Title: The Hangover Part III<\/p>\n
Directed By: Todd Phillips<\/p>\n
Starring: Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms, Zach Galifianakis, Ken Jeong, Heather Graham, Jeffrey Tambor, Justin Bartha, John Goodman, Sasha Barrese, Gillian Vigman, Jamie Chung<\/B><\/p>\n
Who hasn\u2019t woken up with a hangover and said you\u2019re never drinking again only to hit the bar a few days later? That\u2019s fine for us, but Todd Phillips better keep his word. \u201cThe Hangover Part III\u201d absolutely must be the end.<\/p>\n
The Wolf Pack is back together again, but not for more wedding shenanigans, rather a funeral and a trip to a rehab facility. After Alan (Zach Galifianakis) literally gives his father (Jeffrey Tambor) a fatal heart attack, his mother, sister, and Doug (Justin Bartha) decide that it\u2019s time for Alan to get some serious help. With Phil and Stu\u2019s (Bradley Cooper and Ed Helms) support, they stage an intervention and head out to bring Alan to New Horizons. However, while en route, the Wolfpack is ambushed by Marshall (John Goodman) and his thugs. Marshall takes Doug as collateral while Phil, Stu, and Alan meet his demands \u2013 bring him Leslie Chow (Ken Jeong).<\/p>\n
Part of the appeal of the original film was the fact that it focused on four real guys in the middle of a very relatable situation. It\u2019s highly unlikely many have had an encounter with Mike Tyson\u2019s tiger or made a quick $80,000 counting cards to pay off a gangster, but the idea of four guys getting so wasted during a bachelor party that they can\u2019t even remember the crazy time they had is charming. But fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me. Back in 2009, the idea of one friend accidently roofie-ing his buddies was a novel scenario, but the sequel proved the concept didn\u2019t have the appeal and flexibility for another go-around. It seems as though Phillips and co. recognized that issue because we get a different narrative here, but now we\u2019re left with the problem that these characters just aren\u2019t appealing or engaging enough to sustain any feature length scenario.<\/p>\n
The biggest problem here is Alan. His unknowingly destructive nature was amusing the first time around, but now not only is it just downright ridiculous that someone could be this dumb, but Alan\u2019s just flat-out mean, too. There\u2019s something slightly comical about Alan being a 40-year-old man living with his parents and bossing his mother around like she\u2019s his personal butler, but it\u2019s also undeniably cruel and turns Alan into a highly unlikable person. Even once his family is out of the equation, that attitude carries over to Alan\u2019s vendetta with Stu. Yet again, someone\u2019s doing the best they possibly can to help Alan, but all Alan does is insult him incessantly. As for Phil, Alan\u2019s little friend crush on him used to be sweet, but now that he isn\u2019t lovable in the least, all it does is make you wonder why Phil puts up with it.<\/p>\n
And that opens the door to another major problem; Phil and Stu are underdeveloped, boring characters. Alan is a na\u00efve jerk, but what are they? In this case, they\u2019re merely pawns in the battle between Marshall and Chow. One or the other tells them what to do, they do it, get screwed over, and then align with the other side. All they\u2019re ever doing is carrying out means to an end. No character development and no emotion.<\/p>\n
But perhaps Phillips might have gotten away with that if the jokes were funny or if \u201cPart III\u2019s\u201d narrative was the least bit sensible or interesting. Every single gag or comedic set piece either entirely deflates because it\u2019s mean spirited or feels like it\u2019s something that\u2019s being recycled from past installments. Further stripping the film of any momentum is the fact that the storyline is entirely ineffectual. The concept of bringing Alan to a rehab facility works, but why are we supposed to care about a financial dispute between Chow and Marshall? Marshall is a brand new character who never manages to establish any connection with the audience, whether it be through fear or understanding, and Chow is just too erratic to track. The character randomly popping up for a crazy cameo worked in the past, but here, all he does is turn the story on its head and steal attention from the leading trio.<\/p>\n
\u201cThe Hangover\u201d was just not meant to be a franchise. The scenario was only sustainable for a single feature and without the success of that scenario, the characters completely lose their steam. Even if \u201cPart III\u201d really does mark the end, \u201cPart II\u201d and \u201cIII\u201d are so abysmal, it\u2019ll be tough to appreciate the gem of a film that started the whole craze to begin with the same way again. At least we still have \u201cBridesmaids.\u201d<\/p>\n
Technical: B+<\/p>\n
Acting: B<\/p>\n
Story: D+<\/p>\n
Overall: C<\/B><\/p>\n