Movie Night, part 2
More accurately, this would be Movie Night, part 2: the next day, just before the dvds were due back to the local Blockbuster.
Titles are hard.
Anyway, the second feature in our weekend of trying to watch some good movies was The Hangover part II. We could have done better. We should have just watched FWB again.
I knew this one was probably going to flop when I saw in the opening the credit "based on characters created by..." and shuddered. This is a screwball comedy, meaning two things have to work together for it to not suck: the acting, and the writing. This worked very well for the first Hangover, as the characters were in an insane situation that came at them unawares. Their reactions gave the movie a reality, helping some of the more ridiculous elements keep from pushing the movie into total farce, and allowed for the writers to run a little wild.
The second one is not handled the same way. To start with, the plot is basically the same, except that the characters all have previously established relationships. Allan isn't new to the other guys, they know he's a sociopathic man-child. He shouldn't be able to take them by surprise, and they should also have been a little more paranoid about keeping an eye on him. This is hinted at, off-handedly; Stew keeps a napkin over his drinks for fear of being rufied, Allan's dad mentions that "he never really came back from Vegas", but the reality of that is brushed aside.
It would not be the first time in this film.
Reality is a tricky thing. If one were to, say, steal a police car or abscond with a tiger, one might rightly expect that the owner of these items and the authorities backing them up would all have a vested interest in apprehending those responsible for the theft. The first film handled this - with some sideways comedy logic, but still, handled - where the second film only seems to acknowledge the reality of the situation every once in a while.
It is also dark. There was violence in the first film, but it was done for the sake of comedy. There is nothing funny about losing a finger (this installment's version of the tooth gag), especially given that it is not kept on ice and will likely end the burgeoning career of the person who lost it. There is also nothing comical about being shot, or waking up in a hotel room and having no idea where in the world you are.
The central conceit of the first film is that the bachelor party and the hijinks that ensued was voluntary. It got out of hand, but it all still felt somewhat consensual. That feeling is gone in the second, both because Stew didn't want to have a bachelor party, and because they have a minor along with them for some pretty dark, sick shit. The movie does things to these characters, things that they didn't want, and that makes the whole experience a lot less fun to watch.
Also, this one would have not happened had any of the Wolf Pack thought to ask the people at the hotel if they had seen their missing friend. They might have even had time to fix his finger.
Sadly, I can't even say it was worth watching to find out what happens. I already wish I didn't know.
Titles are hard.
Anyway, the second feature in our weekend of trying to watch some good movies was The Hangover part II. We could have done better. We should have just watched FWB again.
I knew this one was probably going to flop when I saw in the opening the credit "based on characters created by..." and shuddered. This is a screwball comedy, meaning two things have to work together for it to not suck: the acting, and the writing. This worked very well for the first Hangover, as the characters were in an insane situation that came at them unawares. Their reactions gave the movie a reality, helping some of the more ridiculous elements keep from pushing the movie into total farce, and allowed for the writers to run a little wild.
The second one is not handled the same way. To start with, the plot is basically the same, except that the characters all have previously established relationships. Allan isn't new to the other guys, they know he's a sociopathic man-child. He shouldn't be able to take them by surprise, and they should also have been a little more paranoid about keeping an eye on him. This is hinted at, off-handedly; Stew keeps a napkin over his drinks for fear of being rufied, Allan's dad mentions that "he never really came back from Vegas", but the reality of that is brushed aside.
It would not be the first time in this film.
Reality is a tricky thing. If one were to, say, steal a police car or abscond with a tiger, one might rightly expect that the owner of these items and the authorities backing them up would all have a vested interest in apprehending those responsible for the theft. The first film handled this - with some sideways comedy logic, but still, handled - where the second film only seems to acknowledge the reality of the situation every once in a while.
It is also dark. There was violence in the first film, but it was done for the sake of comedy. There is nothing funny about losing a finger (this installment's version of the tooth gag), especially given that it is not kept on ice and will likely end the burgeoning career of the person who lost it. There is also nothing comical about being shot, or waking up in a hotel room and having no idea where in the world you are.
The central conceit of the first film is that the bachelor party and the hijinks that ensued was voluntary. It got out of hand, but it all still felt somewhat consensual. That feeling is gone in the second, both because Stew didn't want to have a bachelor party, and because they have a minor along with them for some pretty dark, sick shit. The movie does things to these characters, things that they didn't want, and that makes the whole experience a lot less fun to watch.
Also, this one would have not happened had any of the Wolf Pack thought to ask the people at the hotel if they had seen their missing friend. They might have even had time to fix his finger.
Sadly, I can't even say it was worth watching to find out what happens. I already wish I didn't know.