User Score
5.4

Mixed or average reviews- based on 422 Ratings

User score distribution:

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
  1. May 23, 2013
    3
    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 please wait for DVD.
  2. Jun 4, 2013
    0
    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 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
  3. Jun 19, 2013
    3
    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 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. May 27, 2013
    3
    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
  5. May 24, 2013
    4
    There are a few laughs in the film, and it's great to see these actors together again, but the entire affair is just flat and lacks forward momentum. The first Hangover is a modern comedy great, along with Wedding Crashers, Bridesmaids and Old School. It's very tough to make comedy sequels that work, though. Even the credits sequence wasn't all that funny but stay for it and see for yourself!
  6. Jun 4, 2013
    3
    "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+
  7. Jun 21, 2013
    3
    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).
  8. May 30, 2013
    1
    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
  9. Jun 6, 2013
    2
    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.
  10. Jul 12, 2013
    0
    Where is the comedy in this comedy? Thats the question I am still trying to answer after finishing this movie. Without comedy there is nothing to see here at all.
  11. Jun 5, 2013
    3
    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... 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
  12. Jun 19, 2013
    3
    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 few laughs but overall it is easily the worst of the trilogy.
  13. Jun 10, 2013
    3
    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 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
  14. Jun 11, 2013
    1
    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. This was not better than the second. Not by a long shot.
  15. Jun 5, 2013
    3
    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.
  16. May 30, 2013
    3
    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 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
  17. Jun 2, 2013
    4
    The first 40 minutes are terrible and only gets slightly better by actually becoming an action film. It carries a darker more serious tone that doesn't have the pay off as the first film but succeeds in being better than the second, if you call that an accomplishment.
  18. Jun 7, 2013
    4
    Comedy approach to Ocean's Eleven, so horrible they used well-written characters to themselves up so bad as if you're watching a new Family Guy episode. However, there is value in watching Alan grow and become a man.
  19. May 24, 2013
    3
    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 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
  20. May 27, 2013
    2
    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."
  21. May 28, 2013
    2
    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 way possible.
  22. Jun 4, 2013
    4
    If you are looking for a movie which just makes you laugh & has no storyline then this is the perfect movie for you. However when you consider the 1st and even the 2nd Hangover movies in comparison to this movie then it is awful.

    It has tried too much to relate to the first movie which if it was done correctly would work very well. However it has not been done correctly. I would
    recommend watching this film, but more than once would be pointless. Expand
  23. Jun 5, 2013
    2
    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 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
  24. Jun 13, 2013
    3
    This review contains spoilers. 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 Collapse
  25. Jun 21, 2013
    0
    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.
  26. Jun 21, 2013
    0
    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
  27. Jun 30, 2013
    2
    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.
  28. Jul 10, 2013
    3
    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.
  29. Aug 20, 2013
    2
    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.
  30. Nov 3, 2013
    4
    Outrageous and sometimes hilarious, but for the most part its a retread of the events/scenarios of the previous Hangover films with only the setting being the newest addition and biggest difference. The acting is great and I am most fond of Zach Galifianakis reprising his role as Allen who is clearly the best character of the wolfpack. This is not a very good sequel.
  31. Jul 8, 2013
    4
    Really bizarre... it didn't even focus on comedy and seemed like a caper flick. I can somewhat commend them for trying harder than they did in Part II, but The Hangover should have never been a trilogy.
  32. Jun 1, 2013
    4
    Other than Alan's Ave Maria, this END is piece of F**K! Only got here Mr. Chow's gay act and jokes like smelling Stu's butt. Thank goodness this series got a full stop.
  33. May 27, 2013
    3
    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 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
  34. May 31, 2013
    3
    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 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. Expand
  35. May 24, 2013
    1
    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 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
  36. Jun 27, 2013
    4
    This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. The 3rd installment of the Hangover series, which was billed as the final, had all the hype of a prize fight and like a prize fight was a complete let down. Hangover 3: The Search for Chow was very disappointing, the worst of the series and you shouldn't waste your money to see this in the theater. This is a DVD rental at best.

    The giraffe scene was by far the funniest scene of the movie but unfortunately comes at the very beginning. The extra scene at the end was pretty hysterical too and my thought was an Alan wedding would've been funnier, especially if they had worked it backward to establish who is wife is. My issue with this movie is a lot of what has already been said. Alan was supposed to be our loveable ra-tard who is a kid in an adults body and in this episode he becomes a teenager. A self absorbed hateful person who is mean to just be mean. The heist aspect fo the movie was a good idea but executed poorly. John Goodman was not favorably cast and this would've been a lot funnier had someone like Fred Armisen been the big bad. The jokes fell flat and while the ideas were there, the movie felt like it was rushed. I would've been ok if Todd Phillips (a comedic genius) had to take 5 years to give us a quality ending to the series. Chow was never supposed to be a main character, he was a supporting one and there is entirely too much of him in this movie. My last issue with the film is the lack of cameos. It's the last movie of the series and ends in Vegas, c'mon fellas! Give us a Mike Tyson and Carrot Top and make it funny. When I start feeling that I could've written the movie better, that's when I realize I'm in a bad movie. The first movie of the series is one of my all time favorite movies and I'm aware the sequels wouldn't be as good but I really wanted more laughs to end it.
    Expand
  37. Jun 27, 2013
    4
    A classic example of Sequel Syndrome. The first was fantastic, The second was good but tried too hard to be like the first. The third has people realizing that the writers etc have ran out of ideas. And it has become all too stale.
  38. Nov 9, 2013
    4
    There's just no way around it: The Hangover could have used a third (and final, hopefully) installment, but this is NOT good enough, in any way, shape or form, to match up to the excellent original and solid sequel.

    The main issue is the plot, which feels as hashed together as I can imagine the entire film was. The performances of the main characters are still as solid as they've ever
    been, but Bradley Cooper has come a long way in between Hangovers and his presence is almost...overbearing? It's hard to pinpoint, but none of the actors (including a more involved Ken Jeong as Chow and a unnecessarily involved John Goodman as the film's antagonist) are helped by the thin and void story.

    Without spoiling it, I'll just say that the plot itself chokes the humor out of the film. Each of the previous Hangovers worked by creating situations that were, in and of themselves, hilarious, and then adding the reactions of a handful of excellent comedic actors. A bit of improv must have come into play as well, and even that feels cut off for most of Part III. The potential danger that created the tension in the first two films is diluted to the point where it doesn't work how it's supposed to work: as a platform for the humor. Nothing is better than a good laugh when you might be expecting things to go wrong...and even when they go wrong in Part III, you can't seem to find it in you to care as you once did.

    In the end, you'll most likely wonder, like myself, why any of this had to happen in the first place. I'm not talking about the film, but the story within, which is absolutely ridiculous to begin with and gets no better as it continues to unfold. There are some truly funny moments...with such an impressive cast, it was an impossibility to completely avoid that. But these are too far between a shoddy script to justify itself. A poor idea laced into a great overall idea (concluding the series with a bang) makes the entire thing...below itself as a franchise installment.
    Expand
  39. Nov 27, 2013
    2
    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.
  40. Oct 7, 2013
    3
    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.
  41. Dec 21, 2013
    3
    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 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
  42. Nov 6, 2013
    2
    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)
  43. Dec 23, 2013
    3
    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 action would have distracted me from going through this comedic disaster.
  44. Dec 13, 2013
    2
    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 the whole thing in dead silence, Me and my freands resorted to throwing popcorn around which i found was a lot more entertaining.
  45. Ozy
    Apr 2, 2014
    1
    Hangover 3 simply got too serious. This was not the comedy i had been waiting for. An intervention for Christ's sake? What was the point of this 'end' to the trilogy? What were the film makers trying to say here? 'ok guys, funs over everybody go home now...' dissatisfied and disappointed with this flick. Although I loved hangover 2, its plot seemed the exact same as the first. So ill give this one a 1 for at least trying something different. Expand
Metascore
30

Generally unfavorable reviews - based on 37 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 4 out of 37
  2. Negative: 19 out of 37
  1. Reviewed by: Odie Henderson
    Jun 6, 2013
    38
    The Hangover Part III plays more like a caper film — “Alan’s Eleven,” perhaps — than a comedy. While Phillips ably handles the action sequences, he and co-screenwriter Craig Mazin can’t juggle both genres in the screenplay.
  2. Reviewed by: Steve Rose
    May 27, 2013
    20
    This is less a caper than a trudge; a linear adventure that proceeds in fits and starts, with few surprises and fewer laughs. There's barely even a hangover.
  3. Reviewed by: Rick Groen
    May 23, 2013
    0
    Not just bad, but weirdly, fascinatingly bad.