Hangover I & II
Dave’s 3-Word Review:
Absurd but Chuckle-Inducing
As many of you are already aware, the third and final part in the Hangover series will be released soon, so I thought it would be appropriate to watch both films in anticipation of the oncoming comedy. To give a little background on the first two films, let me make a real quick summary – they’re the same movie. To the T. I’m serious, they did it on purpose…and I think I have a solid idea as to why they purposefully made the same movie twice. For heck’s sake, let’s go ahead and explain the plot of both Hangover films, since they are the same thing.
There is a group of four friends known as the Wolf Pack. These guys’ names are Phil (Bradley Cooper), Stu (Ed Helms), Alan (Zach Galifianakis), and Doug (Justin Bartha). Phil is a high school teacher, Stu a dentist, Alan is nuts, and I can’t remember what Doug does. Their occupations make no difference to the outcome of either movie; they are there simply to expand on the fact that they are indeed, people. These four friends go to a wild town, get drugged by crazy Alan (on mistake). The next morning, they wake up with no memory of what happened to them, someone in the gang is missing, something happens to Stu’s physical appearance, there is a naked Chinese guy, and they go on a crazy adventure to fix what they messed up. By the end of the movie, the audience gets to see what happened during the blackout because someone cleverly finds a camera filled with photos.
Now, keep in mind that it’s not only the plot that is identical, but everything else as well, right down to the camera angles and dialogue. It’s pretty clear…the writers took the last two drafts of the script to Hangover and made movies out of them…screw it if a few things are similar, right? Hold on, though, this isn’t my explanation as to why they decided to keep everything in. Here’s a short answer, because they could. What makes the movie so funny wasn’t the plot, it was the characters. Imagine the North, South, East, and West poles around the Earth that is what these characters are practically based around. They are all polar opposites of each other, and yet…they all connect because of that reason. The filmmakers thought it would be enough to practically have the same story if they had the same actors go through similar circumstances, but crazier nonetheless…the problem is…it doesn’t work that way.
Nobody is going to watch these movies and think, oh haha, I see what they did there. They will reasonably see the movie as the same…exact…thing. A lot of people will even be confused by that as well…so don’t expect much difference from the first movie. Was it funny though? Yeah. Both movies have their funny moments, but the first one was more hilarious…because it is the first time around. It’s more of a disappointment than anything to see the same story laid out in front of us. I know they were trying to be funny, but fail…
The first film had it all, the absurd humor, the corky characters, the far-fetched plot, the impossible adventure, all with a feeling of freshness. The second film had almost all of the same elements, but it lost what acted as glue for the first film…freshness…so it fell apart. I have a feeling Hangover III won’t be making the same mistakes. The trailers look a bit more promising, but at the same time…it doesn’t appear that anyone even has a hangover. I could be wrong, though. I guess we’ll all find out together when Hangover III comes to theaters on May 23!