The Hangover 2: FULL Trailer (03/31/2011)!!!!

[Heisenberg]

^^^^ Thanks for the spoiler.

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

^^^^ Thanks for the spoiler.

Shoot. Edited that out. My bad, sorry. *Hangs Head.

Moral: Never post whilst tired and grumpy.

Hail.

[Dukes and Skins]

I liked it, even though it was essentially the same movie as the first

How I am as well

[da#1skinsfan]

I thought it was incredibly uninspired an not all that funny, especially on the heels of the hilarious Bridesmaids.

[Heisenberg]

Shoot. Edited that out. My bad, sorry. *Hangs Head.

Moral: Never post whilst tired and grumpy.

Hail.

No problem dude.

Sounds like I may wait for this on DVD.

[Warhead36]

It was okay, not nearly as funny as the first. Tried way too hard to be serious while also maintaining a crude and edgey tone. I'm sure it'll do well at the box office because of the first but it can't reach that same standard.

[88Comrade2000]

Some other good comedy sequels:

Crocodile Dundee II

Bill and Ted's Bogus Journey

Ghostbusters II

Back to the Future II

Back to the Future 2 wasn't so-so. 3 was better. Ghostbusters 2 sucked compared to 1. I read somewhere that they may do a third Bill and Ted.

---------- Post added May-29th-2011 at 05:39 PM ----------

The summer has not started well movie wise.

First I was left feeling cheated by the poorest by far of all the Pirates films last week. And now I'm left unfulfilled again by the second Hangover tonight. It was funny in spells, but not laugh out loud first minute to last funny like the first one. A lot more action in this with an obviously bigger budget, but more "meh" then great. Chow stole it for me, Zach G is funny just by being Zach G, and the monkey was a riot; but just not the same.

I think the moral of the last two weeks is Hollywood, please leave well enough alone and stop trying to wring every last buck out of a sequel.

Hail.

What are you going to do next year, when their be sequels galore.

[Gibbs Hog Heaven]

What are you going to do next year, when their be sequels galore.

Take up golf.

Hail.

[Pick6]

I saw it this afternoon and must say I enjoyed in more than the first. Now maybe it had something to do with seeing in in the theater with a friend and the first one I watched at home alone. They really stepped up the crude humor and I was laughing the whole time.

[Springfield]

So....

This movie isn't going to very funny is it?

---------- Post added April-1st-2011 at 01:34 AM ----------

I didn't think so.

Just got back from watching it.

It wasn't nearly as good as the first. It had its moments though. Definitely funnier than most Adam Sandler movies but not nearly as funny as most Judd Apatow movies.

[Elessar78]

I thought it was awful. I was a huge fan of the first but this one just had long stretches of not funny. What made Zach G good in the first one was absent in this one—he was over acting his part. The ending just kinda wraps up because they ran out of time or story. They were trying to get laughs with shock than trying to be funny, they didn't need to go so low in the first. And I'm not a person who's against crude humor, but it can be done better. Hugely disappointing waste of time and money.

[Toe Jam]

I thought it was brilliant, and funnier than the first.

The familiarity of it made it funnier. When you saw Phil on the phone at the beginning, that was funny just because you knew they ****ed up again.

Haven't laughed that hard since Borat, which I consider the funniest movie of the last ten years.

[Kosher Ham]

I didn't think it was funnier than the first. But it was still funny. Worth my 10 bucks.

[da#1skinsfan]

I thought it was awful. I was a huge fan of the first but this one just had long stretches of not funny. What made Zach G good in the first one was absent in this one—he was over acting his part. The ending just kinda wraps up because they ran out of time or story. They were trying to get laughs with shock than trying to be funny, they didn't need to go so low in the first. And I'm not a person who's against crude humor, but it can be done better. Hugely disappointing waste of time and money.

This is sooo spot on. Anyone who thought the first one was hilarious, you've got a 50/50 shot of liking this. I fall into the category above - totally disappointing. The whole movie you're thinking *didnt I see this movie before....wait a second....". Such a joke of a production. Same exact movie, same exact story, same exact situations, just in a different city/setting. They didnt add any wrinkles whatsoever. It's almost like one giant deleted scene from the first movie. Were there funny parts? Yeah a few. In between them I was thinking "when is this going to end already?"

And great point about the ending...youre watching thinking when and how is this turd going to end....then all of a sudden the story accelerates in the last 10 minutes and the credits roll.

Stuuuuuuupiiiiiiiiid. And really disappointing.

[Toe Jam]

This is sooo spot on. Anyone who thought the first one was hilarious, you've got a 50/50 shot of liking this. I fall into the category above - totally disappointing. The whole movie you're thinking *didnt I see this movie before....wait a second....". Such a joke of a production. Same exact movie, same exact story, same exact situations, just in a different city/setting. They didnt add any wrinkles whatsoever. It's almost like one giant deleted scene from the first movie. Were there funny parts? Yeah a few. In between them I was thinking "when is this going to end already?"

And great point about the ending...youre watching thinking when and how is this turd going to end....then all of a sudden the story accelerates in the last 10 minutes and the credits roll.

Stuuuuuuupiiiiiiiiid. And really disappointing.

I try not to over analyze movies when I go see them. Who cares if it uses the same formula as the first one?

If it ain't broke, don't fix it.

[mikered30]

Weak, watch it on DVD.

[zoony]

This is sooo spot on. Anyone who thought the first one was hilarious, you've got a 50/50 shot of liking this. I fall into the category above - totally disappointing. The whole movie you're thinking *didnt I see this movie before....wait a second....". Such a joke of a production. Same exact movie, same exact story, same exact situations, just in a different city/setting. They didnt add any wrinkles whatsoever. It's almost like one giant deleted scene from the first movie. Were there funny parts? Yeah a few. In between them I was thinking "when is this going to end already?"

And great point about the ending...youre watching thinking when and how is this turd going to end....then all of a sudden the story accelerates in the last 10 minutes and the credits roll.

Stuuuuuuupiiiiiiiiid. And really disappointing.

Christ, what were you expecting? A Scorcese production?

[Stophovr6]

Christ, what were you expecting? A Scorcese production?

Some effort?

They re-shot the movie, with different lines but the same carbon copy plot, in a different city. Weaksauce, very weak weaksauce.

[Springfield]

For all of the people who didn't like the movie:

What did you guys expect? Did you not watch the trailer? Of course it's the same movie as the first one!

I didn't like it as much as the original but I found some redeeming qualities in it. I laughed and didn't really think it was a waste of money.

[skinsfan07]

I thought it was pretty good. It's real hard to top the original. But still it had some funny parts in it and was worth the 10$.

[ixcuincle]

As they say, stick with what works. The first was based on a hilarious formula, so just use the same for the sequel.

[da#1skinsfan]

Some effort?

They re-shot the movie, with different lines but the same carbon copy plot, in a different city. Weaksauce, very weak weaksauce.

Bingo.

You want to stick with what works, thats fine, I get it. How about you dont repeat dozens and dozens of scenes from the first movie, scene after scene, with the variable being the city they are in. You were creative with the first one, you couldnt be creative here? Had to just recreate the same movie? Laaaaaaaaaame.

[Elessar78]

I didn't go in expecting a different movie, nor did I expect Scorcese, nor did I over analyze. I would've been ecstatic if IT WAS EXACTLY LIKE THE FIRST ONE. The hijinks of the first one wasn't there, the aforementioned over-acting, Teddy wasn't exactly someone you cared about. If Stu had gone missing, would've been more excellenter. The Asian stereotypes were just ham fisted, not that Hangover 1 dealt in subtlety but it was amusing. The campy (ninja) speedboat ending.

I'm usually keen on spotting sequel duds, but I didn't think they could miss with this franchise. This one I feel I got hoodwinked by Hollywood. Same feeling I got when Suisham missed that gimme against the Saints.

[Homercles82]

Saw it over the weekend and it did follow the same formula as the first one which makes it an OK movie. It was rather disgusting with all the nudity. I laughed more at this one but at times it felt like they had no idea what to do and it really boring at parts. No one cares about the Asian brother Teddy who disappears. The Mike Tyson cameo wasn't that funny. I felt like Alan (Galifinakis) was held back a bit in this movie, but was still the funniest character.

4/10 rating from me. My brother paid for my ticket, otherwise I would have wanted my $10 back.

[The Tris]

The first time I saw the ad for this I thought to myself "Hollywood can never leave a good thing alone" that and "it's the same movie, just in a different settting" (you know, like every movie Adam Sandler has made to date) and then "hold out for the rental because it will be there in 3 months if not sooner" El Paso on seeing this in the theater for me

I think the moral of the last two weeks is Hollywood, please leave well enough alone and stop trying to wring every last buck out of a sequel.

Hail.

What are you going to do next year, when their be sequels galore.

For those like me bemoaning Hollywood's current problem, this article is a fantastic read.

http://www.gq.com/entertainment/movies-and-tv/201102/the-day-the-movies-died-mark-harris?printable=true

With that in mind, let's look ahead to what's on the menu for this year: four adaptations of comic books. One prequel to an adaptation of a comic book. One sequel to a sequel to a movie based on a toy. One sequel to a sequel to a sequel to a movie based on an amusement-park ride. One prequel to a remake. Two sequels to cartoons. One sequel to a comedy. An adaptation of a children's book. An adaptation of a Saturday-morning cartoon. One sequel with a 4 in the title. Two sequels with a 5 in the title. One sequel that, if it were inclined to use numbers, would have to have a 7 1/2 in the title.

...

So here's what's on tap two summers from now: an adaptation of a comic book. A reboot of an adaptation of a comic book. A sequel to a sequel to an adaptation of a comic book. A sequel to a reboot of an adaptation of a TV show. A sequel to a sequel to a reboot of an adaptation of a comic book. A sequel to a cartoon. A sequel to a sequel to a cartoon. A sequel to a sequel to a sequel to a cartoon. A sequel to a sequel to a sequel to a sequel to a movie based on a young-adult novel. And soon after: Stretch Armstrong.