Bring back the monkey!
Printable View
Bring back the monkey!
Just saw this movie today....and not only does Doc makes a valid point but one I noticed as well. This part of the movie stood out like a turf in a punchbowl to the point where I wondered as I left the theatre and couldnt help but think there had to have been a missing/deleted scene somewhere that was there to fill the gap. It was a stretch of incredulity to see the least.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Naysay
Another part of the movie I found annoying was Stu's continually freaking out. Kind of like they went to the well way too often for this comedic device. Would have been a bit more profound to have at least 1 scene were Stu comes to terms with his luck.
That said-if you liked the first you will like the second. And provided you arent expecting the godfather or the dark knight you should find the movie enjoyable.
Some had mentioned Brad Coopers smug face being annoying but after watching this movie-he is the star. Im completly honest in that his casting in that role was critical to the movies success. Hes perfect for the role....much more so the Galifagikaganiston.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hipcheck
Umm...errrr yeah, that'd be me. It's just because he has played some really disconnected smug pricks in the past, and dude must be a great actor...cause he convinced me. But he had more of a Vince Vaughn in Old School kinda vibe here. I swear I told Kingsqueen that I was less likely to want to punch him in the face after this movie, so, I am trying.
Finally watched this today and I have to say I was very disapointed.
I was not expecting much so I was not disapointed. The movie was OK.
Expectations too high perhaps?Quote:
Originally Posted by Crazy_Ivan
Best part of the movie . . . the pictures at the end.
That may have been true of the 1st movie as well.
Perhaps, although I do think the poor reviews tempered my expectations.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hipcheck
In my opinion it was not even close to being as good as the original, if felt to me like it was a story-line written to fit in characters from the first one that had no place being in the second and the cheesey b.s. at the end was typical of the entire movie.
But that is just my 2 cents.
THE HANGOVER 3: Zach Galifiana**** Complains About Fame From Rolling Stones Cover | CHUD.com
Quote:
Regardless, news is spreading fast about the plot of the Hangover III, which Zach alluded to in an interview with Rolling Stone that is currently being teased. There’s not much to it, but it’s definitely a little different than 1 and 2…
“They want to do a Hangover III,” he says. “I’m getting fricking phone calls already.” According what he’s heard, the plot ditches the format of the first two and focuses on his character escaping from a mental institution with help from the wolf pack.
Will WB Digitally Remove The Tattoo From THE HANGOVER PART II Video Release?
Ain't It Cool News: The best in movie, TV, DVD, and comic book news.
Quote:
Now, according to the Hollywood Reporter, if the issue isn't resolved soon, WB may digitally remove the tattoo from all its video releases of the film once it leaves theaters. WB will replace the tattoo with a different piece of artwork altogether. If the parties don't resolve their issues beforehand, the trial should take place in February of next year, after the release of THE HANGOVER PART II on video, so something needs to happen fairly soon because it takes some time to prepare the film for wide video release. A private mediation is scheduled for June 16th.
This probably shouldn't have gotten as far as it has, and I'd imagine that digitally fixing the film will take a substantial amount of time and money to do. It would seem that it might be in WB's best interest to pay the guy. There may be principle involved though, and it seems like both parties are entrenched and not much give-and-take is happening here. In the meantime, if you need to see Stu's original tattoo before it leaves theaters, THE HANGOVER PART II is still playing
