Housefull 3, by Sajid-Farhad, is the third sequel of Housefull series. It is not that I don’t have sense of humour, but comedy genre has never impressed me. Probably I am yet to watch a good film from this genre. Housefull 3 also fails to generate any laughter. I wish, I could laugh, but the film is full of mindless humour. People who love comedy genre have also mentioned that the prequels were much better. I may not sound passionate at all while sharing my review about this film. I am sure, there is tremendous scope in our film industry to come up with genuine comedy flicks.
The film begins with a robbery scene followed by the police officers arresting three thieves (Samir Kochchar and two others). Then the frames move to a NRI businessman Batook Patel (Boman Irani) settled in London, who proudly says that he loves his all the three daughters Ganga, Jamuna, Saraswati (Jacqueline, Lisa, Nargis respectively) and would never married them off. The logic behind his saying so is astrological; he is being conveyed that he would die the moment a son-in-law steps in their house, or a son-in-law looks at him or a son-in-law utters to him. Ganga, Jamuna and Sarswati try to find their own solutions for the same by asking their respective boy-friends Sandy / Sundi (Akshay Kumar) to act as a person confined to wheel chair, Teddy (Riteish Deshmukh) to act as a blind person and Bunty (Abhishek Bachchan) to act as a mute person. All three come to meet Batook Patel, ask his daughters’ hands and end up staying in their house. It doesn’t need mention that the boys were eying the property of the girls. Rest of the film revolves around the situations generated to safeguard themselves from Batook’s eyes and also to win him over.
Jacky shroff plays the role of a gangster Urja Nagre. What is the connection between him and Batook. Who are the three thieves shown in the beginning of the film? Whether Sandy, Teddy, Bunty are able to marry their love interests? How many of the people are claiming Batook’s property? How does Batook handle his girls’ love interests? Does he yield to them? How does the real picture come into play? What chaos is created as the film unfold?
I really have a problem with the script of the film. Is it required to make a mockery of the handicap / disability to generate sense of laughter? The song ‘Taang Uthake’ and choreography is aweful. Girls’ dialogues translate the English phrases literally into Hindi, gets repetitive and lacks humour.
As far as the cast and crew is concerned, indeed Akshay, Riteish and Abhishek are good with the comic timings. I liked Riteish of the three. Girls don’t have much to do. Music is average.
Watch Housefull 3 at your own risk. I don’t recommend this film, but if you just want to watch and forget a film, please go and watch this film, which has just a few scenes of laughter.
The third film in the popular yet low-quality comedy franchise, Housefull 3 doesn't try much to impress. So it ends up with its predecessors in the Bollywood abyss where all bad movies go.
Sandy (Kumar), Bunty (Bachchan), and Teddy (Deshmukh) are in love with Ganga (Fernandez), Saraswati (Fakhri), and Jamuna (Haydon), respectively, mostly because they are the rich daughters of Batook (Irani), a Gujarati NRI with a bad sense of humor. Because things are rather messy and there are couple of skeletons up in the cupboard, Batook wants his daughters to marry some other blokes; so he refuses to meet their beaus. However, the daughters manage to introduce the trio to their father by asking them to fake some disability. So Sandy becomes a cripple, Bunty becomes a man with no voice, and Teddy pretends to be blind. So you get the idea how the jokes are formed and what ensues further in the plot, along with few slightly unnecessary side arcs.
While there is some good old average comedy here to chuckle at, the main problem with Housefull 3 is that it spends 2 hours in making fun of various disabilities, races, and languages, and then towards the climax tries to absolve itself with a confession. It's all good in light-heart, but the overall effect that it gives is mostly unpalatable.
That's it, there's not much else to say here as anyone who has seen any of the previous two films can deduce the story from what information I have provided. The three lead actors are funny to watch, compared to the female leads' performances; they are rather clumsy and pouty in their approach. Songs are dim and so are the montages.
BOTTOM LINE: Sajid-Farhad's Housefull 3 is nothing different from its predecessors and all it provides is few chuckles that may not be welcome in the type of country that India has now become (in the wake of Tanmay Bhatt's Snapchat video controversy). Wait for TV premiere and switch between channels during commercials.
Can be watched with a typical Indian family? YES
I can’t recollect the last time I watched a genuinely good Bollywood comedy – one that earned its laughs rather than pummelling its audience into submission with a sledgehammer.
It was with great trepidation, thus, that I entered the cinema hall to watch Housefull 3; given Sajid-Farhad’s less-than-enviable filmography, it was rather unlikely that their latest venture would be anything other than a cinematic Apocalypse.
Needless to say, some – if not all – of my worst fears were confirmed.
Housefull 3 is cheerfully crude, laboriously long and painfully pretentious.
Most unforgivably though – the film is just flat-out boring.
The underlying premise remains the same as that of the previous two installments – three boys and three girls manage to find themselves entangled in a ridiculously convoluted situation, largely thanks to the many dim-witted choices that they make over the course of the film.
This is a film that brims with solid comic potential, and in the right hands this could have turned out to be one hell of a rollicking entertainer.
There are a few gags that land their punches well enough – especially those that involve a lot of self-deprecation.
All three leading men – Akshay Kumar, Riteish Deshmukh and Abhishek Bachchan – throw themselves wholeheartedly into their half-baked roles, and this earnestness helps propel the film forward.
The ladies however remain woefully bereft of anything that even remotely resembles a well-crafted story arc.
There was a time when I found myself pondering over what might have prompted Sajid Khan all those years ago to spell his franchise’s name the way he did.
Hark, the mystery stands resolved: the extra ‘L’ is for Ludicrity.