Movie Review; The Hangover Part 2 - Page 2

In The Hangover Part 2, it is Stu who realizes the location of the the missing party member; this time it is only through an internal dialogue and a quick series of flashbacks that returns his memory allowing him to figure out the mystery. In my opinion, it is a cheap fix and an unoriginal way to solve a gaping hole in the story-how do we end this thing?

The Hangover Part 2 does add two new and interesting plot-driving characters: a drug dealing monkey (a stolen animal similar to the tiger in Part 1), and Kingsley, played by Paul Giamatti, a pseudo-gangster who replaces Mr. Chow as the movie's lead gangster and kidnapper.

The move is rated R, and contains both gross humor, adult language and themes, and soem pretty wild scenes of violence, drug use, sex, nudity, and the discharge of bodily fluids.

The sequel, like the first movie, was directed by Todd Phillips, who usually makes cameos in his films, though I did not notice him in this one. Bryan Callen, who plays the Vegas wedding chapel owner in the first film, here play Samir, a swarthy Thailand strip club owner and part time gangster. Callen is a great character actor, and Samir is a funny role.
If you can catch The Hangover Part 2 at a second-run movie theater, and pay no more than $1.50 for the ticket, you'll get some value for your money. Otherwise, I'd recommend waiting until the movie is available through Netflix your premium cable subscription.

Page 1 — Page 2
Spread the word
Bookmark and Share
Profile image for daddybydefault

Article Author: DaddybyDefault

Serial entrepreneur, tech geek, author, and father who loves writing and blogging on topics like business, law, parenting, and entertainment. My blog, www.daddybydefault.com is a resource featuring cool stuff for stay-at-home dads.

Visit DaddybyDefault's author pageDaddybyDefault's Blog

Read comments on this article, and add some feedback of your own
  • No image found

Article comments

  • 1 - Devin

    Aug 19, 2011 at 2:38 am

    It's pretty funny witnessing the reactions to this film in Thailand, as I actually live in Bangkok. A lot of younger Thais were really eager to see this film, but maybe a little disappointed after seeing their home city portrayed the way it was. I think people should watch the film and enjoy it, but take it with a grain of salt. Remember, this film is meant to be a comedy. Yes, as any Thai police officer or lawyer will probably admit, there is a lot of drug dealing, child abuse, and other unsavory activity in Bangkok, but there is also a much nicer side like monks doing their morning alms, people enjoying a meal at the food stalls, etc. The best way to get to know this city is to come check it out for yourself, like millions of visitors do each year.

  • 2 - Daddy by Default

    Aug 19, 2011 at 6:44 am

    Thanks for your comment Devin.

    Thailand does have a reputation in the west, right or wrong, as being a wild and corrupt town, which is why, I would imagine, the movie is set there, rather than some other party town in the states.

    With that said, I agree with you 100$, the city is portrayed in a pretty bad light, and I believe it is done purely to mine the comedy of the situation. I've not been to Bangkok myself, but many of my friends have been and they paint a different picture, mostly of beautiful beaches, sunsets, and very nice people.

Add your comment, speak your mind

Personal attacks are NOT allowed.
Please read our comment policy.
Please preview your comment.

blogcritics lists for May 17, 2013

fresh articles Most recent articles site-wide

fresh comments Most recent comments site-wide

most comments Most comments in 24hrs

top writers Most prolific Blogcritics for April

top commenters Most prolific Commenters in 24 hrs