Movie Review: "The Hangover Part III"

- by Steve Garcia, 24 May 2013

The third and final visit to the Hangover franchise, The Hangover Part III once again follows the Wolf Pack into another dire situation, as hilarity and unexpected twists and turns ensue. The original was excellent, the sequel was a disappointing rehash, and the third one? Well you’re just gonna have to keep reading this spoiler-free review!


Written and directed by Todd Philips, The Hangover Part III is where the unexpected franchise all ends. Ed Helms, Bradley Cooper, and Zach Galifianakis all make a comeback as the Wolf Pack, as well as Ken Jeong who plays the deranged egomaniac, Leslie Chow. This time the gang is joined by the film’s main antagonist, John Goodman, who would have been the film’s saving grace, had he have been a part of the movie for more than ten minutes. As far as the Wolf Pack is concerned, Helms and Cooper were great, but the huge problems regarding the cast all revolved around (arguably) the trilogy’s two most popular characters: Alan and Mr. Leslie Chow.

In the original film and even in its lackluster sequel, Alan (Galifianakis) was always portrayed as the lovable idiot—he makes stupid mistakes, but you can’t be too mad at him because he’s “literally too stupid to insult.” In this movie, however, Philips threw all of that development away, and transformed Alan into a jerk that just does anything he wants for the sake of being a jerk. Not once do you ever find the character redeemable and lovable in this installment, and that kills any attachment you ever had to him since the very beginning. As if that wasn’t exhausting enough, about every five minutes of the film is dedicated to how “crazy” Mr. Chow is. Since the character’s naked body popped out to the limo in the original film, the audience already knew that Chow is a nutjob. Here, we’re constantly reminded of the fact by both the insane actions and the tasteless dialogue to the point where the character’s antics are completely and obnoxiously overdone.

While this movie didn’t necessarily need to be as funny as the original, all it needed to do was advance the story and tie any loose ends; that’s what a sequel is for. Philips took a risk and changed the formula for this film, but it ultimately fell flat because the sudden change of pace didn’t exactly fit in with what the original film set out to do. The first one was a “who done it” of sorts, where the characters wake up from a crazy night, and the audience had to follow them to find out just what happened. The sequel, while it was a boring rehash, at least kept up with the formula and followed through with it. This film, however, took the “who done it” concept and turned it into what was essentially an action thriller, where car chases, combat sequences, and even jumping off buildings became the norm. The change was abrupt, and it was incredibly noticeable.

Furthermore, what made the original (and even the sequel to an extent) enjoyable was that the events that took place were somewhat believable—You always hear about how people go to Vegas, get wasted, and marry someone they have no business marrying. You always hear about people mutilating themselves or having sex with the insanity that Bangkok has to offer. Granted, stealing tigers from Mike Tyson is a stretch in it of itself, but you don’t care much about that one because it was a onetime, unexpected twist in a movie that revolved around unbelievable believability. Part III opens up with Alan buying a giraffe, only to have it decapitated because it hit a bridge at 60 miles per hour (it’s in the trailer).  All credibility is completely thrown out of the window from the get go, and you’re immediately taken out of the elements that made the franchise what it was to begin with.

While there was plenty wrong with this movie, it did have its moments, and the callbacks and cameos by unexpected characters introduced throughout the franchise were very much appreciated. Unfortunately, the film didn’t really have its own personality until maybe the last few minutes, which were essentially all throwbacks and reminders regarding how awesome the first one was. While it is this writer’s humble opinion that The Hangover is a movie that should have never spawned a franchise at all, The Hangover Part III had its moments of funny and neatly tied up the trilogy, but it's one of those movies I'll probably forget about by next week and never see again. Give it a watch if you heavily enjoyed the first two, but otherwise? Give it a rent or Netflix it.


Did you see "The Hangover III"? Do you agree with Steve's take? Leave a comment below!

Tagged: movies & TV, Reviews.

blog comments powered by Disqus

---

Follow @TrashMutant