REVIEW: The Hangover: Part II

Personally, being one who couldn’t quite see the complete critically acclaimed hype of The Hangover but still found it enjoyable and fun to watch, the sequel looked like good fun. However, everything within the theatrical trailer didn’t look like anything similar to what we have seen before in the first film. So, quite frankly, although this was not a bad nor a good film, it was pretty much like the first one all over again but less humorous and cornier.

The Hangover: Part II is indeed called Part II and it felt more like a second attempt at the first film than a second film after the first film, hence why there are almost identical similarities in both films. It is basically this in both films: the wolfpack venture somewhere, wake up in somewhere they don’t remember while something has been done to them overnight and they lose a friend, so they must try and find him. So, to be honest, this one just felt rather empty and boring, although there were a few giggles on a few occasions.

Stu is getting married. Along with Doug, Phil, and his soon-to-be brother-in-law Teddy, he regretfully invites Alan to Thailand for the wedding. After a quiet night on the beach with a beer and toasting marshmallows by the camp fire, Stu, Alan and Phil wake up in a seedy apartment in Bangkok. Doug is back at the resort, but Teddy is missing, there’s a monkey with a severed finger, Alan’s head is shaved, Stu has a tattoo on his face, and they can’t remember any of it. The wolf-pack retrace their steps through strip clubs, tattoo parlors and cocaine-dealing monkeys on the streets of Bangkok as they try and find Teddy before the wedding.

All four members of the gang return! Bradley Cooper, perhaps the best actor out of all four in this sequel gave a decent performance as Phil. Unfortunately, unlike in the first film, there just wasn’t as much slapstick or as many laugh-out-loud moments from neither Ed Helms as Stu nor Zack Galifianakis as Alan. Justin Bartha was barely involved in this one at all as Doug, so there was a replacement instead: an Asian chap named Teddy who was missing, and led Phil, Stu and Alan to try and find him. Of what we saw of Teddy on-screen, he was one of those people who you just donít want on the screen and wish you could just push out of the way! It was his acting all innocent and rather idiotic attitude that makes him a very dislikeable character.

Admittedly, Todd Phillips did do a decent job in directing the first film, but this time, it felt like he had used the exact same strategy in directing the sequel as he did in the first one. In fact, in every film he’s done but just jumbled them together! He can be a good director and can pull off a film that is good fun, but this one just did not work. Just like within the first film, you really need to have that sense of humour to understand it and to laugh at the jokes and the situations that they all get themselves into.

Overall, The Hangover: Part II is basically another copy of the first film but slightly flatter and less funny. Publicly, this is just as overrated as its predecessor, but critically it’s not due to it’s mixed reception. There are obviously much worse comedies out there that have been made, but this isnít that far away from sinking down to that level. Should there be a third film, improvements are really needed if they are to succeed admirably, such as a story without too many similarities and situations, perhaps a twist with characters and maybe even a new director.


~ by SJMJ91 on 16/05/2012.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: