• Trust Weighted Good
  • 88 Trust Points

On Demand

Notify
Netflix On Demand

Amazon Instant Video On Demand

$9.99 Buy

iTunes On Demand

Rent from $3.99

YouTube

Tag Tree

Genre
Vibe
Setting
Protagonists
Demographic
Occaision
Production
Period
Source
Location

Wick's Review

Created May 29, 2011 08:22PM PST • Edited Dec 19, 2011 11:44PM PST

  1. Quality
  2. Good 3.0

    Go in with expectations lowered and laugh your ass off. Self-conciously redundant and even more misanthropic, Part II feels like The Hangover’s hangover. That said, it’s funny as hell. LOL bombs rain down early and often.

    It’s also distinctly edgier than the original. Yes that’s possible. The unnatural acts depicted in this outing, along with some cringeworthy mutilations, drive up the edginess rating to 3.9 (Horrid) versus a mere 3.3 (Sordid) for the original. How edgy is that? It makes the sordid Bridesmaids seem quaint.

    This edition moves the wild night from Vegas to Bangkok, another city deserving of its own catchphrase (“Bangkok has them now”). The anxious groom is now Ed Helms’ dorky dentist, set to marry a gorgeous Thai girl from a wealthy and proper family. Think the wedding will come off according to plan?

    Stanford fans – parents especially – will spit out their chardonnay when they see what becomes of a Stanford ring… and the finger wearing it.

  3. Great 4.0

    The three main leads established themselves as terrific comic actors the last time out.

    • Zach Galifianakis is a more apparent psychopath here, which seems less funny in our post-Loughner age. That said, the guy is one funny weirdo.
    • Likewise, Bradley Cooper’s narcism seems a bit uglier than last time.
    • Ed Helms plays the innocent being taken for a ride, and does it as well as can be done.
    • Justin Bartha is once again largely out of the picture, and entirely out of the shenanigans.

    Another mostly strong supporting cast mostly helps the movie’s success.

    • Mike Tyson’s cameo is entirely cheesy, yet it works.
    • A little Ken Jeong goes a long way, if you know what I mean. His extended screen time this outing goes on a bit too long.
    • Paul Giamatti overacts as a criminal heavy. Giamatti’s a great actor in the right role. This one isn’t right.
    • Mason Lee quietly impresses in his feature film debut. Ang Lee’s son looks to have as great a future in front of the camera as his stellar father has had behind it.
    • Jamie Chung charms as a lovely and very forgiving bride.
    • Yasmin Lee, the star of Transsexual Prostitutes 43, 48 & 49 according to IMDb, convincingly cameos here as – surprise – a transsexual prostitute.

    BTW, you gotta love Hollywood casting a Korean-American (Jamie Chung) and a Chinese-American (Mason Lee) as Thais. At least they’re Asian…

  4. Male Stars Really Great 4.5
  5. Female Stars Very Good 3.5
  6. Female Costars Great 4.0
  7. Male Costars Good 3.0
  8. Good 3.0
  9. Direction Very Good 3.5
  10. Play Barely OK 2.0

    A couple dozen laugh bombs can’t redeem a deeply disturbing story.

  11. Music Very Good 3.5
  12. Visuals Great 4.0
  13. Content
  14. Horrid 3.9

    Explicit, brutal and vile add up to a horrid level of edginess. Sure it’s funny, yet that doesn’t make it any less horrid. Be warned.

  15. Sex Explicit 4.6
  16. Violence Brutal 2.6
  17. Rudeness Vile 4.6
  18. Surreal 2.2

    The movie’s conceit is that several normal guys can get drugged, which releases their ids and leads to a wild night of debauchery, none of which gets remembered the morning after, nor follows them home with any lasting consequences. Sure.

    Finally, the dorky dentist marries a starlet stripper in the first movie and a gorgeous, rich girl in this one. Double sure.

  19. Circumstantial Surreal 2.5
  20. Biological Surreal 2.3
  21. Physical Glib 1.8

Forum

Subscribe to The Hangover Part II 1 reply, 1 voice
  • 1 - 1 of 1
  • « First
  • Last »
  • ◄ PREVIOUS
  • NEXT ►
Jun 4, 2011 1:11PM
Wick

Regarding BrianSez’s Review
“It will be a long uphill climb to make money from a Hangover III.” Truth.