Ben Wetmore

Movie Review: The Hangover

Hangover Review


I liked this movie. I think I may say that I loved this movie until about 15 minutes before the end, but it was one of the few comedies that is worth seeing. Having given it that compliment, let me add the caveat that it’s worth seeing once.

Comedies usually suck. The talented writers in Hollywood apparently having decided to abandon the field, I find it difficult to laugh at what becomes an exercise in fart jokes, scat humor and sexual innuendo that while perhaps funny at age 12, or funny when I’m over twice as old but want to infantilize myself back to that age, is decidedly not funny having seen the same formula a thousand times.

Hangover binges on real comedy, and it’s the last 15 minutes, the hangover from the substantive laughs, when you start to regret your previous decisions.

For some reason it devolved into sexual slapstick and crude humor. It started with great situational humor, slightly more highbrow than your typical Adam Sandler tragedy, but then decided to light the script on fire for the last half act.

It’s worth noting that all modern movies are tempted by the pied piper of scriptwriting these days, the hard story arc that gives you a taste in the beginning and works through small reveals throughout the story to give you pieces that lead to a worthwhile twist of a finale, and it lends itself to one viewing. Television series that follow this logic, such as the wonderful Battlestar Galactica, fell into this trap and now, upon rewatching, one can’t really do it out of sequence. The totality of the story in the Hangover, that these guys wake up and have no idea what happened and try to piece it together, works decently the first time through, but won’t lend itself to the ridiculous amounts of rewatching one can do with truly classic comedies like Ghostbusters, Woody Allen movies, Chris Farley movies, etc.; and one also is frustrated that, as funny as the movie is and with the comedic talent at their fingertips, no one scene or groups of scenes are truly outlandishly funny.

In ten minutes on screen Jim Carrey consistently delivers comedy in such memorable moments that are altogether lacking in this movie. Which isn’t to call this a chuckle movie, there are certainly significant laughs within, and that’s why it’s certainly worth seeing, but I struggle to think of many Bill Murray or John Candy, or even Steve Martin movies that can’t be watched repeatedly and still, consistently, deliver a fun time.

Perhaps this is to hold these newcomers to an impossible standard. The iconic moments, after all, come only in time and not in the heat of the moment. The first time I saw the Big Lebowski, after all, the only laugh was when the dude crashed his car into the dumpster, and only through rewatchings did I discover the epic redefinition of comedy that it was. Similarly I recall hating Family Guy and Southpark when I first came upon them, only to open up to them in time. Perhaps the same will happen with the Hangover, but I struggle to find the elements present that might give it that potential. I’ll give them the benefit of the doubt, but in the meantime I’d recommend seeing this once, and refrain from binging twice on the Hangover.


B, 84/100, ***/****

Labels: comedy, movie review

posted by . @ 1:19 PM 0 Comments Links to this post

Borat's ruinous legacy for journalists

Sascha Cohen makes a living by making fun of others. In the various comedic cousins, such as Trigger Happy TV, Jackass, Candid Camera, Michael Moore and others, none makes jokes as abrasively as does Cohen. Personally I can't even stand watching his material. And to add even more to the critique, it now comes out that he uses front companies and elaborate ruses to dupe people into doing interviews and talking to him. Now, I understand the need to build confidence in a subject so they feel at ease, but going to this extreme makes it different than others. You can dupe someone by not directly lying to them, but many will allow their suspicious detector to key them off and refuse the interview. And though it may seem like a small distinction, it gives the subject the opportunity to say, "well, I should have known better" in the sense that they should have done their homework better. Here, by setting up these groups and fake fronts, even having done their homework most would be duped. And so when people see this, when they read it, it means they won't want to give any interviews or ever talk to the media. And while that's my most common advice to friends and organizations when it comes to unfamiliar media, it's a bad overall precedent and will lead to a walled-off section of society unwilling to be a part of the local and national discussion ostensibly happening through mass media. Nancy Pelosi wants to bailout big media that makes all sorts of bad business decisions, but no one thinks to enforce existing laws against Cohen who is truly and irreversibly harming journalism in order to make crass unfunny jokes to line his own pockets.

Labels: comedy, journalism, theory

posted by . @ 8:59 AM 0 Comments Links to this post