Critics have made much hay over how lazy Todd Phillips' sequel effort to, the sleeper phenomenon, "The Hangover" is. While some of their points are vaild, I think many of them missed the point. Phillips' script may very well have been a re-working of the original, but in order to attempt to appease the critics who would have otherwise derided the film for deviating from its successful formula, they stuck to it very closely.
On the surface, "The Hangover Part II" seems to be a self-referential and unoriginal cash-grab. Looking a bit deeper into the intent of it may very well reveal some things about these guys and the nature of their friendship. The Wolfpack can't seem to keep itself out of trouble. Of course, that trouble has to be triggered by a catalyst. This is always where Zach Galifianakis's Alan comes in.
Alan is first and foremost a child. He will never mentally develop beyond the age of 12. However, his introduction in this film is one of my biggest problems with it. At first, Alan is played very broadly as a dick. He is given a small reason for this, but not enough to play it like this. The filmmakers ultimately abandon this idea abruptly.
Alan is like that guy that you feel bad to leave to fend for himself. He is the guy that you hope one day might actually grow up and be a great guy. At his core, he is the most loyal friend that you have ever had. This is the friend that will do anything for you, and you can't stay mad at him...Which is shown in an exaggerated manner in these two films.
Stu, as played by the fantastic Ed Helms, is another story. He is the repressed friend who wants desperately to come out of his shell. Having been severely mentally abused by his previous girlfriend (but enabling it by his very nature), Stu is prone to do nearly anything if his conscious thoughts are taken out of the mix. His repression goes away in these times. He is a lonely sort who is desperate to be with a mate. This desperation means that he will do anything to be happy. Here, he has finally found someone worthy of being happy with. He is also loyal to his friends who recognize that they need to encourage him.
Phil, played to the hilt by Bradley Cooper, is the final primary member of the Wolfpack. He is the married friend that is stifled by life. He is married with a child, but needs more. Seemingly, his only outlet is to get out with Stu and Doug (Justin Bartha, who seems to find a way to only appear in 10 minutes of either film). Phil is the calm one surrounded by excitable and manic friends. He can think through most stressful situations and keep his friends moving towards their goal (usually, trying to find a missing person).
These character points are very faithfully kept intact in the sequel. In fact, you get the feeling that these guys just continued filming from the first film's production schedule. It is just that fluid in its continuity of character. So, why all the griping?
Critics can't get past the fact that the basic beats of the original script are lifted and dropped into this one. Yes, this is true, however, I don't consider reworking the structure surrounding these elements to be lazy. Phillips and his co-writers have done a servicable job of making this situation at least somewhat believable. At no point does the film delve into the carbon copy of say a "Home Alone 2: Lost in New York". Unfortunately, it also doesn't do much to elevate itself into the category of stand-alone classic. You need the first film for this one to make a lot of sense. It simply doesn't have a lot of reason to exist, outside the clamoring of the public to see a smartly written adult comedy with layers of complexity. On that level, the film ultimately never achieves the success of the original.
That being said, this installment has some pretty positive things going for it. Part II does give us a decent mystery, which has more potential for the sharp-thinking audience members to solve than the first. We are given enough information up front to figure it out, without being spoon-fed it. Also, the addition of more Ken Jeong is more than welcome, however they nearly went into overkill mode with it.
Yes, we get the remaining gaps filled in with hilarious found photos which become increasingly more offensive and inappropriate as they are revealed on screen during the end credits. However, the two things in the film that had me laughing the hardest, both come in the final ten minutes. The reveal of Alan's father's wedding present to Stu comes from so far in left field, yet stays perfectly true to the series' established storyline, that I couldn't help but loudly applaud it. Also, keep your eyes open in the scene involving a speedboat's arrival at its destination. You'll want to be watching Galifianakis' actions in the background for a sight gag worthy of the greatest Zucker / Abrams / Zucker "Airpplane" gags.
Ultimately, "The Hangover Part II" reveals the ugly truth that you cannot have your cake and eat it too. The film is nowhere near as consistently funny as its predecessor, yet has its moments. It also leaves us to answer the question, "How closely to the formula do you have to be before you piss off the people who complain that movies don't stick close enough to their successful formula?"
"Lesson Number Three. Always Trust Centuari."
0 comments:
Post a Comment