Hangover 2 (1 Viewer)

[mattCR]

Highlander 2.


I had once said that one of the worst sequels I had ever paid to see was Highlander 2.


Hangover 2 now exists in that same stratosphere.


This is one of the most painfully unfunny. I admit, I disliked that one of the best bits of the original Hangover (Stu hooking up with a stripper in Vegas and deciding he liked her; in this film, he's marrying an Oriental girl who's family hates him and he's lost all his spine from #1)


The movie just goes OFF the rails. I mean, it is almost NEVER funny. There are some gags that should be funny, but they are so forced it is just hard. I said in a theater where no one laughed. Shame on me, they managed to beat $6 out of me for a matinee.


Let me say this: If you're choice tonight is to watch "Hangover 2" or rent "Just Go With It" (Which is also terrible) you will have a MUCH better time with Just Go With It. Hell, I'd watch Season of the Witch again before I'd watch this crap.


I will have to erase this film from my memory now.

 

[cafink]

What did you think of the first one? How did this one compare?

 

[mike caronia]

Different strokes...just saw it and people were applauding when it ended.

Definitely not as good as the first, but there are some good chuckles if you're a degenerate.

 

[mattCR]

I liked the first a good bit. I think that's why the second fell flat; most of the "jokes" seem to be vague retelling, like second hand jokes from the first film, and they just didn't work. Just me. I don't know.. it just felt.. bad, like real bad.

 

[Ron-P]

I saw the first, and wish I didn't. It was not very funny. I'll pass this one up, comments like yours are all over the forums.

 

[Todd H]

First let me say that I absolutely loved the first movie. I've watched it countless times, both at the theater and on Blu-ray. So how did the sequel stack up against the original? Very poorly. It literally was just a retelling of the first film, except set in Bangkok instead of Vegas. Sure some of the jokes were funny, especially the

Spoiler

scene where Stu discovers he slept with a Thai ladyboy.

Other than that the laughs were few and far between for me. Surprisingly, the crowd I was with loved the movie. Overall I'd give it a D.

 

[Sam Posten]

Loved it.

 

[zubidoo]

I'm one of the few people who never thought that The Hangover was particularly funny or clever.

 

[Patrick Sun]

I got some laughs from this followup of "The Hangover", though the scope of this film is a little smaller in spite of its Thailand backdrop (Vegas felt like another character in the first film), and the new characters were drawn quite broadly, my crowd ate up all the low-brow humor, and I was nyuk-nyuk along with them. The script is a little underwhelming in term of plot. So, sure, if you're expecting crude humor, along with an inspired peek into the mind of man-child Alan (Zach Galifianakis), you're going to get it, it'll be a good time for you, but just don't expect a lot of rewatchability from it.


I give it 2.5 stars, or a grade of C+.

 

[Patrick Sun]

I got some laughs from this followup of "The Hangover", though the scope of this film is a little smaller in spite of its Thailand backdrop (Vegas felt like another character in the first film), and the new characters were drawn quite broadly, my crowd ate up all the low-brow humor, and I was nyuk-nyuking along with them. The script is a little underwhelming in term of plot. So, sure, if you're expecting crude humor, along with an inspired peek into the mind of man-child Alan (Zach Galifianakis), you're going to get it, it'll be a good time for you, but just don't expect a lot of rewatchability from it.


I give it 2.5 stars, or a grade of C+.

 

[Chad R]

What's most surprising to me, is that I've known about the possibility of a sequel to "The Hangover" since before the original even hit theaters. I remember the studio making the deals and lining everything up so they could move on a second film quickly. This made me believe that the writers and director had a great idea of where the sequel would go, as if there was unfinished business from the first film that was ripe for a sequel. But then I saw the trailer, and have read the reviews, to see that it's just a rehash. That just doesn't excite me at all. I guess I was a little silly to think that the sequel was ever going to be driven by a desire to make a good movie, and not just a cash grab. Le sigh...

 

[Jeremiah]

I don't see how people are suprised that H2 is basically like H1, of course it is. With that said the movie had some laughs but nothing like part 1, I second Patricks review.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

I loved it, I though it was just as funny as the original, Stu discovering that

the stripper was a dude


had my audience, and myself, in hysterics with laughter.

 

[Malcolm R]

When did they start referring to the characters as "the wolf pack"? I don't recall that reference in the first film, but every article and trailer seems to use it now and in a way that makes it seem like they've always been referred to in that manner.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

It's in reference to Alan's letter that he read on the roof in the first film, he said that he was a lone wolf but as his circle of friends grew his "wolf pack" grew.


It's a name that just stuck I guess.

 

[Pete-D]

This movie is basically to the first Hangover almost exactly what Home Alone 2 was to Home Alone, even though it's a bit odd comparing an R-rated raunchy comedy to a PG rated family franchise.

It didn't get quite as many laughs as the first one but there definitely were moments in my screening where the audience laughter was so loud that I could no longer hear the dialogue. Which for this film I guess says that it's clicking on some level at least. Critics have been tough on this and certainly there are things to nit pick on, but its target demographics will likely eat it up.

It was a little dark, almost depressing at times ... again sorta like Home Alone 2 compared to Home Alone 1 ... lol. If they do make a third one (errr ... who are we kidding, they are going to make a third one), they probably are going to have to change up the formula a bit because it really will no longer be believable in any way.

 

[Inspector Hammer!]

The film is also a lot like Die Hard 2 where it is essential that you buy into the woefully improbable idea that the same thing could happen to the same guys twice in order to enjoy it.


Yeah, when they do a third one I'm not sure how they'll be able to change it, maybe next time have Alan not slip them any drugs? Who knows.

 

[Patrick Sun]

Well, they could just slip Alan drugs from the onset of the next bachelor party and be done with it. Next time being Stu's brother-in-law's wedding...

 

[Adam Lenhardt]

The whole concept revolves around Alan being basically a psychopath. I agree with Patrick: despite having a city with perhaps the most woeful reputation of any in the world, the scope of the film was surprisingly small. In the first film, they zigzagged across Vegas and its outskirts. In this film, they had four or five set locations where the clues led, and very little of the wonderful connective tissue that made the first film work. When you cut to the next location, you're doing something wrong. I laughed; I enjoyed it. But I didn't like it anywhere near as much as the first one.

 

[Paul_Medenwaldt]

I saw it on Thursday night with a mostly packed house. After I watched it, I felt cheated out of my $5. It was basically the same as the first movie and though the audience laughed at most of the jokes, you knew what was coming up. There were no surprises or an ounce of originality with the script. The trailers give away the best scenes and pretty much tells you not to expect much of anything new with this one.

The end of the movie with the photos was about the unfunniest part of the movie. The audience I was with had a few chuckles but not like the original where the audience was falling out of their seats with laughter.

Why not have Doug part of the adventure instead he is mostly a side character back at home base? I thought his character could add another angle to their situations while roaming Bangkok.

If your a fan of the first one, I would say go see it, but don't be surprised if you walk out feeling like you just lost out on a big hand in poker.

Paul