Brad reviews THE HANGOVER PART III (2013), directed by Todd Phillips!

Posted on December 25, 2025 by Bradley Crain

In THE HANGOVER PART III, Phil (Bradley Cooper), Stu (Ed Helms), and Doug (Justin Bartha) get back together so they can help Alan (Zach Galifianakis), whose gone off his meds and seems incapable of handling his dad’s sudden death. After a family intervention, the guys are driving him to a rehabilitation facility when their car is forced off the road and out steps the gangster Marshall (John Goodman), assisted by Black Doug (Mike Epps). Marshall kidnaps (white) Doug as leverage to force the guys to bring him their old friend Leslie Chow (Ken Jeong) within three days, or they won’t see Doug alive again. It seems that Chow, who recently escaped from a Thai prison, had stolen $21 million in gold from Marshall, and he’s pissed. The Wolfpack head back to Vegas, and with the help of a few old friends, they do whatever they have to do to save Doug one more time!

Released in the summer of 2013, THE HANGOVER PART III pulled in around $362 million in worldwide box office against a $103 million budget. While definitely a box office hit, these numbers are a big step down from the prior film’s $586 million, so up to this point, Part III has remained the Wolfpack’s last adventure. While THE HANGOVER PART II was practically a remake of the first film, PART III seems to be going the opposite way and actively tries not to repeat itself. The “what the hell happened last night” plot lines are abandoned for something different, and honestly, that’s probably about the smartest decision the filmmakers could have made for this installment. The film plays more like a darker, R-rated crime comedy, leaning into the action, heist, and confrontation sequences. While the change isn’t entirely successful, I definitely appreciate the attempt to come up with something different.

Even though THE HANGOVER PART III isn’t as funny as the prior films, I still enjoy the chemistry between Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms, and Zach Galifianakis as the primary members of the Wolfpack. I also thought it was funny that Justin Bartha’s pack member Doug is once again relegated to the guy who’s not really involved, as he’s the one who’s kidnapped. Ken Jeong’s Mr. Chow, as cartoonish and unhinged as he is, is probably my favorite character in the series at this point. He pretty much steals every scene he’s in. John Goodman is a welcome addition as the intimidating bad guy, and he’s good in the film, but it’s the kind of role he could do in his sleep. I also really liked the fact that PART III returned to the initial setting of Las Vegas, which provides a nice sense of closure to the series, while also allowing for the participation of former characters like Heather Graham’s Jade and her son Tyler! It was nice to check in with them again.

Ultimately, THE HANGOVER PART III is a pretty good conclusion to the series. It’s certainly not as funny or outrageous as the prior films, but it does deserve some credit for trying something new instead of simply repeating the formula for a third time. And I also thought the final scenes were emotionally effective as they took us for a quick trip down memory lane with the Wolfpack. It felt like the end, and I felt good watching it.

Brad reviews THE HANGOVER PART II (2011), directed by Todd Phillips!

Posted on December 20, 2025 by Bradley Crain

In director Todd Phillips’ THE HANGOVER PART II, the night before his wedding, groom-to-be Stu (Ed Helms), his two best friends, Phil and Doug (Bradley Cooper and Justin Bartha), Stu’s soon-to-be brother-in-law Teddy (Mason Lee) and Doug’s brother-in-law Alan (Zach Galifianakis), sit on a beach in Thailand for a toast to the bride and groom. After cracking open sealed bottles of beer in the beautiful setting, the movie screen goes black, and soon we see Phil, Stu and Alan wake up in a seedy room in Bangkok with absolutely no memory of what happened the previous night. The room is trashed, there’s a monkey wearing a denim Rolling Stones jacket, a naked Chow (Ken Jeong) is sleeping under a pile of blankets, Alan’s head is completely shaved, Stu has a face tattoo, and both Doug and Teddy are nowhere to be found! Doug calls and he’s back at the resort, but the only trace of Teddy is his severed finger, which is now in possession of the monkey. With the wedding just hours away, the three friends follow any clues they can find in a frantic search for Teddy. The search leads to the surprise discovery that Stu had intimate relations with a transsexual stripper, a tattoo parlor run by Nick Cassavetes, a dangerous and duplicitous American gangster named Kingsley (Paul Giamatti), and an arrested, ancient Buddhist monk who’s taken a vow of silence and who’s also confused for the 16-year-old, Teddy. Hell, at one point Mike Tyson shows up and sings the classic Murray Head single, “One Night in Bangkok.” Most importantly though, will the friends find Teddy alive and still have time to get back to the resort in time for Stu’s wedding?!!

A massive box office hit in the summer of 2011, THE HANGOVER PART II became the highest grossing R-rated comedy up to that time, with a worldwide gross of $586 million, against an $80 million budget. It was also the highest grossing R-Rated film to have opened over Memorial Day weekend, raking in over $118 million in its first four days. The story went to the well again with its still clever, but not quite as unique premise, comprised of a mystery-driven plot line where we follow the investigative adventures of Phil, Stu, and Alan and discover what happened the night before at the same time that they do. This allows for another series of outrageous, raunchy, surprising, and funny moments that escalate in absurdity over the course of the film’s 102-minute running time, culminating with another secret roll of pictures on Teddy’s camera that fill in the crazy events from their wild night in Bangkok. Based on the familiarity with the characters and the types of situations, I didn’t laugh out loud quite as frequently this time around, but the film still has its share of amusing moments, and I enjoyed revisiting the film again after a number of years. One of the things that I noticed about THE HANGOVER PART II is that it does not have the re-quotability factor going for it like the first film does. Alan and Chow have some funny lines, but honestly, I don’t think I’ve ever re-quoted a single one of them. I will agree with Alan on one point though, “When a monkey nibbles on a penis, it’s funny in any language.” I’d say that this film is more about mining comedy out of the extreme and absurd situations that our heroes are put in and less about clever, quotable quips.

THE HANGOVER PART II works because of the outrageous situational comedy, as well as the exceptional chemistry between Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms, and Zach Galifianakis. Ken Jeong has a bigger part this time around as Mr. Chow, and of course he’s hilarious. I did get some solid laughs from its combination of shock-value, sight gags and character interplay. The Bangkok we see here also makes for a seedy, raunchy and dangerous background to the crazy action. Of course the biggest negative of the film, as is the case with many sequels, is the fact that it’s practically a remake of the first HANGOVER, just set in Bangkok instead of Vegas. Think Charles Bronson’s DEATH WISH (New York) versus DEATH WISH II (Los Angeles). Also like the first two DEATH WISH films, THE HANGOVER PART II pushes the boundaries even farther, with even more graphic nudity and just overall harder material in general. Sequels always up the ante, but lose a little of what makes them so special in the process, and that’s definitely going on here.

Ultimately, while THE HANGOVER PART II was even more financially successful than the original, it’s not quite as fun because we’ve seen it before in the first film. But I loved the first film, so I enjoyed this one as well, just not quite as much.

Brad reviews THE HANGOVER (2009), directed by Todd Phillips!

Posted on December 16, 2025 by Bradley Crain

It seems kind of strange in today’s world of non-stop streaming, but there was a time when you would purchase a blu-ray of a movie, and they’d give you a free “digital” copy of the movie. In 2009, I purchased the blu-ray for THE HANGOVER and added the digital copy of the movie to my laptop that I kept at my tax and accounting office. Every night during the 2010 tax season, I would go home around 5:00 for dinner, and then I’d go back to the office at 7:00 to continue my work. When I’d get back to the office, I would always play two copies of digital movies on my laptop… first, I’d play THE HANGOVER and next, I’d play ZOMBIELAND. When those two movies would end, usually by around 11:00, I’d head home. Needless to say, I got to know each of these movies very well and love them both.

In director Todd Phillips’ THE HANGOVER, the night before his wedding, groom-to-be Doug (Justin Bartha), his two best friends, Phil and Stu (Bradley Cooper and Ed Helms), and his soon-to-be brother-in-law Alan (Zach Galifianakis), head to Las Vegas for a wild and exciting bachelor party. After taking some Jagermeister shots on the roof of Caesar’s Palace, the movie screen goes black, and soon we see Phil, Stu and Alan wake up in their hotel room with absolutely no memory of what happened the previous night. The room is trashed, there’s a tiger in the bathroom, a baby in the closet, Alan doesn’t have on any pants, Stu is missing his lateral incisor, and Doug is nowhere to be found! With the wedding just hours away, the three friends follow any clues they can find in a frantic search for Doug. The search leads to the surprise discovery of a new stripper wife for Stu, the naked and dangerous Asian gangster Chow (Ken Jeong), who jumps out of the trunk of their car and attacks Phil with a crowbar, and Alan being tasered in the face by a kid visiting the Vegas police station. Hell, at one point Alan even gets punched out by Mike Tyson! More importantly, though, will they find Doug alive and have time to get him back to Los Angeles for his wedding?!!

A massive box office hit in the summer of 2009, THE HANGOVER became the highest grossing R-rated comedy up to that time, with a worldwide gross of $469 million against a budget of $35 million. One of the keys to the film’s success is its clever and unique premise, comprised of a mystery-driven plot line where we follow the detective-like adventures of Phil, Stu, and Alan and discover what the hell happened the night before at the same times that they do. This allows for a series of outrageous, raunchy, surprising, and hilarious comedic moments that escalate in absurdity over the course of the film’s 100-minute running time, culminating with an almost unbelievable roll of pictures on Stu’s camera that fill in the crazy events from their wild night in Vegas. Most movies, even comedies, don’t result in me laughing out loud. I laughed out loud frequently that first time I watched THE HANGOVER back in 2009, and I still do. It’s also a movie that, since that 2010 tax season, I have quoted endlessly in my personal life, whether it be “Classic,” to “Thanks a lot, Bin Laden,” and even “It’s not a purse, it’s called a satchel. Indiana Jones wears one.” I never know exactly when something will happen in my personal life that reminds me of THE HANGOVER, but if the time is right for an “in the face,” I’m always ready!

Of course, the comedy in THE HANGOVER would not work without the great direction from Todd Phillips, as well as the exceptional performances and chemistry between Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms, and Zach Galifianakis. Phillips moves things along at a perfect pace, allowing for tons of laughs, while propelling the story forward to its conclusion. He also seems to capture the chaos and “what happens in” feeling of an out-of-control night in Vegas. And when I watched the film, I was reminded of people in my own life who share certain traits with some of the characters, especially those played by Cooper and Helms. As such, the interactions between the characters seems natural and familiar to me, which makes it even funnier. Luckily, I can’t think of any friends like Galifianakis’ eccentric character, but that’s probably a good thing for my real life. In the context of the movie, however, he steals the film with his deadpan delivery.

Ultimately, THE HANGOVER became a cultural phenomenon that launched a series of three films that grossed over $1.4 billion worldwide. It’s blend of clever writing, great casting and performances, and most importantly, great comedic moments, makes it one of my favorite comedies of the 21^st century.

Film Review: The Ring (dir by Gore Verbinski)

Posted on February 2, 2017 by Lisa Marie Bowman

(SPOILERS BELOW!)

This weekend, I will be seeing Rings, the second sequel to the 2002 film, The Ring. (Of course, The Ring itself is a remake of the Japanese film, Ringu.) Since it’s been a while since we’ve had a new installment in the Ring franchise, I decided to rewatch the first film tonight.

I have to admit that I had a few concerns before I rewatched The Ring. When I first saw The Ring, it scared me to the extent that I actually had nightmares afterward. Even after all these years, the image of that little girl emerging from the well and then crawling out of the television still makes me shiver. But even with that in mind, I still found myself wondering if The Ring would live up to my vivid memories.

After all, it’s been 14 years since The Ring was released and, since that time, it’s been copied and imitated by literally hundreds of other PG-13 rated horror movies. Would the shocks still be effective, now that I knew they were coming and that I would no longer be surprised to learn that the little girl in the well was actually evil?

Add to that, there was the question of technology. In 2002, it seemed all too plausible that people could be trading back and forth a cursed VHS tape. The Ring was made at a time when DVDs were still considered to be exotic. When The Ring first came out, YouTube didn’t even exist. But today, both VHS tapes and VCRs are artifacts of another era. DVDs have been replaced by Blu-rays and Blu-rays are in the process of being replaced by streaming services. For The Ring to work, you had to be able to relate to people watching a VHS tape. Today, all of these people would be too busy watching cute cat videos on YouTube to fall into The Ring‘s trap.

In short, would The Ring still work in the age of Netflix? And would the film still be as scary as it was when it was first released? These were the question that I found myself wondering as I sat down to rewatch The Ring.

And the answer to both questions is … for the most part, yes.

Here’s the good news. All the important things still work. The performances of Martin Henderson, David Dorfman, Amber Tamblyn, and especially Naomi Watts hold up well. Gore Verbinski’s direction is still effective and, as I rewatched the film, I was surprised to see how many odd and quirky details that Verbinski managed to work into the film. (I especially enjoyed the magic-obsessed desk clerk.) The cursed video was still creepy and compulsively watchable and I still felt uneasy while watching Anna Morgan (played by Shannon Cochran) comb her hair in that mirror. Even more importantly, the little girl in the well, Samara Morgan (Daveigh Chase), was still incredibly frightening.

Admittedly, The Ring is dated and some of its effectiveness has been diluted by imitation. Unfortunately, that’s something that happens with any financially successful horror film. Beyond that, as effective as the entire film was, there were parts of The Ring that did feel undeniably silly. There’s a lengthy scene in which Naomi Watts, while on a ferry, attempts to talk to a horse and the horse reacts by jumping into the ocean. I understand that the scene was probably meant to establish that, as a result of watching that videotape, Watts was now cursed. But, still, I kept wondering why Watts was bothering the horse in the first place. I mean, I love horses too but I know better than to disturb one while on a ferry. As well, the film’s opening sequence — in which Amber Tamblyn is menaced and ultimately killed by Samara — no longer felt as effective as it did when I first saw it, largely due to the fact that it’s been copied by so many other horror films. Imitation may be the ultimate compliment but it does tend to dilute the effectiveness of horror.

But, in the end, The Ring held up well enough. The film’s storyline — characters watch a cursed video tape and then, seven days later, are killed by Samara — was simple but enjoyable. And, when David Dorfman delivered his classic line: “No. You weren’t supposed to help her,” I still felt a chill run down my spine.

Will Rings hold up as well as The Ring?

I’ll find out this weekend!