How will “The Hangover: Part III” end?
The climactic finale? A critical review of the whole Warner Bros. “Hangover” franchise and
the upcoming instalment, “The Hangover Part III” (2013)
Quote from writer Andrew Crump of ‘screenrant’ (08/03/13):
‘Early rumors about The Hangover 3 suggested that the film is going to break the formula of the previous two installments; rather than force the Wolf Pack into a morning-after whodunit where they try to figure out what they did the night before, director Todd Phillips – who also co-wrote and produced – claimed that he’s putting their antics on the road’.
Since a few days, ago, Thursday 7th March to be precise, Warner Bros. studio’s
(in collaboration with production company Legendary Pictures) kickstarted the campaign for their long awaited ‘three-quel’ of the conclusive trilogy, the “Hangover Part III”, which, according to the official movie poster’s launch (as seen above) ‘all ends here’. What surprises me most, here, is that the film is certainly taking a different direction. Yes it’s returning to our favourite destination of the series, Las Vegas. But just look at the poster. What is this, the ‘Lord of the Hangover’?
Funnily enough, when I first saw this poster, I both chuckled with amusement at the over-dramatisation of the satiric content, but also remembered this sensationalised movie poster was a mock-up of a strikingly similar approach adopted for a movie franchise’s promotion by the very same company. This was none other than Harry Potter.
Remember those Star Wars esque over airbrushed ‘couldn’t get more over the top if you tried’ looking photo’s of each of the characters (including Ginny, Ron, Hermione, and not fogetting, the almighty Neville Longbottom) in their final glory battles against the Dark Lord and his death eaters parade? Well, Warner Bros. dished them out in pretty much every possible advertising space you could imagine for the last part of
“Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2” (2012).
But as much as I admired the marketing Warner Bros. used for HP, and also their own tongue in cheek humour pointing fun at the ‘seriousness’ of the latest film, with the ‘Hangover: Part III’ poster, just take a look at this crazy discovering! below! Who would have thought! But wait a second, what is Enemy Mine” (1985)? Anyone? News to me.
Here are two valuable sources of the Harry Potter/Enemy Mine movie poster’s striking resemblence!
From first glance, it looks like a half hearted attempt at a Alien/Predator/trying our best to fight for humanity and survive story. Well, if 6.7 is anything to go by on IMDB these days, well…
An unexpected marketing discovery:
Take a look at where Warner Bros actually stole the ‘original’ Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part II” (2011) movie poster concept from!
Good God, how times have changed!
IT’S GONE FROM BATTLING WITH ALIENS AND ANIMALS TO FIGHTING OVER WHO HAS THE BEST WAND! What has it all come to!
Launching the teaser trailer worldwide via social media networks and Youtube along with a VERY
“Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part II” (2011) ‘esque’ poster (clever self-market promotion there, Warners! :p), the 1:59 long preview leaves fans and audiences alike with observed reactions through different sites, from ‘it’s going to capture the success of the Hangover Part I’ again, to mixed responses on a recent Youtube review concerning the ‘vagueness’ of the trailer and it’s formulaic set up, which Todd Phillips has been so slated for in the past, much as by audiences familiar with his other shoe horned type ‘drunken/anti-social/road trip antic’ themed based releases, including “Due Date” (2010) and “Project X” (2012).
But, first and foremost, to cover your tracks reading this, please familiarise yourself with the trailer!:
Once you’ve watched the trailer, try and get the chance to watch this insightful and debatable response from the guys over at MovieclipsTrailer, below!
May I just say though, before you view, what brought me to an important conclusion from the trailer – was that OTHER than what appeared to be a split second shot of Doug in a family living room scene – where on earth is DOUGY DOUG DOUG going to be in the rest of the movie! Not one bit of dialogue from him in the trailer!
Credits go to user movieclipsTRAILERS:
For some, this trailer may be seen as a simple last cash in, or wasteful ‘tie up’ of the series for the sake of being able to be labelled, or atleast called, a ‘trilogy’
(for all you box-set fans out there).
HOWEVER, in attempting this piece in the most non-subjective view as humanly is possible, I have considered that, for the hardcore Hangover fanatics, some may be more pleased to now see a re-visiting of more familiar concepts, locations and ideas fromthe original – “The Hangover” (2009), As highlighted by the guys over at movieclipsTRAILERS, the sequel takes on similar repetitive plots as we’ve seen in past blockbuster releases, and how each instalment degrades where quality and cinematography is concered. Take “The Matrix” (1999). Then “The Matrix Reloaded (2003) (which I thought was ok!). But the “The Matrix Revolutions” (2003), meh.
It just ended in an orgy of darkness, robots,and a dystopian world far from the beautiful scenes we saw that captured the Wachowski’s brothers vision in “The Matrix” (1999).
However, on the flip side of that argument, it is fair to say that some sequels have remained consistent, or even triumphed over the first offering . Liam Neeson’s “Taken 2” (2012) proved a worthy contender of it’s predecssor. Considering it’s simple narrative plot (of being abducted/taken in which Neeson plays the bold, intuitive macho hero-hunter operative), it’s ability to surprise audiences still with fresh ideas, even in a second return is a testament to it’s originality and success as a ‘short ans sweet’ one and a half hour action/thriller/shooter.
Other examples include The “Home Alone” series, which I believe, after the departure of Hollywood childhood star, Macaulay Culkin, just went out the window. The production team should have just kept their money where their wallets were, in my opinion. If they had a huge respect for quality over quantity, they, I think, would have realised that after Culkin left, the series should have stopped right there which could have left a much more profound indelible mark for the franchise to be remember for, essentially.
The classic “Home Alone” with Hollwyood childhood star, Macaulay Culkin (left), and where the series took a bombastic turn with the questionable, astray third development, “Home Alone 3” (1997), starring a substitute Culkin actor, by the name of Alex D. Lintz (right)
The impact of those two original instalments were, and still are, HUGE, on a global level. It is the lasting and dominant association, or reminder, if you will, of the series. However, if someone can tell me if Macaulay Culkin is breathing these days in 2013, please, let me know. Other than the odd unfortunate drug scandal or arrest amongst the Los Angeles district, you just don’t hear a peep from him. Also, more to the point, where has the child star of “Matilda” (1996), Mara Wilson, got to these days?
It’s a shame, in my opinion! Perhaps the presures of Hollywood, being too young, and having too much just boils up the harsh fatality of what these incredible talents were once,in their ‘hey-day’, and ultimately, what they had become after – individuals robbed of their childhoods who do everything to try and escape the industry they once thrive in. You’ve just got to love this scene I’ve thrown in from “Matilda” (1996). The 90’s is just bliss. OR atleast that’s what these Hollywood films depicted that time period was.
I was a child of the ’90’s, as I’m sure a lot of you reading will be 🙂
But just, for myself, it was a time with not a care in the world, If I had a time traveller, and money was no object, the 1990’s would be the definitive time period I would happily be taken back to, given I lived through that period . I mean the music as well. Rusted Root’s ‘send me ony my way’.
Ah, those certainly WERE the days….I just love it. A time free of smartphones, Facebook and instead, just plain, simple, living. As much as we couldn’t survive with the latter now, I’d still love to just know how quite different life would have been like today had we not tapped in to such technologies, and instead kept our lives much more analogue I guess, as a way of putting it.
Like black and white before colour TV.
Just take me back….please!
Credits to go user mandapandais7:
By about the third movie, “Home Alone 3” (1997) they tried to re-capture what Culkin and the original home/family environment did for the series, but inevitably, just fell flat on it’s head, escpecially at the box office. grossing a financial loss, falling two million ish short of the thirty two million dollar budget.
Please, bore yourself with more of where I thought the “Home Alone” series went catastrophically wrong!
The main star, Alex D. Lintz, was just about cast purely for the sense of nostalgia and for the audience to respond to say ‘oh, he looks like Culkin and acts like Culkin’! But, let’s face it, he just wasnt . And just when you thought the Parrot and fancy red remote control car made up for this painful lack of and dose of hindrances, it didn’t.
It would almost be like taking “The Hangover” and using teenagers for the plot. How could it honestly find the witty, bold, gag for gag popular culture references the middle aged cast have delivers (mainly in the first movie) be approached by an American Pie style cast? What’s ironic about this, is that in fact, a ‘flashback’ moment of Alan’s memory during a scene from “The Hangover: Part II” (2011) finds the moment realised, which is awkward and both disturbing to watch, considering the ages of them…..
Credits go to user MidgetsWithShovels (you get some odd user names these days…)
That said however, in understanding how other media format have been tweaked, or changed, the transition from TV drama to film has been successful in some respects, escpecially in the UK. “The Inbetweeners Movie” (2011), “Ali G Indaouse” (2002) and several other adaptations have all worked well and been recieved at the box office. I guess it can just come down to the level of integrity and respect for the series roots and originality that the director and producers have, which, as we have witnessed, can either make or break the format.
They have already been creating imports/exports of drama TV series from the UK to the US on a sporadic level, such as “Skins” (2007), and “The Inbetweeners” (2008), which was just awful. I don’t even want to get started on that. It was just tacky, unoriginal, culturally exempt and illogical in so many aspects. I mean, taking characters is one thing, but, actually mocking the originals and then trying to make them a lot ‘cooler’ just doesn’t flatter the native audience demographic, I’m afraid. It just insults our knowledge.
I’ll show you what I mean. Take the classic ‘bus wankers’ scene from the original Inbetweeners series, in the UK. Then see it’s re-manifestation on the US remake. It’s horrible, and more to the point, just cringey for us Brits to watch. And if there’s anything else to go by, just take a gander at the ‘flattering’ comments below the video…
Credits go to user beanyman62:
Reverting back to the repetitive formula debate I discussed earlier, which has been tried and teasted in many sequels over the past decade or so, this can easily bore some audiences in to oblivion. Escpecially for those who adopt the impatient approach of ‘oh I can’t watch a movie more than once because I know what will happen’ attitude (much like my Dad, actually!), or, who hates the mediocre repetitiveness or cliches of Hollywood movies.
The whole notion of Phllips script just replacing and tweaking a few elements in the movie (as we witnessed in the “Hangover Part II” (2011) catapults critics in to a frenzy of debate and discussion over whether the films series, since the first instalment, has just been a mere cash in and unworthy highly regarded comedy franchise which lacks severe direction and innovativity in the narrative plots, other than just revolving around the following below.
What is remarkable about this argument though, is how there is a good, and a bad. Quoting from a 2011 article on behalf of “rediff MOVIES”, “while critics were bust declaring it a dud, complaining that its jokes were repetitive, the audiences were howling with laughter”.
What I can find from this, is that although “The Hangover: Part II” (2011) did just bank on the repeated success of the drunken ‘laugh for thrills’ scenario of antics and events from the first movie, it’s comedy value from the audience’s perspective certainly paid off as re-watchable, and in Todd Phillips eyes – a worthy risk to be taken – as it went on to become Warner Bros “best opening of all time for a comedy at the domestic box office…[which] grossed the most of any R-rated film in its first five days”.
And on that note, I shall leave you now with a literal draw up of Phillips Hangover movie script plots (which I think, in all honesty, just comprised of a 10 minute meeting with the bosses over at Warner Bros studio’s, haha), along with my plot presumptions from the the recent first, “Hangover Part III” (2012) teaser trailer (released Thursday 7th March, 2013).
THE HANGOVERS, ALL LAID TO BARE: (from left to right)
Part I – 2009, Part II – 2011,
and now, Part III – 2013
How does The Hangover (2009) end?
– LAS VEGAS.
– Caesars Palace
– Alan’s speech on the rooftop with his Wolfpack’, with a pledge they will be ‘looking for strippers and cocaine’…..
Also, ‘how about that ride in? I guess that’s why they call it Sin City.
Credits go to user prosseter13:
– The baby
– Mike Tyson’s Tiger
– The stripper (Stu’s hot, giggly, appears like she’s been drinking too much Red Bull wife, over night!).
Oh, and black Doug. How can we forget him!
– The wedding chapel on the strip
– THE ‘wake up call’
Credits go to user ‘Janan100’
– Stu’s dreamy song, ‘Doug’
Credits go to user ‘FunnyMovieMoments’
And, um, where’s Doug?!?!?!
We’re not taking no ‘black Doug’!
– Doug’s wedding, and a classic homosexual rapper singer performing 50 Cent’s “Candy Shop” for much painful laughter! ”
No 50 Cent duet in sight I’m afraid….
Credits go to user PeanutButterGrapeJam:
– And finally, THE PHOTO’S we’ve all been waiting for.
In the wise words of Alan, ‘That’s classic!’
Credits go to user Jakaka10:
How does the
“Hangover Part II” (2011) end?
– Dark, seedy infested surroundings of Bangkok, Thailand….
– Stu’s future brother in law Teddy (who disappears off the face of Bangkok as soon as the drunken antics get going,
– Alan’s speech on Thailand’s ‘fun facts’.
Oh, and the mention of Stu’s upcoming marriage/past controversial marriage to a Las Vegas stripper…..
Credits go to user ClikClak Mofo:
– The lady-boy…enough said on that. Go and watch, if you haven’t. One of the sights we all wish to erase from our memories..
– THE SECOND ‘wakeup’ call
Credits go to user NDRonin1401
– Some random, trashed, run-down Bangkok hotel?
– Alan’s bald head
– Stu’s missing tooth/discovered tatoo…
– Stu’s ‘Mike Tyson’ tatoo (which the movie got sued for by Tyson’s tatoo artist, oh the irony…. http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/gossip/2011/06/hangover-tattoo-dispute-ed-helms-hangover-2-tattoo.html
– Mr. Chow! (Ken Jeong)
– The helicopter deal gone wrong on the Bangkok skyscraper, State Tower Hotel!
So want to go there!
– Stu’s dreamy song #2. the ‘Alantown’
– The boat run!
– Stu’s last minute arrival with the group at his own island wedding, decked with Mike Tyson and a Thai rock band…interesting…
– THE PHOTO’S. EVEN more grotesque than before.
How will “The Hangover: Part III” end?
– Return: Nostalgic “Hangover” Part I (2009) – Las Vegas baby!
– Alan being Alan (singing at his father’s funeral which is a “triggering event that sends Alan off the deep end”, according to a November 2012 report from ‘screencrush’:
– Nevada desert?
– Doug, for a split second in the living room scene, is THAT you?!
– Road highway chases…
– A GIRAFFE!
– A new villain?
– Return of CHOW, looking lad-ish as ever
– Return of Stu’s Las Vegas wife, Jade! (Heather Graham)
SO, with what appears to be a completely different plot approach (despite the location) taken by director Todd Phillips, will this latest instalment triumph or attain the level of success “The Hangover” (2009) achieved?
Written by Craig Mazin (known for “Scary Movie 3 & 4” (2003/2006) could this be a return to form for the Hangover series, or a drunken train wreck?
Or, is this trailer purely a marketing ploy to keep previous audiences drawed in and to bring new fans?
How will “The Hangover: Part III” end?
Well all I can say now is, roll on this summer.
The Hangover Part III (2013) hits cinema’s in the UK on the 24th May, 2013
For the movie’s international release dates, refer to this link, updated by good old IMDB!