The first Hangover film was a box office monster making over $270 million dollars, so a sequel was pretty inevitable, and with the sequel having the biggest opening of any comedy ever taking $86.5 in it’s opening weekend, it must be better, right?

After marrying a hooker in the first film, Stu is now getting married again, and this time he hopes he will remember it. His fiance, Lauren, is from Thailand and to keep her disapproving father happy they plan to get wed there. All the wolf pack are invited apart from Alan, who’s drugging of the boys led to the Las Vegas incident, but soon Stu reluctantly agrees to let him come and they all head off to the Far East.  Under his strict rules that there not be a batchelor party, Stu and the boys head to the beach for one quiet drink with stu’s brother in law, Teddy. The next morning Stu, Phil and Alan wake up in a sleazy hotel in Bangkok with haircuts, tattoo’s, a monkey and Teddy’s finger in a bowl, but no Teddy. They also find an old friend has joined them in the form of Mr Chow, the psychotic chinese gangster from the first one!  So now they find themselves in Bangkok with two days before Stu’s wedding trying to work out how they got there and where  Teddy is. A trip that will see them running into Monks, tranvestites and mobsters.

I liked the first film, in fact I watched it the night before I went to see the sequel, it was a new idea, not seeing the actual events but the aftermath and then tracing it back. It worked, the cast were great and it was very funny. I wish I could say the same about the sequel.  It seems that they couldn’t think of a new twist on the original idea so thought let’s just do it again but in a more debauched setting.  Don’t get me wrong it did make me laugh on a few occassions but nowhere enough as the first one, it just feels a bit tired already.  We can sort of guess whats going happen before it does, there are no real shock laughs like Mr Chow jumping out of the boot naked in the first one. The only big cameo isn’t that great, I think the original idea of Mel Gibson as the Tattooist would have been a great lift in the story. The actors feel like they are just going through the motions, Zach Galifianakis’s Alan does the same sort of jokes as in the first one, the one actor that seems to be better is Ed Helms, as a big fan of The US Office, I like seeing him in movies and his character really seems to be having a mental breakdown in this one as it seems that everything is happening to him. They also seem to think that putting in a big action sequence will make it different, when it just feels a bit desperate.

Overall, the film’s okay, not great and if you enjoyed the first one it might be worth a rental, but thats about it, can’t say I would want to go and watch a third installment, which is already being talked about.

Rating 5/10

 

Advertisements