The Hangover Part II
Rated MA
Review by Margaret Pomeranz
Well, it’s all happening again. That Hangover thing, where a group of guys get together the night before a wedding and disaster is the result. This time it’s Stu, ED HELMS, about to tie the knot with Lauren, JAMIE CHUNG, despite the overt disapproval of her father.
The wedding is in Thailand at a luxury beach resort. Stu is adamant that he doesn’t want a bucks’ night, considering what happened last time and he doesn’t want Alan, ZACH GALIFIANAKIS,included. But Phil, BRADLEY COOPER, and Doug, JUSTIN BARTHA, talk him round. They go for one quiet beer around a fire on the beach and the next thing you know they’re in Bangkok much the worse for wear.
The problem of Lauren’s missing brother becomes embroiled in missing drug money, a monk with a vow of silence, a nightclub with a specialized trade and a monkey who is a go-between. Unfortunately the writing team of Jon Lucas and Scott Moore who brought a freshness and hilarity to the original must have passed on this rehash, instead we have a screenplay by Craig Mazin and Scot Armstrong with input from director Todd Phillips that is just not that funny. Alan has lost the naivete that made him sort of endearing in the original, in this he’s just mostly unpleasant.
There’s no sense of wild, eye-popping exhilaration as the boys get deeper and deeper into trouble, there’s just a feeling that we’ve been here before and it was much better the first time around. It’s hard to make a sequel as good as the original, particularly when the success of the first Hangover surpassed everyone’s expectations. That success was deserved, whatever success PART II has isn’t.
Further comments
MARGARET: David, aren’t I being tough?
DAVID: Yes, but you’re right. It’s very disappointing because I enjoyed the first one. It came as a bit of a surprise. It had quite an interesting structure and plot and this one reproduces it slavishly. It’s as if you’ve got to have, almost scene by scene, a copy of the original and, of course, it’s not as original anymore and it’s less funny, I think.
MARGARET: Even with the inclusion of the guest star.
DAVID: Well, that’s right, yes. But having said that, I saw it in a cinema and with quite a lot of people and a lot of them were very amused by it and, I must say, the bits they found funniest are the bits I found least funny.
MARGARET: David, I don’t think this is a good thing that we’re so out of tune with our audience actually.
DAVID: Well, I don’t know if it’s our audience or not but, anyway, obviously some people will find this funny but it does push the boundaries as far as it can go, I think, in terms of being borderline offensive.
[b]MARGARET: Well, the fact is that you have expectations because we did enjoy the first and you think that some effort is going to be made to make the sequel at least as good.
DAVID: Yes, but that’s the trouble. I think very little effort has been made.
MARGARET: That’s why TOY STORY 3 was so remarkable.
DAVID: Yes, because it was a whole…
MARGARET: Because it completely reinvented it.[/b]
DAVID: And another thing about this film, I think, if you see it you will never want to go to Bangkok.
MARGARET: I don’t know that that’s true. Look, I’m giving it two stars.
DAVID: I’m giving it one and a half.