The Flickering Myth writing team cast their views over the “epic conclusion” to the Hangover franchise….
Many people claimed the first instalment of the Hangover franchise to be a ‘groundbreaking’ movie in the comedy genre. It made a massive amount of money at the Box Office so a sequel was planned and came out a couple of years later. But unlike the first movie, The Hangover Part II was not as well received by the critics (and, in some cases, the fans). Yet, it still made an absolute killing at the box office. And because Warner Bros. aren’t stupid, a third movie was put into production and the first trailer was released last week.
And it was a trailer that got the Flickering Myth writing team talking. Did they like it?
Simon Columb: Where is the hangover? Where is Doug? Where is the who-done-it intelligence? Where are the jokes. The final part to a trilogy that should’ve been left after one film.
Chris Cooper: My favourite animals are giraffes. So I’m to going to go with… NO. It was also humourless. It just didn’t offer anything
Brogan Jameson Morris: It’s really hard to hold back and not just go to town on this trailer, so here are some positive thoughts I had instead: it’s under two minutes. Las Vegas is nice to look at. John Goodman with a gun can be fun. That’s a good amount of extras for a prison riot scene. Giraffes are cool. Zach Galifianakis’ beard is really impressive. Bradley Cooper agreeing to do this film proves everyone is human. The end of the trailer is a good advert for road safety. There won’t be any more Hangover films now?
Bear in mind I had to watch the trailer four times to find those positives.
Gary Collinson: I suppose we should probably wait until a red band trailer arrives to get an accurate impression of whether this will make The Hangover Part II look like a comedy classic. Still, such a big name comedy franchise dropping such a humourless trailer is an utterly bizarre move, especially considering how bad the last one was. Sadly, I’m sure there are plenty of people out there who found Part II hilarious, so I expect they’ll be easy pleased with this one too.
Luke Owen: I can at least say that the trailer made me go back and listen to Wolfmother. Forgotten how good they were!
I sort of feel bad for the Hangover crew. They made a “ground-breaking” comedy movie and then got panned by everyone and their mothers for making the same film again but with a different backdrop. Now it looks like they’ve taken a 180 and gone down a different route. No hangover, no roofies, no trail of clues. But what we’re left with are three unfunny characters doing really unfunny things like buying giraffes (cause that’s wacky right?!) and putting lollipops in other people’s mouths (cause that’s wacky right?!).
The Hangover Part II was a real insult to cinema audiences everywhere – I have no idea what this one will be. But, as Gary said, maybe we should wait for the red band trailer before making any really damning decisions.
Ozzy Armstrong: Being a fan of the first film and an even bigger fan of the characters, I was looking forward to this. Unfortunately I am very disappointed as there isn’t any real laughs or much promise in this trailer. The good thing is that they are doing something different. Also, as has been said, they have to wait for a red band trailer to show the real humour of the film (if it exists). And as I mentioned, the characters have proven to be very funny.
One bad trailer doesn’t necessarily equal a bad movie but I’m not so sure with this. I’m just hoping that another trailer might show us that this could yet become a great comedy
Anghus Houvouras: This trailer is baffling. It felt like I was watching one of those Tarantino knock offs from the mid 1990’s. They’re going for something here, and hell if i know what it is. I’m a fan of the original and the sequel. I liked Part II more than a lot of people I know who dismissed it as being too much like the first. This trailer seems hell bent on declaring that this one is going to be quite different. If any film ever needed to avoid straying from the formula, it’s the Hangover. Two very successful films that connected with audiences.
As a fan of filmmakers who are willing to flip things on their head, I would admittedly be impressed if Todd Phillips delivered a dark comedy, but i think we’re looking at a poorly designed piece of marketing, not an indicator of Todd Phillips’ diverse directorial range.
Martin Deer: Proud to say I was one of those who liked Part II (it may not be everyones cup of tea but when you’re used to waking up in a Japanese family’s rec room not knowing how you got there you appreciate a certain kind of humour), however this trailer was terrible.
Tom Jolliffe: What exactly does the trailer say? It’s vague but for a comedy trailer they’ve committed a cardinal sin and not included anything funny. It may be a terrible trailer, or possibly it may be they just couldn’t salvage anything funny from the film. I would say though, even more so than the second one, this has the stink of a film made for no other reason than money. I actually enjoyed Part II, even if it lacked any of the charm the first one had. I think the third might well be a turkey.
Matt Smith: ‘I told myself I would never come back. But then… ‘Vegas’… can sure get you a lot of money.’
I didn’t see the second one, bad word of mouth putting me off. But I heard Todd Philips used the ‘Part II’ moniker as an homage to The Godfather Part II, which was a masterpiece. So if The Godfather Part III was not so good, what does that make The Hangover Part III to those who hated the second instalment?
The only joke that worked didn’t because you saw it coming (though he does have the voice of an angel). His beard is a masterpiece, and deserves a spin off in its own right. It’s obvious from the fact I’m talking about beards that I’m not going to take this movie seriously, the trailer being that off putting. Did you see that bit where he hit the suit of armour in the nuts!? Hilarious…
And giraffes are not stupid. It would have ducked.
Ryan O’Neill: I can understand the prediction that this film is going to be poor, coming as it does on the back of the very disappointing Part II. However, if this new instalment does revolve around a vastly different plot and if this trailer has deliberately avoided the common comedy trailer pitfall of crowbarring in all of the best gags and surprises, should these not be seen as positive signs? Some of the best comedy talent in Hollywood is involved in this, surely they wouldn’t phone it in twice?
Jake Peffer: I don’t think this looks like the worst thing I’ve ever seen but it doesn’t look all that great either. There were about two laughs I got from the trailer but not much else. Hopefully this will be better than Part II but it doesn’t look like it’ll be much better and even if it is, that’s not saying much.
Helen Murdoch: After making a truly phenomenal comedy the sequels have paled in comparison. Whilst the second had a few laughs the 3rd instalment seems to lack any kind of humour. My main issue is that it claims to be the final part of the trilogy but as soon as the box office explodes you can be sure that the Wolfpack will return.
I didn’t laugh at a single moment in the trailer. Either they’re saving the laughs for the film or there simply aren’t any. Either way that giraffe joke at the end is heinous
Scott J Davis: Loved the first one on first viewing, but after repeat viewings it lost its appeal to me. Because of that I stayed clear of Part II, particularly after the poor reception it got. That said, anything with Bradley Cooper, Ken Jeong and John Goodman is worth a view, but just cannot comprehend the appeal of Galiafinakis – it baffles me. He was terrible in the first movie and ruined The Campaign and Due Date for me.
Trailer wise, ’twas mostly amusing, but didn’t raise the film above anything but “may see” category…
Tom Jolliffe: Agree with Mr Davis about Galiafinakis. The guy just seems to play the same character repeatedly. You could say that about certain other actors certainly, but I’m not entirely sure if the guy will have anything outside his locker other than Alan. Due Date he just played Alan again. At least say Jonah Hill has shown he can branch out, amongst doing all those films where he plays exactly the same character. Personally once the Hangover franchise has run its course I can’t see Galiafinakis doing much more mainstream work. He’ll find some sort of market straight to video and that’s if he’s lucky.
David Bishop: Didn’t like the first film. Didn’t see the second one. Trailer for third film is rubbish. I will avoid.
And with that damning closing from Mr. Bishop, I think it’s safe to assume that the Flickering Myth writing staff are not fully behind this trailer. Even those who did like the second instalment were quick to dismiss the trailer.
There could be an argument that they’ve left all the funny bits in the movie (as opposed to putting them in the trailer like many comedy movies do), but shouldn’t a trailer trying to sell a comedy have some of its funny moments? Maybe the red band trailer will reveal more…
What did you think of the trailer for The Hangover Part III?