothing like it, the title of this movieBiggest disappointment I have seen lately, the title does not even fit the movie. The plot of the hangover movie is usually the guys gets drunk and have to find a missing person they have lost. This is nothing like it, the title of this movie shouldn't even be hangover it should be manhunt, because that is what the movie is about.. The movie is about the guys chasing down Chow to pay a debt to some criminal in order to save Dough. The movie was not remotely funny, it was just awkward and cheap. Expand
5 of 6 users found this helpful51
All this user's reviews
3
Ratkinson0005Jun 19, 2013
Very boring. At least The Hangover Part II had laughs despite the fact it was a carbon copy of the first. This film may have had 3-4 laughs at best. Of course the best ones was anything featuring Megan McCarthy. The characters don't even seemVery boring. At least The Hangover Part II had laughs despite the fact it was a carbon copy of the first. This film may have had 3-4 laughs at best. Of course the best ones was anything featuring Megan McCarthy. The characters don't even seem like themselves after the first two movies which could be a result of the actors not wanting to be involved with the movie which showed on the screen. The plot was half way decent I will give it that, but as soon as the gang heads to Las Vegas it becomes aware that the film makers did not feel comfortable diverting from the formula too much so they headed to a familiar location. Avoid like the plague! Expand
4 of 5 users found this helpful41
All this user's reviews
3
tropicAcesMay 23, 2013
I liked Part 2 enough. At least it was decently funny. This 3rd film is just a lazy heist film more than a comedy, and just doesn't have any of the heart, fun or laughs that embodied the first film. I can't stop you from seeing it, but pleaseI liked Part 2 enough. At least it was decently funny. This 3rd film is just a lazy heist film more than a comedy, and just doesn't have any of the heart, fun or laughs that embodied the first film. I can't stop you from seeing it, but please wait for DVD. Expand
6 of 9 users found this helpful63
All this user's reviews
3
Danny555to666May 27, 2013
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. It’s the final Hangover to deal with for the Wolfpack, four years after the original film was a surprise major hit at the box office hit making its stars household names in the process the team have reunited to finish what they started. The second film was met with mix reviews, some claiming the film was just the same recycled plot and jokes from the first one and many giving the film rave reviews clearly happy to have more of the same from the WolfPack. Director Todd Phillips has been insistent that this final entry in the trilogy will be different and not another rehash of the first film again. Has he lived up to his promise or is it just the same film for the second time?

Well yes, to give its film its credit the film does deviate from the tested narrative that has been used in the previous two instalments adopting a crime narrative in which Stu (Ed Helms), Phil (Bradley Cooper) and Alan (Zach Galifanakis) have to track down the infamous Mr Chow (Ken Jeong) in order to rescue Doug (Justin Bartha) from a crime lord called Marshall (John Goodman). This plot inevitably sends the group to Las Vegas, whilst tying up all the loose ends that you didn’t even remember from the previous films, such as who Alan bought the drugs from in the original (From Marshall). Most of these tying up loose ends are very unnecessary and feel as if they were just added to tie the film back the original in order for them to have some reason to return to Vegas.

Given the new premise you would think that the film would capitalise on this and take the series to a interesting and hopefully hilarious finale, they sadly do not. The humour is still the same gross out OTT humour as in the first two instalments, possibly a tiny bit more restrained but they more than make up for that in the final post credit scene (more on that later). John Goodman who even in a film as bad as it could be would still be entertaining is great in his minor role as Marshall is criminally underused and you beg for him to have more screen time then he actually does, criminally underused.
The films main problem is the increased role given to Ken Jeong as Leslie Chow, he was fine in the first film as he was only on screen for a grand total of 10 minutes and his wacky/camp persona was tolerable. In the second he had a greater role and became irritating very quickly, however in this he has equal billing with the rest of the cast and is intolerable including, It’s the same joke’s over and over again (including the classic small penis gem from the second film) and even though Jeong looks as if hes enjoying himself it just seems this film is just a tester for a Chow spin off.

Where as in the first and second film the cast seemed to be having fun and at least enjoying themselves, in this film it’s clear that no one cares about their performance and is there simply because they are contractually obliged to be in this film. The performances are all phoned in especially Bradley Cooper who looks as if he’s on autopilot for the film, hoping that doing this won’t damage his Oscar chances in the future.
The film ends on a climatic note at Alan’s wedding and it seems that the series has reached its conclusion, but then comes a post credit scene that makes the entire film incredibly pointless, A scene plays in which all three members of the Wolfpack wake up after Alan’s wedding in a destroyed room, including the monkey from the second film, Stu with breast implants and a naked Mr Chow who alleged sent them a drugged wedding cake. This is terrible for the simple reason that this is the final film in this series and this ending just contradicts the whole film in order to make two or three cheap gags that have been made consistently throughout the previous two films.

In conclusion, Hangover Three attempts to try something new but turns into a bit of a mess recycling jokes and clichés from the first two films, the cast are gliding through this film waiting for it to finally end and they can move onto new projects. This will probably be the last time we see the Wolfpack (until a horrendous remake in 10 years time) and it has to go down as a missed opportunity for the franchise.
Expand
4 of 6 users found this helpful42
All this user's reviews
3
Gamed2longJun 10, 2013
I think we all were going to see Hangover 3. No matter how good or awful it turned out to be. And thus it was created. Hopefully it stop here. Anyone expecting the comedy of the original will be sorely disappointed. The director it seems toI think we all were going to see Hangover 3. No matter how good or awful it turned out to be. And thus it was created. Hopefully it stop here. Anyone expecting the comedy of the original will be sorely disappointed. The director it seems to have realized his big mistake in basically re-shooting the hangover in Bangkok and calling it a sequel. Though props go to the drug dealing monkey.

The result is something that meanders between being a heist film and a gross out comedy. They do a good job of making the characters more human after hangover part 2. As other have said Zach Galifianakis really dominates the wolfpack in this one. Both in terms of being central to the story and screen time. Also Ken Jeong who is elevated from bit character to full on bad guy or good guy depending how you look at it.
Due to a back story of events that barely make sense an over-serious John Goodman kidnaps Doug (no. really?) thus kicking events off. Unlike hangover 1 and 2 they aren't even drugged this time and it is unclear what past sins they have committed to deserve such punishment. Especially Doug. Poor guy gets so little screen-time for being such a big part of the plot. It could have been an interesting direction if he came along for one of their crazy adventures. He could have been the "straight" guy horrified by the things the wolfpack has become used to.

There are laughs to be had though. And at least one pair of boobs to be seen. Though FYI you have to wait for the credits and you will regret it. Overall a low end comedy still sitting in the shadow of a much better original.
Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
0
justthefactsJun 21, 2013
This is a movie with people that have too much time on there hands. I think it is very unrealistic. I would warn people to not waste there money. This movie is for the people that have no life and basic losers.
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
2
TheQuietGamerMay 18, 2014
Is it really a Hangover movie when there isn't a hangover? Much like the second movie this entry moves away from humor in order to focus on a darker more violent story. There are no laughs to be found here, just one or two light chuckles. ItIs it really a Hangover movie when there isn't a hangover? Much like the second movie this entry moves away from humor in order to focus on a darker more violent story. There are no laughs to be found here, just one or two light chuckles. It honestly feels like it's trying to be some sort of crime-thriller type movie, the problem is it just doesn't have any thrills.

Rather than trying to come up with funny moments, the film just throws shocking and violent moments out there with the hopes of keeping viewers entertained. The story is darker and more violent, and because of that sucks all of the humor out of the movie. For whatever reason the writers made Alan (Galifianakis), who was funny in the first movie, completely insufferable and totally unlikable. The amount of animal cruelty here is obscene and just all round awful. This just all around is not an enjoyable, funny, or interesting movie in any way.

Regardless of whether or not you were a fan of the first two Hangover movies (I was) you should avoid this one at all costs. It's clear that the only reason this third movie even exists is just to cash in on the Hangover name. It's a complete and utter waste of time, and I in no way know what the people behind this movie were thinking. My total score is a 2.4/10=Awful.
Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
3
RosewoodMay 27, 2013
Before walking in to this movie THIS MOVIE IS NOT BETTER THEN THE ORIGINAL. Okay now thats done this movie is funny at times but the story is so crazy that you get invested into it. But during the middle of the movie there is somethingBefore walking in to this movie THIS MOVIE IS NOT BETTER THEN THE ORIGINAL. Okay now thats done this movie is funny at times but the story is so crazy that you get invested into it. But during the middle of the movie there is something that might turn people off if you can handle it you well like this movie ALSO STAY DURING THE CREDITS A VERY FUNNY SCENE ALL WELL ENJOy Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
0
dierregiNov 9, 2014
The third and last installment of the Hangover saga gives far too much screen time to the increasingly obnoxious Alan character. Erroneously described as a “man-child”, Alan seems to be a borderline narcissist psychopath. The plot includesThe third and last installment of the Hangover saga gives far too much screen time to the increasingly obnoxious Alan character. Erroneously described as a “man-child”, Alan seems to be a borderline narcissist psychopath. The plot includes plenty of cruelty against animals, abuse of the elderly and shocking lies (such as telling a child you are his father when you are not). Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
2
EyseAug 20, 2013
Hollywood really shouldn't have made more than one Hangover movie, and we shouldn't be encouraging them by watching.

Boring, unoriginal, cringe-worthy drivel. Total garbage.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
2
Iky009Jan 6, 2014
O mais fraco da franquiaO mais fraco da franquia Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
3
MaricaSep 2, 2014
"Someone needs to burn this place to the ground." - Stu

Poor, very poor film. I really like comedy movies, but this.....

**************************
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
3
AlanWynne1992May 31, 2013
While Zach Galifianakis is on top form in this finale to The Hangover franchise, and also, the incredibly funny post-credits scene, I'm afraid nothing can stop this film from just being a stretch too far. While Todd Phillips takes a differentWhile Zach Galifianakis is on top form in this finale to The Hangover franchise, and also, the incredibly funny post-credits scene, I'm afraid nothing can stop this film from just being a stretch too far. While Todd Phillips takes a different approach to Part 3, it can't improve on the previous installment and potentially is even worse than Part 2. I'm afraid that while Warner Bros probably got it financially correct by making The Hangover into a franchise, they should have had The Hangover as a singular masterpiece in comedic film making and left the critically acclaimed film to be loved and remembered for the right reasons and not for the flops that spawned the great creation. Collapse
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
1
BigBiggoMay 24, 2013
The audience at the screening I attended laughed at all the most blatant jokes and anything remotely crude was met with silence and disapproval. This definitely didn't help me get 'into the mood' as clearly most of the people there had noThe audience at the screening I attended laughed at all the most blatant jokes and anything remotely crude was met with silence and disapproval. This definitely didn't help me get 'into the mood' as clearly most of the people there had no fünke idea what the series is about. Hangover I & II were vile but hilarious (if that was your thing), in III the comedy has been curbed to no end. Cheap and soulless, it really is all about the money.

Most of the dialogue is garbage and the f-bomb is dropped rarely (compared to the previous films.) Alan's odd, creepy behaviour and dialogue has been replaced with bratty quips. Focusing the film on Alan effectively ruined it, as the character is at his best when he is kept back in reserve: "She's a Monet." The producers obviously wanted to throw in John Goodman for the hell of it and he does his best Paul Vitti impression whilst swearing continuously through his bottom lip.

Pt. III deviates from the norm of the first two in a big way and it is always good to mix up the palette... Not with arse brown though. Don't bother.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
2
dyshpoNov 27, 2013
This was a very funny movie but some parts were wrong lol. I was left feeling guilty for watching this afterwards. Like as if i stood by as someone drank themselves to death. Dark humor hilarious but over done not so much.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
3
FirebalaOct 7, 2013
It is not even close to the previous sections, poor pointless story, but I would not call it. Except for gag couple bored of it all, it was a waste of money. Too bad for him.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
3
glasses1Dec 21, 2013
Part 1 was fantastic and a truly different comedy movie, definitely and defiantly better than other comedies of a similar genre. Part 2 was decent (even though they recycled the same exact plot from Part 1), due to an impressive performancePart 1 was fantastic and a truly different comedy movie, definitely and defiantly better than other comedies of a similar genre. Part 2 was decent (even though they recycled the same exact plot from Part 1), due to an impressive performance by Ken Jeong. How many times can you repeat the same exact jokes and plot? To be honest, this comedy lacked momentum and had lazy acting with somewhat poor production values. And yes, I know how hard it is to make a 'good' comedy sequel, let alone a prequel. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
2
HouseClarkzoniaNov 6, 2013
It's like an ignorant child trying to grab attention, it's annoying and a pain in the ass. At-least Ken Jeong made me laugh at some scenes in the movie.
(2 for Ken Jeong)
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
2
eagleeyevikingJan 23, 2016
While The Hangover Part III offers plentiful of character development for Alan and has a new plot.nHowever, the film simply isn't funny enough to recommend.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
3
rafingal23Dec 23, 2013
Compare to the first two films, this one was an insult to those who was in love with the series from Day 1. There was no hangover and it was a total catastrophe. I should have gone to watch this with my girlfriend where a little lip actionCompare to the first two films, this one was an insult to those who was in love with the series from Day 1. There was no hangover and it was a total catastrophe. I should have gone to watch this with my girlfriend where a little lip action would have distracted me from going through this comedic disaster. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
2
NatMarshall14Dec 13, 2013
Unfunny, left me bored and just disappointed. it seems like much of the star cast has lost their charisma over the trilogy. I went to go see it with my freands and well that usually causes laughs no matter what the film.... but i watched theUnfunny, left me bored and just disappointed. it seems like much of the star cast has lost their charisma over the trilogy. I went to go see it with my freands and well that usually causes laughs no matter what the film.... but i watched the whole thing in dead silence, Me and my freands resorted to throwing popcorn around which i found was a lot more entertaining. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
3
MarickJan 8, 2015
The Hangover Part III is a 2013 American comedy film produced by Legendary Pictures and distributed by Warner Bros. Pictures. It is the sequel to 2011's The Hangover Part II, and the third and final film in The Hangover trilogy. The filmThe Hangover Part III is a 2013 American comedy film produced by Legendary Pictures and distributed by Warner Bros. Pictures. It is the sequel to 2011's The Hangover Part II, and the third and final film in The Hangover trilogy. The film stars Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms, Zach Galifianakis, Justin Bartha, and Ken Jeong. The supporting cast includes: Jeffrey Tambor, Heather Graham, Jamie Chung, Mike Epps and John Goodman with Todd Phillips directing a screenplay written by himself and Craig Mazin. The film follows the "Wolfpack" (Phil, Stu, Doug, and Alan) as they try to get Alan the help he needs after facing a personal crisis. However, things go awry when an incident from the original film comes back to haunt them. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
3
Dat_One_CriticAug 23, 2015
This movie is like the taken series. In the first two movies someone in Liams family gets taken but in the third one no one gets taken. Hangover 1 and 2 they get a hangover but in the third one no one gets a hangover. Odds are if you don'tThis movie is like the taken series. In the first two movies someone in Liams family gets taken but in the third one no one gets taken. Hangover 1 and 2 they get a hangover but in the third one no one gets a hangover. Odds are if you don't stick to what the name of them movie is. It might not be good. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
3
EpicLadySpongeApr 25, 2016
Yeah sure, let's just make ANOTHER Hangover movie just for the best of our franchise just to earn money. Hangover feels more like a Hangout and that's saying something.
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
2
MovieMasterEddyApr 6, 2016
The Wolfpack rides again. Or rather, it limps exhaustedly over the tundra in what is billed as the final edition of the “Hangover” trilogy. Defanged, with glazed eyes and creaking joints, these superannuated party animals try vainly to stirThe Wolfpack rides again. Or rather, it limps exhaustedly over the tundra in what is billed as the final edition of the “Hangover” trilogy. Defanged, with glazed eyes and creaking joints, these superannuated party animals try vainly to stir up some enthusiasm during a return visit to Las Vegas, the site of the first “Hangover” movie. But their heart isn’t in it.

As the expectant audience at the screening I attended waited for “The Hangover Part III” to explode into action with the usual lewd gross-out antics, only a few scattered laughs could be heard, along with much grumbling after the final credits. For “The Hangover Part III,” directed by Todd Phillips from a screenplay he wrote with Craig Mazin, is a dull, lazy walkthrough that along with “The Big Wedding” has a claim to be the year’s worst star-driven movie.

In case you need to be reminded, or somehow missed the earlier editions, the Wolfpack includes Phil (Bradley Cooper), Doug (Justin Bartha), Stu (Ed Helms) and Alan (Zach Galifianakis), four of the unlikeliest on-the verge-of-middle-age buddies ever to join forces in search of adventure. Phil is the charmer, Doug the straight arrow, Stu the square, and Alan the infantile id.

“The Hangover Part III” concentrates more on Alan than the earlier movies did, and on their troublemaking sometime sidekick and nemesis, the whiny-voiced, sociopathic Asian gangster Mr. Chow (Ken Jeong). An early scene in which Alan is speeding home in his sports car with a giraffe in an attached trailer promises more comedy than is subsequently delivered. As Alan reaches an underpass, his long-necked pet is decapitated, and the accident causes a traffic pileup. It is the first of several acts of cruelty to animals. Dogs are shot, and a coked-up chicken is smothered.

After the giraffe mishap, the other Wolfpack members stage an intervention to which Alan reluctantly agrees. While taking him to a rehab center, they are intercepted by a hulking mobster named Marshall (John Goodman) and his goons wearing pig masks. Marshall blames Chow for stealing millions of dollars of gold bricks and takes Doug as a hostage until Chow is brought to him, along with the gold.

The story awkwardly zigzags to Mexico and back. When the guys discover that Chow is in Las Vegas, holed up in a heavily guarded penthouse suite with drugs and escorts at Caesars Palace, they re-enter Sin City — where all their troubles began — and try to capture him. These Las Vegas adventures are a sequence of perfunctory stunts: entering the penthouse from the roof on tied-together sheets, Chow’s escaping by parachute and the tedious chasing that pads out the movie.

In the most amusing scene set in Las Vegas, Alan and Cassie (Melissa McCarthy, in a cameo role as a mean-spirited pawnbroker) make goo-goo eyes at each other in a grotesque flirtation that involves the passing of a red lollipop from one mouth into another. The most strained and lifeless moment brings back Heather Graham’s character from the first “Hangover,” simply as a reference.

At their best, the earlier “Hangover” movies were anarchic, absurdist farces descended from Abbott and Costello, the Three Stooges and the Hope-Crosby road movies, but with a libido inflamed by drugs and booze. In the spirit of those forerunners, the members of the Wolfpack may age, but they never learn from experience. One excuse for their naïveté is that most of their mayhem takes place while they are blind drunk. Their hangovers seem to last only a few minutes before they’re up and running.

But the toll has been severe on the series, if not the characters. Only in a sight gag during the final credits is there a momentary flare-up of the old antic spirit. Otherwise, “The Hangover Part III” is dead.

Goodbye and good riddance.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
3
UNARMED_JORDSep 15, 2016
this movie cannot even be counted as a hangover movie, it's a bit more of a mafia/drug style film thats unbelievably dark which doesnt sink in because of the crappy jokes and punchlines made here but once again the one thing that saves thethis movie cannot even be counted as a hangover movie, it's a bit more of a mafia/drug style film thats unbelievably dark which doesnt sink in because of the crappy jokes and punchlines made here but once again the one thing that saves the film is Leslie Chow Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews