Movie Review: THE HANGOVER PART II

THE HANGOVER PART II

2011
R

The Hangover Part II is a 2011 comedy film directed by Todd Phillips that serves as a sequel to the 2009 smash-hit, The Hangover. This time around, we're heading off to Thailand as Stu (Ed Helms) prepares to marry Lauren (Jamie Chung). As one can imagine, his best friends Phil (Bradley Cooper) and Doug (Justin Bartha) are headed there as well, and a late addition sees the slightly-troubled Alan (Zach Galifianakis) also attending the wedding. Much to Stu's reluctance, he's talked into having a beer after a pre-wedding party, and fans of the original film will know exactly where the film is going. The following morning, Stu, Phil and Alan awaken in a seedy motel in Bangkok without any memory of the night before. The key difference, however, is that they haven't lost Doug; instead, they've managed to lose Lauren's sixteen-year-old brother Teddy (Mason Lee). As they try to piece together the events of the previous night in order to find their lost friend, they utilize the help of a familiar face in Mr. Chow (Ken Jeong), whose status as an international criminal only muddies their plans.

After The Hangover raked in nearly $280 million in the United States and garnered a Golden Globe win for Best Musical or Comedy, anyone could've guessed that a sequel loomed somewhere on the horizon. Rather than take us back to Las Vegas, the screenwriters chose to take us somewhere a little more exotic. I personally think that Thailand proved to be a perfect choice, considering a lot of the stereotypes that we Westerners have concerning the seedy areas there. So as one can imagine, I had high hopes going into this flick.

Unfortunately, Part II didn't really reach those expectations, at least for me. Everyone in my theater was rolling with laughter, and while I did laugh quite a bit, I couldn't quite see how any of it was different than the previous film. Aside from the locale, Part II seemed more like a remake than a sequel. A lot of the jokes seemed forced, and the best ones were the ones that directly referenced the events of the original film. Yes, some of the jokes are grand, but for the most part, it all felt a little bit stale to me.

Even the level of acting was a little below where it was in the original film. Our lead trio (Helms, Cooper and Galifianakis) should have been the most consistent, but only Galifianakis brings anything close to an A-game. Cooper and Helms are essentially carbon-copies of their previous personas, and while Galifianakis doesn't offer anything drastically different, his character still seems a little bit fresh. Ken Jeong is easily the best part of the film, bringing a much-needed manic energy that the rest of the actors somehow forgot to bring. I was completely glued to the screen whenever Jeong happened to grace it, and I only wish we could've gotten a little bit more. Oh, and Paul Giamatti makes a bit of an extended cameo, but I'm still debating whether it was entirely necessary.

(On a side note, those of you who read my breakdown of the film's original teaser trailer know that I said Liam Neeson would be making a cameo appearance in lieu of the preferred Mel Gibson. I can sadly report that neither of them appears in the film, so don't get your hopes up.)

Ultimately, The Hangover Part II just seemed a little bit off throughout its entire run-time. I think my sister put it best when she said that the original film offered a shock value that no one was really expecting. Because the first film had pushed the limits so far, we came to expect that the sequel would try to do the same. Yes, there's still quite a bit of shock value in Part II, but I think that the audience - and especially myself - was a little more braced for what we were about to see. And I think that works against the film even if it shouldn't. It's terribly difficult to make a sequel that outdoes the original, and Part II doesn't quite reach the level of the original. That's not to say it's not entertaining. I'll be the first to admit that I laughed quite a bit, but that pang of originality that surrounded the original film simply didn't translate to this one.

Movie Review Summary:

Grade: B-
1 Thumb Up

Movie Review: LIMITLESS

LIMITLESS

2011
PG-13

Limitless is a 2011 dramatic thriller directed by Neil Burger. It follows Eddie Mora (Bradley Cooper), a down-on-his-luck writer who's struggling to make his deadlines. When he randomly meets his former brother-in-law Vernon (Johnny Whitworth) on the street, Eddie receives a new type of drug that allows a person to access one-hundred percent of their brain capacity rather than the supposed twenty percent. After reluctantly taking one pill, Eddie immediately understands its power and needs to have more. When he goes to visit Vernon, he finds him dead in his apartment in what appears to be murder. Eddie searches the apartment and finds a massive stash of the pills and takes them for himself. He starts to take them once a day, and the changes are drastic. He finishes his book in four days, learns new languages, and so on and so forth. Eddie finally decides to make some money off his newfound brilliance, entering the world of stock broking. When he amasses over two million dollars in a matter of days, he catches the attention of Carl Van Loon (Robert De Niro) a major player in the stock market scene. Van Loon signs Eddie onto his team as they're attempting to merge with another company. Around the same time, however, Eddie's stash starts to run low, and he starts to have problems focusing and maintaining his high level of function. He learns that if he stops taking this drug, he'll die, so his life quickly becomes a race to finding any possible means to stay alive.

I'm not really quite sure where to start with Limitless. I went into the film not expecting a whole lot, but I thought I'd get a little bit more than I was ultimately given. The issue wasn't really the acting. I mean, there's nobody that's standing out. I think Cooper does enough to prove that he can hold his own as a leading man - such a statement has been up for debate as of late - but I'm not sure that Limitless is really going to be the final proving point for that argument. De Niro is decent in a limited role, but he hasn't been stellar since the mid-1990s, in my opinion. Abbie Cornish is also okay in her supporting role as Eddie's girlfriend Lindy, but she isn't really given much room to work with her character. I could go on for a while about each individual character, but it would ultimately be fruitless. This movie is really Bradley Cooper's vehicle, and he does well, but there was no way he could've ever done enough to make this a winning flick.

The basic storyline behind Limitless is actually a rather intriguing idea. To think that a drug could allow a person to access their entire potential brain activity is an astounding thought indeed. However, there would have to be consequences to such activity, and that's addressed within the film. The reason that people on this drug tend to get sick and die is because their brain simply cannot handle that much time functioning on such a level. So, although the whole idea may seem a little far-fetched, it's an interesting idea nonetheless. The issue, however, comes with the screenplay, which proves to be confusing and convoluted. Early in the film, I chalked my confusion up to the filmmaker's attempt for the audience to feel the same emotions as Eddie, and confusion seemed the most logical. As time went by, however, I found myself still unsure of just what was going on. Time bounces around a lot in this flick, and it was difficult for me to keep up with everything that was happening. In addition, the visual effects - which tie into the screenplay, in case you're wondering - prove to be a little bit of a sensory overload and only add to the confusion. While on the drug, Eddie will go hours and even days without recalling what had happened, but it happens so often that it seems like there's just too many holes within the actual story.

I could probably talk about this movie for a little bit longer, but I don't really think it deserves my time. It wasn't really a film that appealed to me. All of the visual effects seemed a little too trippy, and it all only added to my overall confusion with the entire film. It's not the worst movie I've ever seen, but it's nowhere near redeemable, in my opinion. Perhaps if you're a fan of Bradley Cooper, you'll be able to stomach it all; otherwise, I'd avoid this one if you can.

Movie Review Summary:

Grade: D
1.5 Thumbs Down

Trailer Breakdown: THE HANGOVER PART II

If you read my review of the new film Hall Pass from earlier today, then you'll have seen the teaser trailer for the upcoming film, The Hangover Part II. Now, I don't know if Hall Pass was the first movie with which the trailer was played, but it was definitely the first time I've seen it. That being said, the teaser did raise a number of questions, so now, I'd like to issue my first ever "Trailer Breakdown" where I bring you those questions and give my thoughts. If people like this, I'll do more of them as trailers for big-time flicks arise, but let's stick with the present. Everybody saw and loved The Hangover back in 2009. They loved it so much, in fact, that it nabbed the Golden Globe win for Best Comedy or Musical of the year. It did so well at the box office that the Warner Brothers called for a sequel. Here's the trailer, in case you have yet to see it:

So, obviously, there's a few pressing issues (four, to be exact) that immediately come to mind. Let's talk about them, shall we?

1. Where the hell are the guys this time?
Actually, I didn't really think that when I was watching the trailer because I already knew the answer. The gang rocked Las Vegas in the first installment, but this time around, they're taking their talents to Thailand (Bangkok, to be specific). They're going from one end of the spectrum to the other, and to be honest, I'm pretty excited. There's so many stereotypes that go with male American travelers in Thailand that we should be in for quite a treat.

2. What's with Alan's (Zach Galifianakis) shaved head?
Normally, I'd assume that an actor would've just chosen to do their 'do in a different manner. However, this is Zach Galifianakis. The man's almost instantly recognizable because of the exuberant growth on his head and face. To have it all taken off the top is a tad bit shocking, so I'm thinking it has something to do with the film and its story.

3. On that note, what's the deal with the tattoo around Stu's (Ed Helms) left eye?
This also has to be a part of the story. Considering you can make a quick trip to the Internet Movie Database (IMDb) and find out for yourself, I'll just let the cat out of the bag: the gang is traveling to Bangkok for Stu's wedding. That means it's his bachelor party this time around. However, the tattoo also plays some significance considering some of the press from the film's shoot over the past few months. Originally, the film was to have a Mel Gibson cameo as Bangkok tattoo artist, but Galifianakis urged director Todd Phillips to reconsider the casting. As much as I think the Gibson cameo would've proven priceless, he was released from the film in favor of Liam Neeson, Bradley Cooper's co-star from The A-Team. It'll be good, but Gibson would've been perfect, especially considering his recent problems. So, I'm assuming that Neeson will be the one giving Stu this tattoo, but I guess we'll have to wait and see.

4. And finally, will the monkey be the new Baby Carlos?
The second I saw the monkey ambling along ahead of our three amigos, I instantly thought back to everyone's favorite sunglasses-wearing infant. He was the rock of the group that brought them together while keeping them from tearing each other apart! (well, maybe I don't really think that, but I had to add a little bit of flavor to this post, right?) So, now that Baby Carlos is safely with his mother back in Las Vegas (we're assuming), we need another small creature to please the girls we take to the theater. The monkey could totally fulfill the cuteness factor they so desperately crave.

I know I didn't answer anything definitively, but I don't really think anybody could at this point in time. It's more just musings that we can think about until we get a longer trailer. Or until the film is released on May 26. Until then, ponder all you want, but I'm sure this'll be a smash hit just like its predecessor.