Let me get one thing straight, my expectations for this film were rock bottom. I loved the first two (maybe the first one a bit more than the second) but I had heard only bad things about this film so i figured i would go in with low hopes, thinking that i could only be pleasantly surprised... I was wrong.
Within five minutes of the film starting, a giraffe is decapitated (not a spoiler, this features in the trailer). Although I had seen this happen in the film's trailer and was less than impressed at the time, i gave director Todd Phillips the benefit of the doubt that this happens for a logical reason in terms of the wider narrative...
It turns out that this happens for absolutely no reason in terms of the wider narrative.
I actually think it would have worked much better if Alan had bought or stolen a life-size cuddly toy giraffe and the same thing happened. A cuddly toy giraffe would have worked on so many levels; reinforcing Alan's child-like and ridiculously impulsive behaviour as well as the humour of Alan being upset at a toy giraffe's head coming off alongside the pure ridiculousness of a life-sized giraffe in general. There was just no need to include a real giraffe's head being cut off aside from shocking the audience and when a film resorts to shock tactics in order to get a cheap laugh from the audience you can 100% guarantee that this will not be a good film. With this being at the very beginning of the film I was tempted to leave there and then to save sitting through more tacky and desperate attempts of humour but i persevered in vain.
It turns out that this happens for absolutely no reason in terms of the wider narrative.
 |
| Needless animal cruelty |
While we are on the subjects of animals, i don't know what species pissed Phillips off but the giraffe is weirdly not the only animal to be killed off for absolutely no reason in this film. In fact there are two other instances where the audience sat in an uncomfortable silence as more animals were murdered in scenes that really did not need to be included in the film and once again served absolutely no function to the wider narrative. I'm not being a PETA, paint-throwing prude here; as much as i love animals, if the murder of one (or in this case some) is justified within a film then i won't bat an eyelid, it's just the gratuitous inclusion of killing animals in order to give the audience a cheap shock that I can't stand - shocking the audience into laughing awkwardly does not a good film make. It is definitely not my inner animal lover that the animal killing offends, it is my inner film lover.
The other thing massively wrong with this film is that it is heavily dependent on Alan to the extent that it completely exhausts his character. We get it, Alan isn't all there - he's, shall we say, 'special' and sometimes says or does silly things that will make both grown ups and children laugh. He provides that blatant, predictable, in-your-face humour of a fat guy being stupid. Call me old fashioned but i am more of a fan of wit. I think the first two films strike a perfect balance between the
'Alan-humour' and the 'witty-humour' and though i never particularly found Alan excessively funny, his occasional quips were a welcome easy-laugh in the midst of everything else that is going on. However, in The Hangover 3 it is much more 'The Alan Show' and near enough every scene is dominated by him in a desperate attempt to make the audience laugh. It's a lazy script and Alan is so overexposed throughout the film that by the end I wanted to pull my hair out. His scenes are long and the attempts at 'humour' are stretched - there are only so many times Phillips can desperately reinforce the fact that Alan is fat and has the mental age of a child and it still be funny.
Phil and Stu are actually the understated saviours of the film and their witty one-liners, though few, got the biggest laughs in the cinema and if it wasn't for them the film would have been a totally lost cause. Stu is still neurotic, Phil is still sarcastic and though the 'Alan/ Phil & Stu' balance was massively skewed against them this time around, they did have just enough presence to at least slightly salvage what remained of the film once you cut out all of the 'Alan-is-stupid' scenes and the animal killings.
The strongest part of the film was definitely the plot. When i heard that for the third film they were changing their tried and tested formula i did have my doubts and though i was slightly disheartened
when the opening scene wasn't a dishevelled Bradley Cooper desperately phoning Doug's wife i was pleasantly surprised by the strength of the basic story and how well executed the plot was. There were just enough twists and surprises to maintain my interest and as I had already lost faith in the quality of the movie I was waiting for the story to become as obvious and desperate as the attempts at humour were; it doesn't. When you cut out all of the heavily Alan-focused scenes the plot has a real chance to shine and it isn't as predictable or as far-fetched as i initially thought that it would be.
One of the things that I loved about the second film was that even though the narrative is so similar to the first, there are brilliant elements of realism that somehow makes these characters and the situation they manage to get themselves into, not once but twice, somehow seem plausible. The second film would not have worked at all for me if it wasn't for the fact that the characters constantly reference the escapades from the first film; the fact that Stu now only drinks bottled beer to avoid being drugged again, the fact that he doesn't ever intend on having the bachelor party that got them into such a mess in the first film, the sheer disbelief that it has happened again - as if they are saying to the audience 'We know it is utterly ridiculous that this has happened again - we know you are thinking how stupid it is that we have basically made the same film twice and we completely agree with you.'
Phil, Stu and Doug all express the appropriate and realistic amount of complete and utter shock at it happening again, along with them openly saying how stupid they are. Doug's wife sums it up the best in the opening scene of The Hangover 2 where a defeated, flabbergasted Phil tells her that it has happened again and she just snaps 'Seriously, what the hell is wrong with you guys?!' She basically asked the question the entire audience was thinking and i remember that being the moment that i relaxed into the film and all scepticism was obliterated.
Therefore, for me, one of The Hangover 3's saving graces was the fact that the attitude from the second film was maintained; these characters are aware of their past more than any other characters from most sequels or trilogies, and that's what makes it borderline relatable. In a lot of film sequels, there isn't much from the original film that is referenced beyond necessity - The Hangover 3 makes references to the first two films, bringing back minor characters in order to help this plot thrive, as well as adding that little hint of nostalgia. There are flashbacks, there are in-jokes and pretty much all the fun of Vegas from the first film is revisited, all of which are very welcome additions to an otherwise faltering film.
It is such a shame that the strong storyline of The Hangover 3 was let down by such a lazy script as i truly feel that if they had maintained the character balance of the first two films they would have been on to a winner. However, Phillips obviously saw Alan as a way to get some easy laughs and didn't seem to consider the fact that he might not be everybody's favourite character, and even if he was he definitely wouldn't be once he has dominated 98% of the film. There is just so much wrong with this film that the few things that were right are completely overshadowed and even though i didn't expect much from the film going in, I still felt pretty disappointed as i left. For me, the fatal flaw of The Hangover 3 wasn't changing the formula narrative-wise but changing the balance character-wise; that alongside the inclusion of shock tactics over wit and real humour is just an unforgivable recipe for disaster.
All in all i award The Hangover 3: ★★ ☆☆ ☆
And I will let the little one from Malcolm In The Middle summarise my feelings towards The Hangover 3 in one short sentence:
Stay tuned for more reviews and follow me on twitter if you fancy it :)
Love,
 |
| Ha-Ha Alan's fat, can we move on now? |
Phil and Stu are actually the understated saviours of the film and their witty one-liners, though few, got the biggest laughs in the cinema and if it wasn't for them the film would have been a totally lost cause. Stu is still neurotic, Phil is still sarcastic and though the 'Alan/ Phil & Stu' balance was massively skewed against them this time around, they did have just enough presence to at least slightly salvage what remained of the film once you cut out all of the 'Alan-is-stupid' scenes and the animal killings.
The strongest part of the film was definitely the plot. When i heard that for the third film they were changing their tried and tested formula i did have my doubts and though i was slightly disheartened
 |
| I missed this scene |
One of the things that I loved about the second film was that even though the narrative is so similar to the first, there are brilliant elements of realism that somehow makes these characters and the situation they manage to get themselves into, not once but twice, somehow seem plausible. The second film would not have worked at all for me if it wasn't for the fact that the characters constantly reference the escapades from the first film; the fact that Stu now only drinks bottled beer to avoid being drugged again, the fact that he doesn't ever intend on having the bachelor party that got them into such a mess in the first film, the sheer disbelief that it has happened again - as if they are saying to the audience 'We know it is utterly ridiculous that this has happened again - we know you are thinking how stupid it is that we have basically made the same film twice and we completely agree with you.'
Phil, Stu and Doug all express the appropriate and realistic amount of complete and utter shock at it happening again, along with them openly saying how stupid they are. Doug's wife sums it up the best in the opening scene of The Hangover 2 where a defeated, flabbergasted Phil tells her that it has happened again and she just snaps 'Seriously, what the hell is wrong with you guys?!' She basically asked the question the entire audience was thinking and i remember that being the moment that i relaxed into the film and all scepticism was obliterated.
Therefore, for me, one of The Hangover 3's saving graces was the fact that the attitude from the second film was maintained; these characters are aware of their past more than any other characters from most sequels or trilogies, and that's what makes it borderline relatable. In a lot of film sequels, there isn't much from the original film that is referenced beyond necessity - The Hangover 3 makes references to the first two films, bringing back minor characters in order to help this plot thrive, as well as adding that little hint of nostalgia. There are flashbacks, there are in-jokes and pretty much all the fun of Vegas from the first film is revisited, all of which are very welcome additions to an otherwise faltering film.
It is such a shame that the strong storyline of The Hangover 3 was let down by such a lazy script as i truly feel that if they had maintained the character balance of the first two films they would have been on to a winner. However, Phillips obviously saw Alan as a way to get some easy laughs and didn't seem to consider the fact that he might not be everybody's favourite character, and even if he was he definitely wouldn't be once he has dominated 98% of the film. There is just so much wrong with this film that the few things that were right are completely overshadowed and even though i didn't expect much from the film going in, I still felt pretty disappointed as i left. For me, the fatal flaw of The Hangover 3 wasn't changing the formula narrative-wise but changing the balance character-wise; that alongside the inclusion of shock tactics over wit and real humour is just an unforgivable recipe for disaster.
All in all i award The Hangover 3: ★★ ☆☆ ☆
And I will let the little one from Malcolm In The Middle summarise my feelings towards The Hangover 3 in one short sentence:
Stay tuned for more reviews and follow me on twitter if you fancy it :)
Love,
No comments:
Post a Comment
What do you think? Leave your comments below!