Golmaal 3 - Wogma Readers Reviews

I'm sorry, I didn't like any of the movies.

The "trilogy" is basically a financial investment and not a film - and maybe that distinction is there. There are people who want to see it, and there are people who don't want to see but that doesn't change the fact that the entire trilogy is backed by only one motive - being the diwali blockbuster of the year.

Slapstick is great, but only if they earnestly strive to make a slapstick movie- Govinda movies in the 90s. I would much rather watch those than a business deal disguised as a film.

(Okay too harsh, but Tusshar Kapoor, esp in Golmaal annoys the **** out of me!)

I watched the first one out of lack of choice (one of those spend the evening with your friends type) and barring a very very few scenes it was all nonsense. I love comedy but not this kind where scenes and characters are created purely in the hope of making people laugh. There are some that succeed but Golmaal wasn't one of those. Anyway why am I writing about what I thought of the first film ---- guess I got carried away by the idea of 'trilogy' that Swetha mentioned.
Golmaal Returns - hmm guaranteed more nonsense so I skipped it except like about 15 mins of the movie that I happened to watch while I was switching channels and was glad I skipped it.
This third one - I have no intention of watching it whatsoever not because it does or doesn't give me entertainment but more because I feel that each time the Indian audiences (i.e. people in general) are making a 10 step progress in the way they think, it is movies like these that pull them back by 9.

Absolutely.. Totally agree

Well, watched this movie purely because of this review. Had read Poonam's reviews of Jhing Chik Jhing on her blog and had seen it later. And I am glad that i saw that movie (also, summer 2007 was her recommendation). She is once again bang on with her review. As she said you get a feeling that the movie is stretched for no reason, especially the 2nd half of the movie has much of these scenes. Still, as poonam says, the movie is a 3 hr (i think 2 hrs and 40 minutes) of standup done by hell lot of actors. Golmal 3 is a sure laughter medicine despite some scenes. Pretty good especially after golmal 2. The rating options are not suitable. Had to give "so-so" rating when it is better than that, but not a "Yay"!

i like the film
http://hindifilmcity.com

Golmaal 3 was full Dhamaal.
I loved this movie alot.

Kunal dialogue was rocking.

Super Flop,
Total nonsense,
Waste of money and time of the public and of the director and the film crew itself.

ROHIT S H I T T Y.....
A Blunderful experience.....
But surely if one sees this,
He'll become sincere enough in the future to thoughtfully choose a movie before watching...

Whatever the above commenters are blabbering, mind it,
It IS NOT a good movie.
Even calling it a movie is too much...

@Joydeep I haven't watched 'Khatta Meetha', but I sure was relieved that movie made me laugh. Which is lot more than I could ever say about Golmaal 2.

@praneshachar: Thanks so much for your comments here. Yeah, I waited to watch the shooting scenes in end, some of them were hilarious.

@Wardhaman Thanks for the kind words. Yea, I thought it was a stand comedy show one that could easily be improvised each time without altering/impacting its non-existent plot. :) What did you mean when you said - 'Golmal 3 is a sure laughter medicine despite some scenes' What scenes you found objectionable/irritating?

@Mallika That's quite some enthusiasm, I am curious to know what you thought of the movie AFTER you watched it. ;)

@Yakub The stammering fit well in situational comedy and game of rejoinders, that I didn't much notice the irritation it may have caused to some. To each his/her own.

@Dr. Sachin: I do not remember a single instance where disability per se was being made fun of in a derogatory manner. No character was put down solely because it was mute or stammering, rather laughs happened due to situations/reactions that mute rejoinders/stammered replies created/evoked. Which is not so much different than laughing at gullibility of Vasooli or amnesiac portrayal of Johnny Lever. In truth, we try to make light of even could-have-been-dangerous moments. Don't we jest when even able-people trip or fall or makes similar mistakes. Or, would we prefer a sanctimonious mourning? Not only that, I loved the scene where Tusshar Kapoor's mute character goes to break the secret of their birth to everyone and for once they all (including the step-brothers) understand perfectly without a shred of doubt.
What would you prefer - differently-abled lead characters that can laugh at themselves and give equally back or morose disabled characters (often part of sub-plots) that only evoke pity? Personally, I would judge a movie/book/comedy based on its intention - and in this case, I didn't think it was insensitive. It's good to laugh on idiosyncrasies that life offers.

Wait, you five F.A.L.T.U a lower score than a Golmaal 3

Really?

I'm 100% sure the direction and screenplay of F.A.L.T.U even with inconsistencies and plot holes would be much above this.