Hangover 2

This.

Watching the movie, I didn't care that it was the same. It probably goes against many things about movies I don't like, but at the same time I really didn't give a damn. I was too busy having fun with my friends enjoying the movie complain a lot even though I did have problems with movie.

Yeah, it's weird. Maybe I should watch it again and before that, watch the first one, but in the meantime, I enjoyed myself and laughed. That's all I was looking for. In a sequel with such a stupid continuous concept, I was still able to laugh. It didn't insult my intelligence nor did it slaughter my sheep, so I'm cool with that.
 
just came from the theater.

loved it !

only thing was, that the movie here in germany is FSK12.. which would equal a PG12 rating.. and let me tell you, the faces of some 12 oder 13year olds on the way out were pretty disturbed :D
 
Last edited:
I kinda wished it would have been Teddy who drugged them this time. I mean given his story/character arc it would have made more sense then Alan just drugging them to relive another crazy night. Teddy could have admitted it in the end once they found him and have a scene where he says he wanted to cut loose for a night because of all his pressure from the dad and secretly we learn that he's done drugs while in stanford.


I finally saw this last night and this was my exact thought. I really thought it was going to be Teddy that actually did the drugging.
 
I really enjoyed the second one, not as much as the first, but I still got a kick out of it. They definitely upped the "suspend disbelief" aspect, but I was able to go with it. I thought there were quite a few good laughs and memorable moments.
 
It's the same as the first but more ridicilous but I don't really care, I've seen it twice and enjoyed it both times. I'm not sure if I like it more than the first however but I thought it was good. The guys have chemistry and Mr Chow is funny.... EVen though some bits just wouldn't happen, it was fun seeing them go through it all again.

The first time I saw it when the credits started rolling, an old couple, around the age of 80 got up and started walking out... You could tell everyone else was like, 'what the hell' :awesome:
 
I agree, Alan was just way too overboard this time around. He was likeable in the first one, but just pathetic in the sequel. And the fact that Stu just forgives him for almost ruining his life makes Stu even more pathetic than Alan.
 
It was funny even if it was a complete carbon copy of the first one but set in Bangkok, I just don't where a third sequel would lead the guys to before it gets repetitive.
 
A third one might be tough to pull off, but I'd definitely be there if they gave it a shot. I have no idea where they could go with another one, though.
 
Optimus Prime nailed it. Using the exact same story does no work at all this time around. So forced.
 
So I saw it. I'd give it a 6/10 over all. I actually did not see it as much of a copy as a lot of people made it out to be, but it certainly was not as funny. Still, alright movie, and I hope if there is a third, it will be a very different film.
 
Zach Galifianakis talks Hangover 3, inadvertently reveals the plot



There have been no shortage of "Zach Galifianakis Is Struggling With Stardom" articles as the actor/comedian has been out promoting THE HANGOVER, PART II. And as I'm sure you've heard, with the sequel being as successful as it was, Warner Bros. is itching to move ahead with the third and final film in the HANGOVER trilogy. The ever-reluctant Galifianakis sighs in a recent interview with Rolling Stone and says, "They want to do a Hangover III...I'm getting fricking phone calls already." I feel ya...
My main problem with THE HANGOVER, PART II was its insistence to follow the original film almost beat-for-beat. It wasn't not funny but it was almost like a director tried to make a reboot of the original but skew it as a thriller set in Thailand. Galifianakis however confirms that the upcoming film will ditch the hijinks-before-a-wedding formula for something slightly more different.
The actor tells Rolling Stone that the third film will start with his character Alan in a mental hospital following the events of the second movie. It's up to Phil, Stu and Doug to break him out, for reasons that aren't entirely clear.
Galifianakis admits it's just what he's heard the plot of the film would be and it's possible there would be some adjustments to that storyline (or that's just the first act and they're breaking him out for some larger, more nefarious purpose).


-------

Sounds like an odd set-up but at least it's something different
 
Hmm...I could be interested in that...but glad Alan got into a mental hospital. ****ing hate that guy.
 
Zach did a good job as a mental patient in It's Kind of a Funny Story .
 
Good to hear at least Zach knowing how the second film was a carbon copy that shouldn't have been. Maybe the third will be him waking up in a hospital and the second movie was all in his head.
 
I want Doug to be featured more prominently in the third film. I'd like to see all four of them interact for the entire movie.
 
Yeah, I think it was a mistake leaving Doug out. I think it would've added another dynamic to at least make an attempt at making Hangover II more fresh.
 
The guy who plays Doug isn't funny.
 
Bradley Cooper really isn't funny either. Ed Helms and Zach G. were the comedic roles in both films. Nobody was rolling in the aisles when Bradley Cooper did something.
 



Warner Bros. might have to digitally replace the Tyson Hangover 2 tattoo



by: Paul Tassi Jun. 9, 2011


Many of you have probably heard about the lawsuit that Mike Tyson's tattoo artist filed over Ed Helm's facial ink from THE HANGOVER PART II. It didn't do anything to the release of the film, but the lawsuit is still ongoing, and if a settlement isn't able to be reached, Warners says they'll actually go and digitally change the tattoo for the DVD release.
“If the parties are unable to resolve their dispute, Warner Bros. does not intend to make any use of the allegedly infringing tattoo after the film ends its run in theaters because Warner Bros. will digitally alter the film to substitute a different tattoo on Ed Helms’s face."
"The home video release is currently scheduled for early December 2011, which would allow Warner Bros. sufficient time to make the change if it becomes necessary."

The crux of the joke is that the tattoo in fact the one Mike Tyson has, but I'm not sure if they actually put in a line stating that in the film. It seems like something that should have been mentioned, but I have a hunch it was maybe a scene that was cut after the lawsuit was filed.
So what are they going to replace it with? Just another weird tribal squiggle, or will they try to make it an entirely new joke.


--------

Since when are there Trademarks on tattoos . I know artists who don't duplicate their work but this lawsuit seems frivolous.
 
Another reason for me to not buy the dvd.

Also...what a stupid lawsuit.
 
That tattoo artist needs a right hook across the face via Tyson.

And Cooper is awesome in both movies. He's the slighty funny cool straight guy. In the third one he needs to lose his mind like Helms though. And Alan needs to stop it with drugs. And let that other guy in on fun.
 
He's funny in his own way. As themadness said, he's the straight man. He anchors the other two very well. As much as I would like to see Doug join the pack in the next one, I think the one straight man, with the other two is enough to balance it out. Could it work with the other straight man? Maybe.
 
Wow, I found Cooper to be pretty damn funny in both. Sure, he plays more of the straight man, but his reactions to some of the situations are awesome.

Also ... What a dumb lawsuit?!?!
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
200,571
Messages
21,763,332
Members
45,597
Latest member
iamjonahlobe
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"