Hangover 2

[Drizzle]

Saw it. Loved it. Not as funny as the first, but still hilarious, especially the [BLACKOUT]tranny[/BLACKOUT] scene. Galifianakis cracked me up as always.[BLACKOUT] "They shot the monkey! Oh, I am at my wit's end!"[/BLACKOUT]

And to everyone complaining about the fact that it's a carbon copy of the first: What were you expecting? This isn't the first comedy sequel to do that. The plot's the same, the jokes are different. It can still work. See also: Home Alone 2, Austin Powers: The Spy Who Shagged Me, Meet The Fockers, Ace Ventura: When Nature Calls, etc.

I'm still game for a third one. But no more after that.

 

[Ultimatehero]

I might be the odd guy here in that I liked them about the same. As a stand-alone film I liked 2 the best. As a sequel, I liked 1 the best. Alan, as people said seems oddly a lot more cruel in this film. If it wasn't for this contradiction, I would have liked 2 the best overall. The stakes were higher, the surprises were out there (more so than the first) and it was just an overall funner, funnier ride. 9/10.

 

[GREEN =w= DAY]

the movie was hilarious! just as funny as the first. although the plot and situations they were put in was almost exactly the same as the first.

i still liked the first one better, but this is a pretty solid sequel

 

[dude stannis]

Well, it seems it was indeed intentional.

Bradley Cooper:



http://www.shavemagazine.com/entertainment/Interview-Bradley-Cooper/2

That quote in bold is interesting. Makes me beileve than if/when they do in fact do a 3rd movie that it will be completely different.

It seems to me they want to go the Die Hard route. With 2 being in the same style as 1 and then 3 becoming something totally different.

Lets just hope we don't get a fourth in PG-13 then.

 

[roach]

Also many of our beloved superhero movie sequels follow the same outline as the previous film just with a new villian in each movie. What gives?

this was my thought exactly

 

[Marvin]

I am a little disapointed that they did'nt try anything fresh with the sequel but I am still going to go see it with friends Friday night. In fact the showing I am going to is almost sold out (bought tickets online just now). Lots of comedy sequels follow the same outline as the previous film but suddenly the hangover 2 gets hammered because it did the same thing?

Also many of our beloved superhero movie sequels follow the same outline as the previous film just with a new villian in each movie. What gives?

examples?
I'm actually curious.

 

[terry78]

Yeah, Phillips said that the third would be something completely different from just a retread.

 

[bullets]

Saw it. Loved it. Not as funny as the first, but still hilarious, especially the [BLACKOUT]tranny[/BLACKOUT] scene. Galifianakis cracked me up as always.[BLACKOUT] "They shot the monkey! Oh, I am at my wit's end!"[/BLACKOUT]

And to everyone complaining about the fact that it's a carbon copy of the first: What were you expecting? This isn't the first comedy sequel to do that. The plot's the same, the jokes are different. It can still work. See also: Home Alone 2, Austin Powers: The Spy Who Shagged Me, Meet The Fockers, Ace Ventura: When Nature Calls, etc.

I'm still game for a third one. But no more after that.

That sounds hilarious . I can't wait to see this. I'm not mad it follows the same formula , that's something a lot of them do. I hope they don't push it past a third though , eventually the joke will grow tired. Tbh, I didn't think this was necessary but looks like it turned out right.

 

[nocomics]

the movie was hilarious! just as funny as the first. although the plot and situations they were put in was almost exactly the same as the first.

i still liked the first one better, but this is a pretty solid sequel

Same here. I'm not sure if I thought it was as good or funny as the first,but it did have its moments. Though the same formula kindof seemed to drag the movie down imo,but overall a decent sequel.

 

[nocomics]

This movie was a piece of ****ing ****.

So far, the critics have been SPOT ON this year.

Only thing I disagreed with from them was Sucker Punch.

Pirates sucked, Battle LA sucked, Hangover 2 sucked....if it wasnt for Thor, this would be the worst summer ever.....

I'm banking this WHOLE summer on Transformers 3. Bay will deliver.

Each to their own opinions I guess. I wont go as far and say 'sucked',but I thought Pirates was a disappointment, Battle LA actually wasnt too bad,Hangover was a decent sequel. THor, I disagree with I didn't think it was that good of a movie overall. I wont get my hopes up for TF3. I do agree SUcker PUnch was an actually decent movie.

If it wasnt for superhero films, I wouldnt be seeing anything.
Ive been sick of hollywood films for awhile now. Nothing but stupid idiotic bad movies and remakes.

The only non comic book films Im looking foward to is Malicks Tree of Life and Potter.

IMHO Hollywood has been on life support for years.


Have no interest in Hangover2 as transvestite schlongs arent my thing and I already saw the first one so why watch a bad rehash of a not so great film anyway.

Ehh, Im getting a little tired of Superhero movies as they seem just to overdue it,though I will still see GL/CA and Xmen,but they need to give that genre a rest.
Do agree on the remake things,there are literally thousands of untapped novels out there that could be made into movies,Hollywood just needs to read more.

 

[Symbiotic]

Deadline is reporting an estimated opening day take of $30 million. Projecting a 3-day weekend of $80-85 mil, and a 5-day of $125 mil.

 

[roach]

Ehh, Im getting a little tired of Superhero movies as they seem just to overdue it,though I will still see GL/CA and Xmen,but they need to give that genre a rest.
Do agree on the remake things,there are literally thousands of untapped novels out there that could be made into movies,Hollywood just needs to read more.

I agree. It's either gonna get better or worst since Marvel Studios formed

 

[The Shape]

As someone who loved the first, I was pretty disappointed with this one. I understand what they were trying to do (same exact thing as the original film) but come on! Too much the same! Watching the film with my friends, blazed as hell, it felt like we were just hitting the same beats of The Hangover with just mild differences. Some lines of dialogue are identical.

Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of laughs and funny moments throughout, but overall I found the film to be less creative with its comedy. I mean, they had Stu sing another song...which was lame. There was a 30 minute period that I didn't even laugh. Call me crazy, but as good as it was to see these guys again, I was hoping for more.

 

[GregComicFan]

I saw this last night. It had a lot of funny moments but I also thought the carbon-copy nature of it went OVERBOARD. Sure, Phillips could have kept the same structure as the first movie (There's a wedding, guys get drunk, wake up somewhere, someone is missing), but certain parts of the movie were such blatant rip-offs of Hangover 1 that it did feel like lazy writing...

for example... Alan again being responsible for the Wolf-Pack having memory loss (I had trouble buying the fact that even Alan, the man-child, would have learned nothing from Hangover 1 and he still tried drugging someone...even if it was just intended for Teddy). When he confessed I was like "you gotta be kidding me... again????"

There was a lion in the bathroom in the first one, now its a monkey.

In both movies, the Wolf-Pack's drunken antics get them caught up with the some evil mob element.... again??? seriously?

aaaaaaaaand let's throw in a pointless Mike Tyson cause he was in Hangover 1.

and to be honest... when Teddy appeared at the end of the movie with his camera and started talking about how he found pictures of the previous night's exploits on it... I kinda rolled my eyes because I felt like "Well, of course, cause everything that happened in Hangover 1 happens here too."

This isn't the first comedy sequel to do this. One example I can think of is Ghostbusters 2. I LOVE both GB1 and GB2, but I admit GB2 followed a very very similar structure to GB1 (The Ghostbusters are heroes at the end of GB1, then broke and considered jokes at the beginning of GB2... Bill Murray's character is an item with Sigourney Weather's character at the end of GB1, then not together with her any more at the beginning of GB2....they reset everything so they could start the same structure/drama over again... and have the GB rise to popularity/Bill gets the girl again).

Other things about the Hangover 2 I didn't care for....

Teddy didn't care he lost a finger???

I would have been infuriated at myself!!!! It seemed like he did enjoy having the aspirations to being a surgeon and a cello player... won't his life be negatively altered by losing a finger?

I didn't buy that Stu's wife's father accepted him just because Stu blew up on him and explained he has a dark side. The father seemed super uptight and conservative and like the type of guy who would hate Stu even more if he turned out to be a crazy wild man who takes out Teddy, gets his finger cut off, is late to the wedding, and is generally irresponsible....

 

[Drizzle]

Spoiler

I would have been infuriated at myself!!!! It seemed like he did enjoy having the aspirations to being a surgeon and a cello player... won't his life be negatively altered by losing a finger?....

Spoiler

It was only the ring finger.

 

[Lord Blackbolt]

Spoiler

It was only the ring finger.

It doesn't matter which one.... I'd be pissed off at any finger.

 

[LostSon88]

and to be honest... when Teddy appeared at the end of the movie with his camera and started talking about how he found pictures of the previous night's exploits on it... I kinda rolled my eyes because I felt like "Well, of course, cause everything that happened in Hangover 1 happens here too."

I did as well. I was like, "seriously? Photos again."

Even something as simple as showing videos during the end credits as opposed to the photos would've been more creative and separated itself from the original.

...as i've said NUMEROUS TIMES, its not the fact that they used the same premise of the original that bothered me, its the fact that they didn't seem interested in doing anything to make it even remotely different and were content with simply following the structure BEAT FOR BEAT.

Heck, even "Home Alone 2" changed it up with the use of the Talkboy (granted blatant product placement), a subplot with Duncan's Toy Chest and adding new villains (Tim Curry, Roy Schneider).

 

[Maximus One]

I loved this movie! Not as good as the first but still damn hilarious! Zach's crying and whining and just his facial expressions killed me but I think overall Ed Helms outshined everybody in this movie! He was just hilarious!

 

[GregComicFan]

...as i've said NUMEROUS TIMES, its not the fact that they used the same premise of the original that bothered me, its the fact that they didn't seem interested in doing anything to make it even remotely different and were content with simply following the structure BEAT FOR BEAT.

Spot-on assessment. I wholeheartedly agree.

I used Ghostbusters 2 as an example of a sequel that used the same structure as the original... but Ghostbusters 2 still had A LOT that separated it from the original (Ernie Hudson in the entire movie, Ray and Winston seemed to have bonded as best buddies, totally new and unique villain, Sigourney Weaver has children now, Janine and Louis are an item, the slime subplot, etc.).... but GB2 still had the same structure as GB1 (Ghostbusters are inactive, paranormal activity ensues, Bill Murray tries to win over Signourney, Ghostbusters bust ghosts and rise in popularity again, a city employee tries to discredit them, a big monster invades NYC - this time the Statue of Liberty come to life instead of Mashmellow Man - the main villain is defeated and the Ghostbusters are loved by NYC).

Hangover 1/Hangover 2 was nothing like GB1 compared to GB2. Ghostbusters 2 is a perfect example of a sequel that has the same structure of its predecessor but totally new elements. Hangover 2 is a copy of the original almost beat for beat.

 

[Marvin]

Superman returns is a beat for beat ramake of the original but even that seems to have changed things up more than this...

 

[enterthemadness]

First off, two thumbs up for this movie, just like the first one. Yes, it's the same thing all over again, but it's even more R than before and IMHO...just as if not, more funny than the first one. I can not wait until I see both back to back on DVD.

 

[enterthemadness]

Deadline is reporting an estimated opening day take of $30 million. Projecting a 3-day weekend of $80-85 mil, and a 5-day of $125 mil.

Nice. Seems $200 million domestic is a lock. I doubt it gets to 277 like the first one did...but I can see 240/250 in play.

 

[Dark Knight]

Anyone want to do a small experiment and ask a group of ten people when you see Hangover at the theater if they would let their 10 year old or under see The Hangover or any other R rated film?

 

[enterthemadness]

Anyone want to do a small experiment and ask a group of ten people when you see Hangover at the theater if they would let their 10 year old or under see The Hangover or any other R rated film?

Oh..nooo......nooo....no....no....just like the first one and with most R rated comedies...I say High school age.

Now Die Hard...I saw Die Hard 3 at like 9 or so...maybe at the latest 12...yea, more violent, but no nudity. To me...Nudity/drug scenes are too much for a 10 year old to see.

 

[Maximus One]

I wouldnt either and that was exactly what I was thinking seeing little 9-10 year old kids running up and down the aisles yesterday. I was like WTF!!! Especially with Stu's whole ordeal and the photos at the end. I seriously don't see how this movie made it with just an R rating to be honest. Knowing the MPAA I can't believe they didn't try to put an NC-17 stamp on it. I bet the unrated version will be crazy though lol