The Hangover Part II review

By Rick Morris

Every so often a movie comes out and discredits most of the takes-itself-too-seriously film critic industry by eliciting the most asinine reactions from said pinheads. THE HANGOVER PART II is one such movie.

Having made it clock in at a miserable 35% approval rating on Rotten Tomatoes, the look-at-me crowd seeking attention for their “urbane” and “educated” opinions have made themselves the real story of this summer blockbuster.

The indictments aimed at this movie are instead a boomerang, telling us everything we need to know about those who dare to utter such tripe.

^ Highly derivative of the original? WELL, DUH! The formula worked! Why deviate? Most scenes could have fit in the first movie with only minor deviations as to circumstance or location. So what?

^ Upping the ante on crudity – you were expecting one of your precious subtitled foreign films? Get that weak sh%& outta here!

Never forget that most positive reviews of the first movie were accompanied by self-righteous tripe like “I don’t normally recommend a movie of this nature, but …” There’s a reason that we only seek out for our web TV show and befriend critics like Ben Lyons who don’t feel the need to put on airs and who unapologetically like what they like. These hypocritical geeks based their praise on the first one being a surprise megahit and thus they could maintain their “serious” cred by praising a movie like this if it wasn’t expected to be a hit. The sequel isn’t an underdog, so it’s time to bury it, apparently.

Long story short, as you’ve probably heard, the story this time is that Stu (Ed Helms) is getting married in Thailand and the weekend of the wedding is again disrupted by the antics of the childlike Alan (Zach Galifianakis). His drugging-gone-awry of Stu’s future brother-in-law Teddy (Mason Lee) causes everyone to fail to remember the fateful chain of events and leaves Teddy missing and the gang (Stu, Alan and the smarmy/hilarious Phil, played by Bradley Cooper) frantically retracing their steps and landing in fresh mayhem at every step.

I’d never give too much away, because I don’t want to discourage anyone from going to see it, but there are a few key points that allow this movie to reach the vaunted level of the original.

^ A singing cameo near the very end that somehow even tops Chow’s elevator singing from the movie trailers.

^ Paul Giamatti bringing the noise as he generally does.

^ A boat “landing” that you should never attempt in real life.

^ The culmination at the end of Stu’s string of bitter monologues throughout the movie.

^ The obligatory Ed Helms musical interlude – posted below for anyone interested in a spoiler of sorts.

I don’t like to speak for all of my FDH Lounge colleagues, but I’d be shocked if any of them disagreed with my assessment that this is our kind of movie. Two freaking thumbs up and get to work on Part III, people!

Hangover 2 trailer

Ed Helms does “Alantown”