The Hangover Part III (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews



Message


Empire Admin -> The Hangover Part III (20/5/2013 2:52:25 PM)

Post your comments on this article




ronniem -> Big surprise (20/5/2013 2:52:25 PM)

Too bad people still flock to see such drivel and enable studios to keep giving us unnecessary sequels, prequels, reboots, remakes...etc




klepto4 -> This makes me a little sad (20/5/2013 4:29:48 PM)

Yeah this is most probably again studios insistance of churning something out quickly, while it's still fresh in our minds and as a result all talent,creativity and care has suffered. I can forgive the 2nd one as a miss fire but it's such a damn shame when the first was so good that with all the brilliance of everyone involved, it's just amounts to another wasted opportunity :-(




Madhava -> Completely unecessary... again. (20/5/2013 9:01:47 PM)

The Hangover should never have been anything more than a one-off film. Some films are made to be trilogies -- the Hangover was definitely not one of them. Hollywood, why can't you just let some films alone? It was successful? Okay, just make another original movie and that will be successful too! Stop with the flipping unnecessary sequels!




Toursiveu -> Ken Jeong... (20/5/2013 11:19:41 PM)

... should never be allowed near a movie camera EVER AGAIN. There I said it...




elsquig -> doggoneit (21/5/2013 7:01:06 PM)

thats my friday night down the tubes. does anyone remember the 80s when you couldn't move for great comedies ? now your lucky to get 1 every 5 years.




bamamike -> So What! (22/5/2013 3:37:47 PM)

Was anyone excited about this 3rd one? Was anyone excited about a 2nd one?




Wild about Wilder -> RE: So What! (23/5/2013 4:45:14 PM)

On it's own it probably would've been a lot of fun BUT! this just doesn't match up to either of the originals.
Still funnier than most of the drivvel we get from La La land these days just not as good as the others & hopefully this'll be the end.




ElephantBoy -> RE: So What! (23/5/2013 4:57:51 PM)

"Stop the pain" Kermode will be thrilled.




teeman89 -> Not as bad as Empire makes Out. (23/5/2013 6:22:50 PM)

I have collected Empire magazine for a while, but i am starting to ignore their reviews recently after the great review for The Impossible. I managed to get an advanced screening to the Hangover 3 and it's actually not half bad. It's never gonna be a masterpiece but no film is. If you want a film where you can sit down and be entertained for couple of hours than this film is a perfect choice. I think 3 stars would be a much fairer score.




Dvid Ilott -> Law of Diminishing Returns (23/5/2013 9:42:06 PM)

The memory of the classic original seems such a long time ago. it was fresh and edgy. I didn't particularly rate the sequel. This new movie had just one laugh for me - the visual gag of the decapitated giraffe's head coming through a car windscreen.

The 3 leads have become tedious and irritating and the banter is now just loud bickering. Cooper looks like he'd rather be somewhere else and it all smacks of contractual obligation.

Let's make this the last one please!




TheMightyBlackout -> It has great things in it... (23/5/2013 11:55:40 PM)

It has great things in it, it just isn't a great movie. Although, I wasn't disappointed because it's pretty much what I was expecting: One for the fans.

As a franchise, 'The Hangover' needed this movie. Although I'm not entirely sure its audience did.




ElephantBoy -> RE: It has great things in it... (24/5/2013 11:10:24 PM)

Just listening to Kermode's review now, amusing stuff. Can't believe John Goodman is in it, hope the paycheck was worth it!




Hood_Man -> RE: It has great things in it... (27/5/2013 1:27:51 AM)

It has some funny moments, it's diverting enough for 90 odd minutes, and I have to confess to finding the end quite touching.

However, for a film called The Hangover 3, it's completely forgettable.

Also...

SPOILERS






I did not need to see Ed Helms with boobs...




jcthefirst -> RE: It has great things in it... (28/5/2013 4:27:44 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hood_Man

It has some funny moments, it's diverting enough for 90 odd minutes, and I have to confess to finding the end quite touching.

However, for a film called The Hangover 3, it's completely forgettable.

Also...

SPOILERS






I did not need to see Ed Helms with boobs...


That coda was one of only two laughs I had throughout the whole film.




porntrooper -> RE: It has great things in it... (29/5/2013 1:40:13 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jcthefirst


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hood_Man

It has some funny moments, it's diverting enough for 90 odd minutes, and I have to confess to finding the end quite touching.

However, for a film called The Hangover 3, it's completely forgettable.

Also...

SPOILERS






I did not need to see Ed Helms with boobs...


That coda was one of only two laughs I had throughout the whole film.


Same here.

The problem with Part 3 is, it almost feels that Todd Phillips deliberately went out of his way to make a movie that wasn't as good as the previous two. He has been quoted as preferring the second movie over the first, and seemed a bit pissed off that people criticised that second film for following the same formula and not trying something different. To the point where in Part 3, it genuinely felt that Phillips was sticking two fingers up to everyone and saying.... "See, this is what happens when you take these characters from that formula and do something different with them. Shit, isnt it?". The fact that the coda at the end left me wanting to see more of that 'hangover' just emphasises that feeling to me.

Phillips has made a movie that feels so dissconnected from the others, so unfunny and so hard to like, that I can only imagine it is intentional to piss off and make fun of the critics of Part 2.

Sometimes, particularly with comedies, you can sense audience frustration and dislike. In my showing, on opening day mid afternoon, there were 6 walk outs. That seemed a lot to me, but what was really unusual was that they walked out during the third act, they seemed to be waiting and waiting to get to the funny, and when it didn't come, they just fucked off. There were very few laughs, indeed I am struggling to recall which parts people did actually chuckle along with, the final coda is the only one I can recall.

It also seemed that the characters themselves were re-written to be as unlikeable as possible. Alan was always walking a tightrope between lovable mentalist in a world of his own, but here he is spiralling downwards as a deeply unpleasant sociopath, only in a couple of scenes does he act like the Alan from the first two movies. Indeed one gag (Chow's email/txt message sign off) flies against a similar gag used in Part 2 (where Alan gets a txt from Chow to arrange the speedboat) making the character seem far dumber than he should be. Phil is another than in the previous films walked a fine line between 'likeable' and 'arsehole', but here he seems to have ju mped way passed 'arsehole' into 'utter cunt' territory. Chow is another, now he feels all tormented and dark and strange, as opposed to the coked up party monster he was presented as earlier. Again, it really does feel like a 'fuck you!' from Phillips to the audience for them daring to criticise whaty he did before.

It's a shame, I really liked the first movie, and despite the re-hash, I enoyed the second. The third one however, sucks balls.




MonsterCat -> RE: It has great things in it... (29/5/2013 2:23:04 PM)

The Hangover Part 2 is pretty much a rehash of the first film, though. It's also depressingly bad and deeply offensive.

Phillips is full of bullshit if he's saying the first sequel isn't basically a cynical rehash.




porntrooper -> RE: It has great things in it... (29/5/2013 3:03:44 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MonsterCat

The Hangover Part 2 is pretty much a rehash of the first film, though. It's also depressingly bad and deeply offensive.

Phillips is full of bullshit if he's saying the first sequel isn't basically a cynical rehash.


Phillips accepted that Part Two followed the same formula and beats, but he believes it is the better movie of the two, and in the interview it came across that he had issue with those that criticised the decision to stick to the formula established in the first, rather than try something different. So, it seems to me that he has deliberately aimed for something so odd and unfunny, as something of a 'fuck you' to those people, and it retains the best laugh in the film for the final few moments of screen time, and guess what? It is again a shameless rehash of the formula. Would a third movie following the same formula have worked as successfully as the previous two? Probably not, but I bet it would've resulted in more laughs than what we ended up with. I can see why people dont like Part Two (although I fail to see what is so deeply offensive?) for using the same formula, but in doing so it was a success and it managed to at least remain funny in part. The same can't really be said about Part Three, it simply doesn't work as a crowd pleasing comedy in the same way the others did, it comes across more as a surreal indie oddity, with a side helpin of 'fuck you' to his critics.




paulyboy -> RE: The Hangover Part III (29/5/2013 10:44:04 PM)

Quite enjoyed the first film and just about tolerated the second. I was expecting the worst with this final installment, but shockingly I actually managed to wrestle some enjoyment from it. A couple of laughs and a nice ending, I've seen a lot worse.

2.5/5




bydabeachman -> RE: The Hangover Part III (3/6/2013 7:26:29 PM)

I feel the Hangover III was an incredible vacation for Todd Phillips. The film truly was able to bring their story full circle and give us, in my opinion, a better film than the other previous ones. Here we had the character we know and love in a situation that was created from the previous films. We see the characters how they have been affected from these experiences and how they are dealing with them. Brilliantly introducing new characters and bringing back familiar ones. Departing from the typical hangover experience this film made a tight bow to tie it all up. I can see them making spin off shows from it, hell what I would like to see is a Hangover 4 when they actors are in their 60's that would be an amazing film! You never see people do a sequel like 40 years later, I'd like that. Overall this film was really well made and fun for the whole gang. Brilliantly written and not just drivel as many think it will be, they redid themselves. GO SEE IT BEFORE YOU MAKE A DECISION.




moviebuff73 -> RE: The Hangover Part III (4/6/2013 11:17:28 PM)

Loved the first one. Loved the second. Love the third. It is different to the previous movies, in story & in humour, but it's still a very funny movie.




film man aidy -> RE: The Hangover Part III (6/6/2013 10:52:09 AM)

This just about kept me mildly entertained for it's duration. I'm not going to take the film apart bit by bit, but will say that you know the film has problems when it's absolute standout moment, by a country mile, was the post credits scene.




Conboy -> The Hangover Part III (8/6/2013 2:25:25 PM)

Todd Phillips Hangover III, from his own screenplay along with Craig Mazin leaves the funny at home. The first Hangover was inspired chaos, the second a retread of the first and the only reason for number three is to allow the cast and Phillips to receive a sizeable payday. I never thought I’d see a film where Galifianakis is not funny. But the third in the series manages to achieve that and not much else.

The film begins with Chow (Jeong) escaping from a Bangkok prison, cut to Alan driving down a freeway with a giraffe. You know this is not going to end well. Phillips clearly chooses to go big and loud at the expense of keeping it funny. Pretty soon with Alan off his meds an intervention occurs and the “wolf pack” are on the road in search of a treatment facility. They get hijacked and Marshall (John Goodman) appears as a gangster wanting his $42 million back. Lesley Chow stole the money and now the boys need to track down Chow and get the money back. Doug (Bartha) is his insurance and the “wolf pack” have three days to get the money back or Doug is dead.

From this moment on the boys and Chow attempt to recreate the chemistry. But the film is so flat and predictable it vanquishes any of the good will that the first film delivered. Even a trip to Tijuana Mexico fails to improve the proceedings where unforgivably Leong butches the great Johnny Cash song “Hurt”. Clearly Phillips sees Jeong as a comedy genius a view not shared widely. He lost me when he started to eat dog food just to get a laugh. Helms and Cooper sleep walk through proceedings they are merely here to react to the Alan and Chow show. I’m a big fan of Galifianakis but here he disappoints he is occasionally funny but fails to reach the highpoints of his scene stealing performance in the original. He has a couple of nice moments with McCarthy but that’s about it. Heather Graham makes a brief appearance as the ex-stripper Jade and Goodman is con




Will Frey -> RE: The Hangover Part III (5/7/2013 8:06:01 PM)

I thought it was joke of a bad film. John Goodman, you were on such a good roll - Red State, Flight, Argo and now this? How much did they pay you for this?. A thorough disappointment.


3.5/10 [:-]




m_er -> RE: The Hangover Part III (13/7/2013 10:55:14 AM)

i liked it. nice but forgettable. goodman was great as usual.




jezy -> (19/9/2013 3:54:47 PM)

Dreadful. The scene after the credits rolled was genius and should of been the story for the movie.




Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
4.296875E-02