The Hangover: Part 2 Review

The Hangover Part 2 is pretty funny and rather enjoyable; that said, it is at its core almost a carbon copy of its predecessor, a predecessor which outstrips it in terms of laughs and especially in terms of originality in almost every way.

It is understandable why there is a second Hangover film. The first, released in 2009, was the highest grossing film in the US for that year and in the top 10 for the world and is credited as being the highest grossing R rated comedy of all time. Obviously this is not the first time that film studios had attempted to capitalise upon a successful film by throwing out a sequel to films that don't really seem to warrant them (actually its probably more surprising when this doesn’t happen) and many of these such films are generally poorer in quality and originality. In some ways, this is the path of this Second Hangover film.

For all intensive purposes, The Hangover ‘Part 2’ (a truly inspired title), is, especially in terms of plotting and structure, a precise replica of the first Hangover film. The first Hangover film was actually something original, taking the worn out ‘one crazy night’ premise, as seen in films such as Super Bad, and twisting it in a interesting direction, focusing on the repercussions of the events of that night rather than the events themselves. The sequel does nothing so original, taking this premise and recycling it in a new setting. Once again there’s a upcoming wedding, this time between Stu (played by Ed Helms) and Lauren (Jamie Chung) in Thailand, and once again everything goes awry and the three friends, Stu, Alan (Zach Galifianakis) and Phil (Bradley Cooper) once again have to attempt to piece together the crazy escapades of the previous night, which once again none of the three can remember, and also again have to find a missing person, this time in the form of Lauren’s younger brother, Teddy (Mason Lee), before the wedding takes place. Even some of the latter twists and the turns of the film feel almost precisely ripped from their Vegas escapades. In truth, though the events of the crazy night in Bangkok are different from those in its predecessor, everything just felt oddly familiar and hence nothing ever felt surprising or new.

That said, a film doesn’t always have to original to be funny and the Hangover Part 2 certainly has its moments of laughter. Though the first quarter of the film, before they actually get to the ‘hangover’ part, was rather void of laughter (leading me to wonder why such a long build up was necessary), once the friends reach this point and start attempting to piece together the events of the previous night, things certainly improve, though still there are longer stretches of fewer laughs than would be expected, and some jokes and scenes which seem to fall a little flat. That is not to say that the laughs are not present, and the crazy situations return in a abundance and are in the most part both funny and entertaining. There’s guns, drugs, mobsters, penis’; all that you would expect from a sequel to The Hangover (also: a monkey!!) Apart from these crazy situations, the majority of the laughs emanate from the actions of Galifianakis’s character, who returns as the haplessly infantile yet strangely compelling Alan, who fits perfectly into Galifianakis’s bumbling and awkward shtick. In comparison to Galifianakis’s performance the other actors seem less compelling and certainly less funny, though Ed Helm’s girlish screams are always a treat.

In the end then, in terms of originality, The Hangover 2 is obviously lacking, but it does enough to keep itself entertaining and generally funny throughout is running time, even if there are moments where it falls a little flat. That said, in many ways you could just go and rematch the first hangover and be equally, if not better, entertained.