Jolly LLB 3Â once again shows that while Indian cinema is capable of addressing serious and relevant issues, it often refuses to fully commit to them. The film touched upon themes of justice, power, and systemic failure, but repeatedly weakened its own message by inserting unnecessary clownery. The constant jokes, exaggerated reactions, and forced humour took away from what could have been a grounded and impactful courtroom drama.
At this point, it is hard not to compare it to the courtroom dramas from Hollywood, a genre I particularly enjoy. Films like A Few Good Men, The Trial of the Chicago 7, Spotlight, and 12 Angry Men stand out as some of my favourites because they rely on sharp writing, meaningful legal arguments, and a consistent serious tone. They prove that audiences do not need forced comic relief or overacting to stay invested in stories about justice and accountability.
A major disappointment lay in the fact that the film carried “LLB” and “Law” in its title but barely engaged with the law in any meaningful way. There was genuine scope to discuss real laws, legal procedures, and the actual legality of situations presented in the case. Instead, the courtroom scenes relied more on dramatic monologues and theatrics than on logical legal reasoning or detailed examination of evidence. The courtroom felt more like a performance space than a serious institution.
The assumption that audiences require humour to stay interested feels outdated. A consistent serious tone would have allowed the film to explore injustice and corruption with greater depth and credibility. Justice is not a joke, and treating it like one only dilutes the impact of the message.
Jolly LLB 3Â could have stood out as a sharp and sincere legal drama. Instead, it settled for being safe and loud, missing the opportunity to genuinely respect the subject it claimed to represent.