THE HANGOVER PART II – The Review

If you weren’t able to put 2+2 together, THE HANGOVER PART 2 is director Todd Phillips’ follow up film to DUE DATE, and sequel (of sorts) to THE HANGOVER (2009). It’s becoming apparent that Phillips is very much a one-trick pony, but it’s a trick he’s rather good at… not great, but good. If Phillips’ films were a game of chance, they’d be roulette and we’d be betting on red or black. His films are 50/50, with the original HANGOVER, OLD SCHOOL, and some would even say ROAD TRIP, being his hits, while his other films fared less favorably with many viewers.

Before I elaborate further, I want to make this perfectly clear… THE HANGOVER PART 2 is funny, no… it’s down right hilarious, nearly as much so as THE HANGOVER. For that reason, the film succeeds, but not all success is equal. Let’s consider the necessity factor. If two films are nearly identical, are they both necessary? Aside from the obvious financial profit perspective, PART 2 is only different from THE HANGOVER in it’s details.

For all intents and purposes, THE HANOVER PART 2 is a factory film, a movie built primarily as a payday, which follows the original formula so closely I could fill this entire review with nothing but the plethora of direct and obvious evidence that the script is more like a game of Mad Libs than an original work… but I won’t do that. Why… because it would end up ruining the one positive attribute of the film, that being the humor itself.

The “Wolf Pack” is back. Phil (Bradley Cooper), Stu (Ed helms), Alan (Zack Galifianakis), and Doug (Justin Bartha) are now preparing for Stu’s wedding to an attractive Thai-American woman, but they’re getting married in Thailand. When Phil suggests a bachelor party, Stu adamantly refuses, fearing another Las Vegas experience. Of course, the bachelor party still occurs unexpectedly, leading the wolf pack once again down a road of shame and danger as they try to piece together exactly what happened the next morning.

THE HANGOVER PART 2 follows the structural storytelling formula of the original to an exact degree, from the opening sequence, to the unraveling of events, and even the photo montage during the end credits. With that said, the overall arc of the story is very predictable, but it’s the utter insanity and bizarre nature of what happens that keeps the audience laughing. Stu’s father-in-law-to-be takes on the role that Jeffrey Tambor filled in the first film as Doug’s father-in-law-to-be, and even the little monkey in PART 2 (one of the funnier threads) is actually filling the role of the baby from the original film.

Ken Jeong (COMMUNITY) returns to reprise his role as the effeminate international criminal Leslie Chow, a welcome element in the film. One new element in PART 2 is a cameo by Paul Giamatti as another crime boss, to whom the wolf pack is somehow connected through Mr. Chow. From chain-smoking, drug-dealing monkeys, to silent Buddhist monks kicking their asses, the wolf pack endures another string of painfully unpleasant bad luck to recover one of their own in time to save the wedding. Perhaps the least effective part of the film is the return of another cameo from the first film, this time singing at the wedding and bordering on cruel and unusual punishment for the audience.

Overall, THE HANGOVER 2 will probably do well at the box office, given its built-in formula for laughs. Those who go see PART 2 expecting more of what they got with THE HANGOVER will be happy to get just that. Those who go see PART 2 expecting something different from the original will likely still be laughing hysterically, but simultaneously experiencing a slight case of déjà vu.

OVERALL RATING: 3 out of 5 stars