The Hangover Part 3

When I heard they were making a Third Hangover movie, my first thought was, milk it for all it’s worth guys. I am a firm believer that the first hangover was a flash-in-the-pan-hit. It tapped into some desire in our society to party like you don’t care, get into misadventures, and make mistakes without any real consequences. The first hangover had something to it with the characters, charm. You loved these kooky dumb guys, who got into a crazy situation. Situations that they did to themselves. People can relate to these characters, they might have their own friends that are crazy while partying, and they can laugh at these guys trying to make sense of a crazy night on the town.

The Hangover Part 2 main problem is that it is basically a repeat of the first film. One of the guys is getting married, a night of drinking before the big day, wake up to try and figure out what happened. The big problem with the second hangover film was that it was set in Bangkok, not that it was a repeat. American audiences could not relate to the crazy time in Bangkok, like they could to a crazy night in Vegas. It fit a formula, that fit the Hangover franchise.

The Hangover Part 3 breaks this formula. The Hangover 3 starts out with Allen (Zach Galifianakis) needing to go to rehab, because he’s insane and needs to take his meds. I don’t think that is how it works writers. On their way to the clinic, they get attacked by a gangster and told they need to find Chow (Ken Jeong). The gangster is going to take Doug and kill him if they don’t find Mr. Chow in 3 days. I think this is a miss opportunity. By changing this movie formula they lose the audience again. This is no longer a character film about crazy adventures you get in while drunk, this is now a film about a man hunt. That happens to have crazy people involved in it.

In retrospect I think the film could have gone another way that would have worked better. They get kidnapped by the gangster, they get sent on their mission, but then drugged so they would forget what they had done. Having to retrace their steps again. Waking up in Vegas not knowing how they got there, or what had happened. Same formula, but people can understand it, and it is what people are expecting from a Hangover movie. Bring the story back to something people can relate to. Not this, overreaching-never-going-to-happen-to-them-gangster-kidnapping-movie. The first films are about fun that got out of hand, now we take those characters go do insane stuff, that does not fit their characters at all.

The funniest character in these films is Galifianakis. He is just an idiot that causes a bunch of trouble, and we all sort of wish, he was part of our lives, to add some spice to it. The charm of his character is pretty much lost in this film, with just a few scenes that are the exception. His Character, that was more idiot charming in the first two films, now I just found him brash and annoying. Many of his silly rants falling flat in the theater. The writing in this film is pretty awful, thinking more about shock factor, that actual cleverness.

There are a few gems in this movie, the last scene is pretty good and funny. With a few awkward laughs thrown in the middle. There is very little actual humor in this film, but scenes that make you feel so uncomfortable that you laugh. That seems to be Todd Phillips’ Modus operandi, shock you into submission until you laugh, because it hurts so much. I think this film would have been a better second film, with them coming back to the formula in the third film. Instead they lost the audience. I honestly think the first film was a mistake success. They tapped into some idea about people they were not expecting. The idea that we are all normal, but sometimes we need to party and get crazy, then spend the next day picking up the pieces.

The Rating System

Production (Directing, Editing, Music) 3-5

Story (Plot) 2-5

Characters (Likability, Acting) 3-5

Writing (Dialogue, Cleverness)2-5

Emotions (Was it; Fun, Scary, Sad, Do I care)3-5

Overall score 13-25