nishesquire09

(2012-04-29 18:16:58)

Lacking the feel of a bachelor party

The first Hangover set the standard. It was a legendary night ofcraziness that resonates with men who have participated in insanebachelor parties, or sets the tone for those who will. It captured thementality, the feel, the utter spontaneity of a "last night out withyour bachelor friend." It correctly understood that the bachelor partybrings together people who meet for the first time - a combination ofhigh school friends, college friends, brothers and cousins - whocollaborate on a common quest to celebrate the end of single life for aspecial person.That's what made the first Hangover special. For the most part, thesequel lacked that feel. There was less celebration and much morepanic. And it really missed the opportunity to bring in an additionalcharacter to truly mix things up. The brother of the bride was hardlyinvolved, but when he was, he was too meek, too geeky, and generally apain to watch. At times this movie felt too serious for a bachelor party celebration,and at others too repetitive. It was essentially the same recipe as thefirst, except it was set in Bangkok and with a couple of minor changes.Unlike the first installment, which provided a steady stream of comedy,this one sputters throughout, although it does have several laugh outloud moments.

george.schmidt

(2012-04-29 09:12:30)

Hysterically funny follow-up to the out-of-nowhere blockbuster comedy keeps the 'Wolfpack' back for action

THE HANGOVER PART II (2011) ***1/2 Ed Helms, Bradley Cooper, ZachGalifianakis, Justin Bartha, Ken Jeong, Paul Giamatti, Jamie Chung,Mason Lee, Jeffrey Tambor, Sasha Barrese, Gillian Vigman, NickCassavetes, Crystal The Monkey (cameo as himself: Mike Tyson)Hysterically funny follow-up to the out-of-nowhere blockbuster comedykeeps the 'Wolfpack' back for action along the same lines exceptinstead of Las Vegas they head to Bangkok for more of the same in theirfractured-memory evening of debauchery with groom-to-be, mild-mannereddentist Stu (Helms); Abbott & Costello (ah, Cooper and Galifianakis)and his future-brother-in-law (Lee, son of filmmaker Ang Lee) MIA; avery angry gangster (Giamatti having fun); a return visit from Mr. Chow(hilarious Jeong) and the scene-stealing, chain-smoking, drug-dealingmonkey (Crystal) all attempting to fit the pieces of the jigsaw puzzleof their lives. Director Todd Phillips – who co-wrote with Craig Mazin& Scot Armstrong – gets in touch with his inner Harold Ramis (a goodthing!) – mixing the numbskull slapstick with some emotions and goingdecidedly darker (a severed finger; a trip to a he/she strip joint andthe 'death' of a character) fuel the fires of familiarity yet on thewhole it's still gut-bustingly FUNNY and rapid fire in sightgags/zingers and one-liners that requires several trips to get them allin !

Fields201

(2012-04-29 15:34:39)

I Felt Like I Had A Hangover After This Movie

The Hangover Part 2 begins when Phil (Bradley Cooper) is on the phonewith Stu's (Ed Helms) soon to be wife that someone has gone missing andthe wedding may have to be cut off. Cut back to a week earlier, and Stuis getting married to his fiancГѓВ©e in Thailand. They bring along herlittle brother Teddy who Alan (Zach Galifianakis)despises. But suddenlythe boys are drinking and wakes up with a hangover only to find Teddymissing and they must go through a series of events to find him.Hold on a sec, I seem to be referring to the first movie. Wait, this isthe second movie. It's the same scenario all over again. Stu's now gota tattoo on his face that looks suspiciously like Mike Tyson's(replacing his missing tooth from the first one) and Alan now has abald head. It's the same exact formula!To be fair, there are a few funny scenes in the movie that made melaugh out loud. I actually thought that the whole movie would be a rushjob devoid of any laughs. The audience I saw it with was laughingthroughout the movie, with a few down times here and there. Chow evenmakes an appearance but his return is mostly forgettable. The first scene that made me laugh was at the toast in the beginningwhen Stu's soon to be father-in-law compares Stu to rice. It wasactually quite funny. Then Alan makes a speech and I really thought thefilm would really nail it if he struck back at the father-in-law whowas obviously badgering Stu in front of an audience of people. However,that did not happen. So close. There were a few other funny moments inthe film, but it never seemed to quite live up to the first one. Well,maybe one part involving a monkey, a monk and a bus. The audience wasrolling on that one. In fact, the monkey was the real show stealer. I'mbetting he will return for the third installment.The last third of the movie, however, felt very rushed. It was like thewriters struggled to really find that ending that was just phoned infor the sake of finally ending this picture. Granted, the end creditshelped salvage the rush job that they did, but it wasn't enough towarrant this a worthy sequel to the highly successful Hangover film. With the third installment greenlit, let me spoil the third one foryou. Bradley Cooper will be on the phone with Alan's fiancГѓВ©e, and thewedding will have to be called off. Flashback to sometime earlier, andwe lead up to the events where they wake up with a hangover, and aseries of events will follow which will probably feel just like theprevious two installments. The End.

anne-517

(2012-04-28 18:30:12)

Awful ending

This movie was ruined for me by the inclusion of a notorious convictedrapist as the "celebrity" at the end. As far as I am concerned it is aninsult to women everywhere. If it hadn't been for that appalling endingthe movie would have been OK. It wasn't as good as Hangover I but itwas fairly amusing (except with a lot less heart). What kind ofdirector thinks that it would be funny to include such a disgustingcreature as the highlight at the end of his film? I won't be watchinganything directed by Todd Phillips again. I can't believe that womenrated this higher than men. What is wrong with people? It was a verysour note at the end of what was supposed to be a comedy. They shouldbe ashamed of themselves.

EnderAK08

(2012-04-27 22:43:11)

Hangover I with a new location

I expected more out of Todd Phillips.The Hangover (2009) was hilarious, Due Date (2010), was funny but notas much. The Hangover Part II is literally the same movie with the same plotpoints as Hangover I - phone call from Phil (Bradley Cooper) sayingthere's no wedding, flashback to the pre-bachelor party events,awkward/hilarious wake up scene (someone's missing!), wandering aroundcity in question, discovering that Alan (Zach Galifianakis) messed up,more close calls, a wedding, pictures during the credits. The missingperson in question is still in the hotel, although they do check theroof.The sequel is seedier (it's Bangkok), but uncomfortably dark. There areplainly sad and depressing moments. Unlike the first movie, where theidea that Doug (Justin Bartha) might be dead is humorous, it's nothere. There's so much talk of murder and death that the humor of themovie slips out. Sure there are funny moments - when Stu (Ed Helms) in a diner beforethe trip covers his cup with a napkin - "so nobody roofies me."Galifianakis is funny, although not as funny as in part one, but hegets us through. Ken Jeong returns for a few scenes as Mr. Chow, butthe movie is so familiar much of the fun is gone. It is beautifully choreographed though - Bangkok has never been sowell-displayed, so beautiful and so dangerous, I just wish the moviehad lived up to its promise. 4/10

Jim Helfer

(2012-04-27 01:51:59)

LOTS of full frontal MALE nudity

This movie follows the extremely distubing trend of most "guy" movies these days -- REPEATED FULL MALE NUDITY!!! Since when do the majority of guys want to go to the movies to see other guys?!?!? If you don't have a desire to spend time stalking the local gym shower, this movie should be avoided!

IronMike84

(2012-04-26 22:23:14)

102 Minutes of Garbage

I felt used after paying to see this movie. Nearly everything about itwas awful.The first half hour was spent reminding us what happened in the firstHangover (as if we forgot) and running through the exact same jokesverbatim..The next hour was tired, boring, predictable, and pathetic. I couldn'twait for it to end so I could do anything else.Throughout the movie, the Zach Galifianakis and Ed Helms characterswere distorted into such idiotic caricatures of their roles from theoriginal that it was insulting to watch.Outside of a few funny moments and Ken Jeong's time on screen, thismovie about as fun as getting a root canal.

sad-eyed-angel

(2012-04-26 10:20:11)

Not bad, just.... nothing new

When a movie is as much of a mega smash hit as The Hangover was in2009, you can pretty much tell as soon as the credits start rollingthat the movie will have a sequel. And that can be a good or bad thing;a sequel can further develop the characters you loved from the firstand tell a whole new story, or it can regurgitate whatever made thefirst so great and just add new words. The Hangover, Part II is thelatter.In part II, the boys are going to Thailand for Stu's wedding and wakeup realizing they lost his bride's little brother. Sound familiar? TheHangover part II is very similar to the first one, right down to itstarts out almost the exact same way with everyone wondering where theyare and Phil calling Doug's wife Tracy. The main difference betweenthis one and the first one (other than it takes place in Thailand) isthat the jokes go from funny to uncomfortable to watch. Instead ofwaking up and discovering one of them lost a tooth, they wake up tofind the severed finger of the guy who is missing. Instead of gettingtasered in the nuts, Phil gets shot in the arm. Instead of stealing apolice car, they've kidnapped a monk. The jokes that made you laugh inthe first one makes you feel sorry for them in this one. I'm not sayingthis movie was entirely bad, Bradley Cooper is still gorgeous (sue me,I'm a girl and that's my main draw for seeing these movies) and thereare still some jokes that you can laugh at. I'm saying that they feltthe need to rehash or bring in as much from the first one as theycould, like Mike Tyson is randomly on the stage rapping at the end, andthe movie ends with them looking at pictures from the night before. Itmakes me hope there is no Hangover III, but I think that would beimpossible as the only one left to get hitched is Alan and who seesthat happening?

ChadFeldheimer

(2012-04-21 01:39:01)

Cannot believe how similar this is to the first. *heavy spoilers*

This review contains copious spoilers for The Hangover Part II. But sodoes The Hangover Part I.I loved the first film. It came from nowhere and was as good as thereception it got, and I was really hoping that the advertising for thisone was just some kind of mislead, saving the good stuff and thesurprises for the actual movie, but unfortunately for all of us, thisis cookie-cutter film making at its most blatant. Start off with aflashback to the beginning of the third act, Bradley Cooper on thephone to someone at the wedding, follow up with a montage set to aDanzig song, throw in some Kanye leading up to the titular event, havethem wake up in complete disarray mere days before a wedding, with oneof the group (shock horror) missing! Quest to find him while keepingthe missus in the dark about the whole situation, with some cutesidekicks a long the way and a bat sh*t crazy Ken Jeong. Have them beatup and shot at with Zach Galfinakis making stupid comments. And then,surprise surprise, he was in the hotel the whole time! Silly us. Scorethe finale with the exact same music from the first, and, why not,chuck in Mike Tyson. "Hey guys I found all these photos of what we didthat night", "Okay, we'll look at them once and delete them", cut tocredits, photo montage ensues.There are definitely laughs to be had, but you'd have far morere-watching the first one. It's not a terrible film, I wouldn't evencall it a bad film exactly, but it is such a wasted opportunity... Ithought PotC: On Stranger Tides would be the worst sequel of thisseason, but not too sure at this point.

garrettthebeast7

(2012-04-20 08:35:34)

Hilarious! A worthy sequel to a comedy classic!

After seeing The Hangover in 2009, I could not wait for Part II to bereleased and it was worth it. I really don't get why people are sayingthis movie sucks because it has the same plot. What do they expect? Ofcourse Todd Phillips is gonna use the same formula as the original butit works with this one. I can honestly say while Phillips did take thisone a step up with how crude and nasty the jokes are, it still made mefall out of my seat laughing, especially Alan's new attitude in this.To me, the only thing that would make The Hangover Part II a failure isif Alan was the one the trio ended up losing the night before. Withouthim, The Hangover movies would suck! Sure, we got Phil's sarcasm andthe craziness of Ed Helms but Alan is the one with it all. Overall, Igive it a 9/10.

Jack Cahill

(2012-04-20 01:03:46)

A must see.

Hangover Part II: Film Review Hangover Part II. what a great film, yetanother fantastic storyline. People doubted whether or not it could topthe previous film, and if the sequel would ruin the originality of theprevious film... they thought wrong. Part II is still the same idea,they all go out loose there memory etc etc, but Part II offers so muchmore comedy and thrill, there is more at stake this time, more tooloose. It was great to see the "wolf pack" back together butunfortunately Doug was not in the whole drama again, he went homeearly, it would have been nice to see him get more involved in thefilm. This time they do not live the high life glamour like they did inVegas, they were in Bangkok, there seemed to be a much darker anddepressing tone in the movie, they wake up in the grotty, dirty hotelwere all the power goes off, they find themselves in the slums ofbangkok. the film gets much more graphic, near the beginning andthroughout there are strong drug uses and strong sexual actions andnudity. I would say that this film is really a teenage humor, for 15 to28 maybe but adults will enjoy just as much To sum up this film i wouldsay it is a fantastic must see, its got to be comedy film of the year,its going to win loads of Oscars and just a general fun and fantasticfilm to watch. A must see film. i give it ******** stars (pleasecomment and rate my review :)for more of my reviews visithttp://review-cahill.blogspot.com/2011/06/hangover-part-ii-film-review.html

Mike Rajewski

(2012-04-19 21:21:53)

Weak......wait for the rental - and then don't rent it

If you'd like to enjoy watching Hangover 2 you're going to have tore-watch the first one and pretend it's really the second. Come tothink of it, you won't really be missing much. 99% of the movie iscompletely predictable and not very funny - and I really TRIED to laughduring the movie. Two parts of the movie made me laugh, one was a"realization" one of the guys had in Thailand and the other was a cameoappearance at the end of the movie.Watching this movie reminded me of how spoiled I've been with sequelsof late (ie Wall Street - which was actually pretty good). As forHangover 2 though, bad......just plain bad. Don't waste your time goingto the theater and don't even pay for a rental.

meeza

(2012-04-15 17:34:27)

A good buzz! The unnecessary action sequences cause it not to be a great hangover!

It happened again in "The Hangover Part II". I am referring to many ofthe ingenious comedic elements that made the first "Hangover" a realcrowd pleaser- the magnetic rapport between its three main protagonistsor better stated, those pack of wolves; the unpredictability of thenarrative structure in the protagonists' ordeal trying to figure outthe mania that occurred during their obliterated state; thescene-stealing comments from the eccentric Alan character; and ofcourse "those pictures". Sure one could argue that it is more of thesame from the original, but if it ain't broke don't fix it or forget itfor that matter. "The Hangover II" takes place in Thailand a couple ofyears after the first Hangover mayhem occurred in Vegas. Dentist Stu(Ed Helms) is marrying his lovely young bride in Thailand; however, Stuwants to extract himself from anything close that resembles a "bachelorparty" due to the toothless mania that happened to him in Vegas. Stu'sbest buddies Phil (Bradley Cooper) and Doug (Justin Bartha) head eastwith their wives and kids for Stu's wedding. And even the offbeat Alanattends even though Stu is reluctant with the idea. Into the picture inthis one is also Stu fiancГѓВ©e's teenage brother Teddy. And before youcould say "just-one-beer beach bonfire in a Thailand Resort causesBangkok profound partying", the madcap fiesta experience returns to theWolfpack; and Teddy is also along for the ride. Doug does save himselffrom the forgettable partying by splitting from the bonfire early. I donot want to provide too many more shots on what happened in "TheHangover II" because it would then spoil your hangover experience. Butlet me just say that they don't call it "bang kok" for nothing. As inthe original, this Hangover flick also gets some zany chow time fromthe flamboyant villain Mr. Chow, again masterfully played by Ken Jeong.I also loved the cameo work from the great Paul Giamatti. And yes, wedo get another scene-stealing Tyson comedic punch in this one from theChamp! In fact, all the performances were as good in the sequel as inthe original, but still the top thespian of the Wolfpack pack is ZachGalifianakis, who delivers another comedic brawny performance as theone & only Alan. Director Todd Phillips keeps the pace engaging as hedid the first time around, but my only Phillips knock is that in a fewscenes he tried to do the whole "action-comedy" thing in "The HangoverPart II" which made me want to barf, its called "The Hangover Part II"not "Bad Boys II"; nevertheless, another solid directorialorchestration from Phillips. The screen writing team of Phillips andCraig Mazin & Scott Armstrong delivered a funny script outside thewhole "bang bang" sequences. "The Hangover Part II" is a must-see eventhough you probably will not be as hung over from it as you were whenyou first had a taste of a cinematic "Hangover". **** Good

John Smith

(2012-04-15 06:40:40)

"I want to rip out my eyes and have a lobotomy" awful.

Please DO NOT WATCH THIS - DO NOT SUPPORT THIS FILM. It will rot yourmind.I had to edit thisI HATE THIS MOVIE SO MUCH I WISH I COULD GIVE IT NEGATIVE 500 stars.It's a film that celebrates lying, irresponsibility, immorality, andboasting about your failure as a human being. Worse than that, theAsian family members pretend to be liberated by this "zest for life".It's like a suicide pill for your spirit.Also, it's completely incomprehensible the character Lauren would marrythe incompetent, lying, prostitute frequenting, once divorced, andthe-reason-for-her brother's-amputated-finger guy who plays the lead.It's so f'ing retarded. I want to have anmesia.Below is my original more under-stated review: This is just anatrocious piece of crap. It's the Damien Hirst of comedies. It'sremarkable that a turd like this can succeed commercially. It's about abunch of irresponsible clowns who conveniently forget that they start ariot in Thailand.There's one really pointless plot brought to life by a stale cast.There's plenty of racism against Asians from mocking their accents (heyyou ignorant writers - why don't you learn to speak Thai and see howwell you do, dumb fu*ks) to stereotyping (anti-social over achievers).It's unbelievable that it took FIVE writers to pen this crap.Even more unbelievable is that this is the sequel.Hollywood wonders why people continue to download films or rent insteadof watching them in theaters. Just look at your "work". Only idiotswill pay for this crap. No one has a problem buying quality material ifthey ever come out again.I'm gong to cut off ties with anyone who watches this or invites me todo so. Such idiots should be banned from reproducing.

nickmesafilms

(2012-04-13 21:30:47)

The Hangover Part II (2011) - What Happens in Bangkok, Stays in Bangkok!

The second installment of the box office hit, "The Hangover" was notthat great through the eyes of critics, but I honestly enjoyed watchingthese guys drunk again, even if they were too lazy to come up with newmaterial. The film had the same laughs from the first film, and itreally kind of makes the first film look funnier. But one mixedthought: this is a film that should remain as one and shouldn't makemore of it. What I mean is, the writers were just too lazy for newideas, and they decided to stick with the same story. So, when watchingthe movie, you already know what will happen next. But I didn't mindwatching the same story, and completely enjoyed the newest changes intothis movie with a new Thailand background, new characters, a smokingmonkey, a tattoo, a finger, and a larger role for Ken Jeong, theChinese mobster. This movie lives to a fuller potential, and brings anew background to a well-known story, making it better and more new.The script is still raunchy and well-written, and the cast of BradleyCooper, Zach Galifanakis, Ed Helms, and Ken Jeong is still as funny asever. Though critics love the first film, and hated this one, I thinkit had bigger laughs than any other laugh, and deserves all theattention from fans. "The Hangover Part II", in my review, "unoriginaland predictable, but hilarious in every way."

GeorgeEdwardMaier

(2012-04-13 06:48:16)

Could have been better

The hangover films fall into this category where you have to just enjoythem for what they are and not think about them. They are very purelyentertaining, on a simple level. I'm not saying that's a bad thing, I'mjust saying maybe we shouldn't judge these films on the same criteriawe would a film that's attempting be be something else, such as BlackSwan, which is one of the biggest contrasts you could draw from thehangover films.There's a distinct lack of believability to the plot line of thissequel, as was true about the first film. Things happen often withouttrue or thought through cause, which I suppose is intended to be anelement of comedy, but sometimes I find it is taking a short cut tolaughs, and achieving them on a cheaper level. It's much harder to getlaughs about more believable situations, and the trademark of thesehangover films seems to be cheap laughs. Did someone hit repeat? Many of the narrative sub-structures, inaddition to the main plot line, seem to follow the first film. Thebeginning and resolution are pretty much exactly the same as in theprequel. I found the idea of a smoking monkey frankly disturbing, not funny asthe filmmakers tried to pass it off. It paints dark reflections ofanimal cruelty and anthropomorphising in our society which are keyissues, and this film tries to make them funny... I don't think itworks, and no one else in the cinema seemed to laugh either. I thoughtthe human race was getting past the idea of novelty from animalcruelty? Cinematography needs to be noted also, generally average. They seemedto put a lot of effort into getting really beautiful establishingshots, then slack off for every other shot. Furthermore they seemed tofollow conventions and not try anything experimental or different. Abit of a disappointment if I'm honest. I know my review so far may lead you to believe differently, but Iactually enjoyed the film overall. I just wouldn't like to see itagain. I think the film is worth a watch once you will likely get a fewlaughs even if there are prolonged moments when it's just boring andpredictable and one of the key jokes relying on the exploitation oftranssexual characters by supporting backwards stereotypes.

GoneWithTheTwins

(2012-04-12 23:26:16)

"I can't believe this is happening again!"

The Hangover Part II offers another dose of debauched misadventuresfrom the "wolf pack" of comedians sure to please those hungering formore after the original film. A familiar blend of severity andsilliness returns to keep the proceedings entertaining, if not a littletoo serious. Personal injuries and drug-fueled antics don't exactlylose their edge after a few one-liners attempt to obscure their gravityand all of Zach Galifianakis' scatterbrained outbursts can't counteractthe repulsiveness of the film's cruder moments. If The Hangover PartII's primary mission was to top its predecessor in shock value, itsucceeded. We're not sure if that's a compliment or not.On the eve of Stu's (Ed Helms) wedding in Thailand, Phil (BradleyCooper), Doug (Justin Bartha), and Alan (Zach Galifianakis) convincethe normally mild-mannered dentist to join them for one last drink onthe beach. When the group of friends awaken the next morning in Bangkokwith no memory of the previous night's transgressions and discover thatthe bride's younger brother Teddy (Mason Lee) is now missing, they mustonce again retrace their footsteps to locate the vanished youth andreturn Stu in time for his wedding. But when their exploration leadsthem to vengeful gangsters, cigarette-smoking monkeys, and the returnof an old criminal kingpin, remembering their drunken mishaps will bethe first thing they'll want to forget.Although it's touted as a sequel and dubbed "Part II," this follow-upto the hugely successful previous comedy is almost more of a remake.The similarities between the two are abundant, starting with anidentical cast, the very same story, a matching tone, equal servings ofbawdiness and mayhem, familiar male exposure (what happened to the daysof gratuitous female nudity?), a loudly intrusive soundtrack, and allsorts of bodily fluids. The trio's reaction to unexpected events,panicky situations, mysterious acquaintances, contraband, drugs andunnaturally forgiving wives remains on par with the original as well.If the formula works and fans are itching for more, stick with it, thefilmmakers clearly note."I can't believe this is happening again!" screams Stu in a grimyBangkok alley. The Hangover Part II brings spontaneity to new heights,despite its recycled plot, especially with its interest in severedilemmas. Lighthearted humor is reserved almost entirely for ZachGalifianakis, who once again steals the show with his wildly eccentric,disturbingly idiosyncratic, stay-at-home son personality and disregardfor safety, propriety and poise. The rest is a blend of darkly comicalmisadventures ranging from disquieting to shocking to downrightabhorrent. At every turn the trio is assaulted with violence,questionable pharmaceuticals, threats, filth, sexual deviance andvisual nastiness, making the experience a rarer form of comedy, asuccessful box office venture (based on the first film's $44 millionopening), and even a critical winner (landing the Golden Globe for BestPicture – Musical or Comedy). Too bad this sequel is likely to bepanned for the rather ignorant approach to Thailand, a racial error Sexand the City 2 couldn't escape.- The Massie Twins (www.GoneWithTheTwins.com)

(2012-04-12 13:29:42)

Hilarious!!!!

The first is now a classic, hard to follow up. This one is a close second to being as funny as the first. Grade A for entertainment. Closing credits are hilarious. Anyone not finding this movie funny, needs to find their lost sense of humor. hahahahahaha I'm still laughing.

davideo-2

(2012-04-12 01:39:02)

It was never going to be up to the standard of the original, but it was hard to think it would fall this short of the mark

STAR RATING: ***** Saturday Night **** Friday Night *** Friday Morning** Sunday Night * Monday Morning 'The Wolfpack' return, this time with Doug (Justin Bartha) engaged to abeautiful Thai girl and descending on the city for a weekend of thewild partying they'll always be remembered for from the first film. Butwhen one of their group goes missing again, they're thrown into anotherseries of wild escapades, involving their old friend Mr. Chow (KenJeong) a ruthless gangster (Paul Giamatti) and Mike Tyson! For the wonderful gems it sometimes churns out, it's easy to forgetthat Hollywood is fundamentally a business in the area of making money.So while an occasional film like The Hangover may come alike that was afar bigger hit than anyone could have imagined and developed it's owncult following, it's almost a forgone conclusion that they will want tocash in on this and make a sequel that will be commercially quitesuccessful and likely to have a big box office opening weekend, butartistically will be quite a failure in light of it's inspiration. Andno doubt director Todd Phillips's ego was spurred on with what arunaway success his first film was and was happy to go along with itand thought he could manage the same success twice. And so we have TheHangover Part II which is basically everything The Hangover was...butisn't.The formula from the first film is repeated almost exactly, as it oftenis, with the location simply switched from Las Vegas to Thailand, butthis in itself feels like enough to feel down on it, with the brightlights and dazzling spectacle of the world's gambling capital replacedwith the more diluted, down played back drop of the far east. But mostcrucially the laugh quotient is significantly down, with the set upsand delivery simply failing to work the way they did the first timeround. The characters are basically the same, Bradley Cooper's Phil thesmooth, charming one, Zach Galifianakis's boorish buffoon getting up tohis usual antics and, of course, Bartha's Doug the mild mannered,unwitting one who ends up going mad, as well as a few of the noveltycharacters from the first film re-introduced, but none to the effect ofthe first film. To try and liven things up a bit, at the end we havethe baffling spectacle of Mike Tyson performing his own little livemusic stint.The Hangover Part II is simply a sequel that is unsurprisingly not asgood as the original. Sadly, it's not by a mile and then some. *

david-sarkies

(2012-04-11 08:54:51)

Same film, different city.

This movie was absolute rubbish. In fact it really annoyed me. Okay,the first was was awesome in its very unique way, and I doubt it couldeasily be beaten. By looking at this film though, it hasn't. Okay,setting it in Bangkok is cool, but in many ways this movie was simplytrying to be a remake of the first movie and failing badly. It tried touse a lot of what I consider the successful elements of the first, buthere it generally didn't work. In fact, parts of it I thought weredownright sickening.In part II it is Stu's time to get married. Now Stu, the dentist,always came across as the boring one who prefers life to be simple.Nothing has changed, and he simply wants a nice, quiet wedding inThailand. He has to put up with a father-in-law who is less thanimpressed with him, but who also thinks the world of his own son, a 16year of pre-med. Now Stu tries to keep everything simple so as not tohave a re-run of Doug's bachelor party, and does his best not to inviteAlan, Doug's brother-in-law (as well as having a bachelor party in aroadside diner).However, Alan manages to invite himself, and what begins as a few beerson the beach, ends up in a dodgy hotel in the middle of Bangkok. Oh,and this time Teddy (the brother of Stu's wife to be) is missing.Basically, it is a re-run of the first movie in that they cannotremember anything about what happened last night, and if they don'tfind Teddy, then there is going to be hell to pay.Mr Chow is back as well, waking up in the hotel along with the others(and there is a monkey present as well). As from the previous movie,the guys try to piece the night together, and in doing so get caught upin some major crime ring, all in the effort of trying to find Teddy.However parts of this movie were simply down right sickening. Thefinger I thought was a little overboard, particularly since it ruin'sTeddy's life (being a chelo player and surgeon to be), and theprostitute scene was just wrong. I'm not even sure if they showedthings that we really don't want to see (though it is quite dark in theroom at the time).While I would serious recommend the first movie, I would simplyrecommend this one be given a miss. While there were some things betterhere than in the other movie (if you haven't found him by now thenBangkok has him), but in the end, Vegas was much better.