| The Hangover Part II |
| Written by Nick West | |||
| Monday, 06 June 2011 10:40 | |||
 In 2009 The Hangover was a surprise hit. It followed Phil (Bradley Cooper), Stu (Ed Helms) and Alan (Zach Galifianakis) as they tried to find their lost friend in Vegas after a wild bachelor party. The movie was surprisingly well written and hilarious. It showed the daytime Vegas we don’t often see in movies, had some interesting camera work and introduced us to some stars with great charisma and chemistry. It made a whole lot of money and made a lot of people laugh. The Hangover Part II attempts to recreate the magic of the first movie except in Bangkok, Thailand. Everything is in place except for the laughs. I found problems immediately in the script. Everything felt forced from the get-go. Director Todd Philips worked with different screenwriters than the first film. One of the new writers is credited with penning Scary Movie 3, Scary Movie 4 and Superhero Movie. Scene by scene and joke by joke The Hangover Part II copies its predecessor beat for beat. It literally uses the exact same plot. I’m not kidding, the exact same plot. Nothing in the premise or execution has changed. We start with a phone call from Phil followed by shots of a city and badass Danzig music. Then we jump back to meeting the boys in California. Within two minutes I had already predicted the rest of the movie. Not so much predicted as remembered the first one. Plot aside, the real question with a comedy is, does it make you laugh? If you’d like to hear and see the same jokes and gags from the first movie repeated (again) beat by beat—then yes. Those of us with any sort of literary or cinematic intelligence will most likely be bored. Part II gives us a monkey instead of a baby, a naked Mr. Chow attacking the boys, a standoff with a criminal, a false reunion, a car chase, sex with hookers, Stu having a stand-up-to-his-oppressor monologue and more. I know it sounds good on paper but remember, we’ve already seen this movie. I’m actually surprised at how classes and callous this cash-in is. It reminded me of those crappy sequels we used to get in the 1980s. Think Grease 2 or Jaws 3D. I’m not over exaggerating. Despite the screenplay and redundancy, Part II is at least watchable. Ed Helms is a funny everyman with fantastic delivery. (My biggest laugh was a scene where he screams “Fuck tha po-leece!”) Bradley Cooper is a pretty boy with believable reactions and intelligence. But unfortunately Galafianakis overplays his character. He gets a few laughs and wears thin quickly. And when I say “watchable,” I mean, at least I didn’t want to get up and leave the theater. It doesn’t mean I wasn’t bored. I was. What really bends me out of shape is that Phil, Stu and Alan are great characters. You could put them into other situations and they would stand strong. It’s too bad the filmmakers decided not to try something new or interesting. Leaving the theater, I asked my seventeen-year-old brother what he thought of the flick. He replied, “It seemed like a Hangover movie.” It’s sad that The Hangover has become its own rip-off. If you’re a fan of the first movie, do yourself a favor—watch it again instead of seeing the sequel. Oh, guess what? The Hangover Part III has already been green-lit. See you in two years for a franchise that is a parody of itself. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1411697/ http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1119646/
|
