Movie Review The Hangover

The Hangover (2009) 

Directed by Todd Phillips

Written by Jon Lucas, Scott Moore 

Starring Ed Helms, Zach Galifianakis, Bradley Cooper, Heather Graham, Justin Bartha 

Release Date June 5th, 2009 

Published June 5th, 2009 

The glitz and glamour of Las Vegas has long been a tempting target for the movies. But, rarely has the ever so carefully un-wholesome Vegas mantra "What Happens in Vegas, Stays in Vegas" been better explored than in the brilliant new comedy The Hangover. Directed by Old School's Todd Phillips, The Hangover is male arrested development and Vegas debauchery at its finest.

Four pals travel to Sin city with plans to drink and gamble and be back home with a day to spare before one of them, Doug (Justin Bartha) gets married. Those plans go out the window fast as a night of PG-13 debauchery takes an X-rated turn and the groom ends up missing.

The story picks up the day after the debauchery when Doug's pals Phil (Bradley Cooper), Stu (Ed Helms) and Andy (Zach Galifianakis) awaken in their high roller suite to find a purloined tiger in the bathroom, a baby in the closet and one missing groom. They remember nothing of the night before and have to piece the night together from available evidence.

A medical bracelet tells them they took a trip to the hospital. A valet claim card delivers the police cruiser they evidently stole and a photo tells them that Stu married to a complete stranger. The trip to the hospital, the cop shop and the chapel lead to more bizarre revelations as we follow on a debaucherously amateur detective story.

The story is inventive in the way it continues to spin the boys' behavior out into new and ever more outrageous action but what really sets The Hangover apart are the three actors at its center. Bradley Cooper plays the handsome ladies man as a wannabe bachelor bitter about having given up his freedom for marriage. He is the traditional lead in a comedy of this sort but Cooper gives the role an edge by blending into the ensemble and truly being one of the boys.

The Office co-star Helms is the nebbish nerd with a harridan girlfriend (Rachel Harris) whose so henpecked he has to say he's in wine country instead of Vegas and has some real tap dancing to do when the trip is extended by another day. Helms gets the privilege of playing opposite the radiant Heather Graham as the proverbial hooker with a heart of gold who may be the key to him leaving his old life behind.

And then there is Zach Galifianakis. The enigmatic comic, known for making the great Steven Wright look cheery in comparison when on the stand up stage, is the breakout star of summer 2009.

Roger Ebert fairly compares Galifianakis to John Belushi in Animal House. It's that iconic. Zach's Andy is a wealth of comic non-sequiturs and manages to make a character generally played as a creep into a sweetheart of a man-child whose naïve observations and physical carriage are parts of the funniest performance of the summer.

The Hangover is arguably the funniest movie of 2009. Destined to break out the pack thanks to its absurd amount of laughs and slightly tweaked take on material that seems more familiar than it really is. It's essentially a road picture filled with human caricatures, recognizable types who should work through a mechanical plot to a rote end. Not the case here where the mechanics are twisted and turned in such surprising and hilarious ways.

This is one time where you will welcome a Hangover.

Movie Review: Failure to Launch

Failure to Launch (2006) 

Directed by Tom Dey 

Written by Matt Ember

Starring Matthew McConaughey, Sarah Jessica Parker, Terry Bradshaw, Kathy Bates, Zoey Deschanel

Release Date February 10th, 2006 

Published February 10th, 2006

To buy into the premise of the new romantic comedy Failure To Launch you have to be willing to believe that there are so many men over the age of 30 still living with their parents that a woman could start a profitable business helping parents get rid of them. I just did not buy it and, thus, I felt that Failure To Launch was a failure in making sense.

Sarah Jessica Parker stars as Paula, an expert in removing deadbeats from mom and dad's house. She is hired by the parents of Tripp (Matthew McConaughey) who, despite having a good job selling boats for a living, driving a Porsche, and having his pick of beautiful women, still lives with his mom and dad, played by Kathy Bates and Terry Bradshaw.

Paula’s method for dealing with these momma's boy losers is to pretend to be the guy's girlfriend, build their self esteem in a simulated relationship and urge the men to get out on their own if they want to keep her. Once they are out of mom and dad's place, she dumps them. If you think that sounds ludicrous and, potentially, a little cruel this movie may not be for you.

Essentially, the premise of Failure To Launch is too stupid to support the movie. Things are not helped by the film's many diversions to goofy supporting characters like Paula’s roommate, Kit, played by Zooey Deschanel. Kit drinks constantly and, for some reason, is plagued by a bird that she chooses to hunt with the help of one of Tripp’s friends, played by Justin Bartha. The film gives ample screentime to this bizarre subplot, which has nothing to do with the main romance.

Then there are the animal attacks. For some strange, inexplicable reason Failure to Launch director Tom Dey thinks it is hysterically funny to have a character repeatedly attacked by various animals. A small chipmunk, a bottlenose dolphin and a small vegetarian lizard each randomly attack Tripp in what his buddy Demo (Bradley Cooper) says is nature punishing Tripp for his unnatural lifestyle. If you find these scenes funny you are on a very different wavelength than me.

I get that romantic comedies are often absurd from conception. Pretty Woman posited the lovely Julia Roberts as a grungy L.A prostitute. While You Were Sleeping pushed Sandra Bullock as the fake wife of a coma patient and one of my recent favorites, 50 First Dates, had Drew Barrymore as a woman with a severe short-term memory loss.  That was not the absurd part--finding Adam Sandler memorable enough to fall for, that was absurd.

So I get that logic, reason. and even coherence are not the strengths of this genre. Abandoning these things for a moment to evaluate Failure To Launch on its own terms I will admit that both McConaughey and Parker strike a likable chord. They spark well together in romantic scenes and give off the air of a loving couple even as the film spins out of control.

However the film is too out of control for my taste. Again I return to Deschanel's Kit whose fight with an obnoxious mockingbird interrupts the film's romantic plot once too often. A bizarre example is a scene set in a sporting-goods store where Kit attempts to buy a shotgun and is mistaken by the store clerk (the Daily Show's Rob Corddry in an unnecessary cameo) as someone contemplating suicide. The scene goes on for three or four minutes with this misunderstanding. Why this scene exists only director Tom Dey knows for sure.

Then there is the ending which undoes much of the good work that McConaughey and Parker do by making both look nearly as foolish as the rest of the film. The film plays on one of my movie pet peeves--the argument that would be solved if the characters simply spoke to one another. Tripp and Paula's romantic trouble could be solved with one easy conversation. Instead, the film pushes them together in an elaborately comic fashion, where neither is willing to say the few words that could solve the problem.

And only in a film this absurd could this important conversation be broadcast over the internet so all of the supporting players and more than a few extras can watch and cheer along their friends. One gets the sense that moments like these would work better as parody of romantic comedies and not as a sincere romance. The comedy of Failure To Launch seems designed like another take on what The 40 Year Virgin accomplished last year. A sweet-natured examination of arrested development with broad comic intentions specifically designed for the talents of comic actors accustomed to such material.

The actors involved in Failure To Launch, aside from the oddly well-suited Terry Bradshaw, are too straight laced and earnest for this expansively comic material. Both Parker and McConaughey have cultivated screen personas that make money playing real romance, not broadly comic slapstick with a hint of romance, ala Adam Sandler or Steve Carell.

With a pair of terrific lead actors there was certainly potential for Failure To Launch. But, doomed by an absurd premise better suited to the broad comic talents , Failure To Launch is an out-of-control mess of a film, distracted by its own precious idea of what is funny.

Movie Review National Treasure 2 Book of Secrets

National Treasure 2: Book of Secrets 

Directed by Jon Turteltaub 

Written by Cormac Wibberley, Marianne Wibberley, Ted Elliott, Terry Rossio 

Starring Nicolas Cage, Jon Voight, Ed Harris, Diane Kruger, Justin Bartha, Helen Mirren, Harvey Keitel

Release Date December 21st, 2007 

Published December 19th, 2007

2004's National Treasure came out of nowhere to become a late season blockbuster. With its popular take on legendary conspiracies, big time action and stunts and its family safe PG rating, National Treasure was like a perfect map to blockbuster success.

Naturally, with a film so successful there would have to be a sequel and the crew of National Treasure is indeed back. Nicholas Cage returns to the role of Benjamin Franklin Gates, historian, adventurer and most of all treasure hunter. With his electronics wiz pal Riley (Justin Bartha), Ben has been chasing all sorts of treasures for years.

The latest adventure has an important personal connection. As Ben is lecturing to a group of students on the history of his famous family of adventurers and treasure hunters, he is confronted by Mitch Wilkerson (Ed Harris) who claims a scrap of paper from the diary of John Wilkes Booth proves that Gate's great great grandfather conspired to kill President Lincoln.

Knowing that his family history proves otherwise, Ben sets out on a new adventure to track down the evidence that proves his great great grandpa's innocence. The trail leads Ben, Riley and Ben's dad Patrick (Jon Voight) to an ancient book passed down through the ages from one President to another. It's the legendary presidential Book Of Secrets.

Home to all of the greatest conspiracies in history, the book holds the key to whether great great grandpa Gates was a traitor or not. Hot on the trail of the book as well is Wilkerson and his secret society of thugs and Harvey Keitel as an FBI agent whose job has long been keeping on what Ben Gates is up to.

It is impossible to deny the fun of the National Treasure movies. With their goofball stunts and good humor, the movies are inoffensive and easily digestible. While you are watching them you smile and chuckle and for most that will be enough to call it successful.

If you like your movies with low brain power and plenty of distracting explosions and diversions, you will love National Treasure 2: Book of Secrets. You won't recall the experience 10 minutes after it's over, but at least it won't take up space in your memory as it didn't in mine. I have seen National Treasure 2: Book of Secrets twice now and I still needed the Wikipedia plot description and Rottentomatoes reviews of my fellow critics to remind me that the film existed.

Forgettable, low watt entertainment, if you like movies the way you like a good candy bar or a can of soda, you'll like the disposable entertainment of National Treasure.... uh, what was that subtitle again? I forget?

Movie Review The Hangover Part 2

The Hangover Part 2 (2011) 

Directed by Todd Phillips 

Written by Craig Mazan, Scot Armstrong, Todd Phillips 

Starring Bradley Cooper, Zach Galifianakis, Ed Helms, Ken Jeong, Justin Bartha, 

Release Date May 26th, 2011 

Published May 25th, 2011 

The working theory for "The Hangover Part 2" is '˜if it ain't broke, don't fix it.' The '˜it' in this case is the basic premise from the first film which is tweaked only with a location change. The characters, the jokes and even a few of the scenarios are almost exactly the same as they were in the original "The Hangover." And yet, "The Hangover Part 2" is truly as funny as or funnier than the original.

Stu's Getting Married

Stu (Ed Helms) is getting married and because his bride's (Jamie Chung) parents are from Thailand the wedding will be taking place there. Phil (Bradley Cooper) and Doug (Justin Bartha) are both coming to the wedding but Stu is not surprisingly reticent about inviting Allen (Zach Galifianakis). After all, Stu still puts napkins over his drinks since the first film, out of fear of being rufied again.

After a little pleading from Doug, Allen is invited and, no surprise, at all it happens again. The how and the why are part of the fun so I won't spoil it for you. The guys end up in Bangkok with, of all people, Chow (Ken Jeong), the gangster who the guys accidentally kidnapped in Las Vegas. This time, Chow is Allen's plus one at the wedding much to Stu's surprise.

Where's Teddy?

Among the slight changes to the original are of course the location and the missing guy. In the original they lost Doug, this time it's the bride's little brother, a 16 year old pre-med student named Teddy (Mason Lee). As in the first film our heroes have no memory of the night before and must retrace their wild night to figure out where Teddy is.

"The Hangover Part 2" is only slightly more outrageous than the first film but the few moments that go beyond the original film go well beyond. Do not go in thinking that director Todd Phillips and company have run out of ways to shock you because "The Hangover Part 2" goes places that would make "The Hangover Part 1" uncomfortable.

Paul Giamatti in, Liam Neeson out

Watch out for Paul Giamatti in a cameo as well as Mike Tyson but the much talked about Liam Neeson cameo is out. Director Todd Phillips has a funny cameo but you likely wouldn't recognize him, few people actually know what directors look like unless their name is Speilberg or Hitchcock. Nevertheless, Phillips is an over the top natural.

"The Hangover Part 2" rehashes just about every scenario from the first film, including seeing far too much of Ken Jeong sans clothes, and throws in a monkey for good measure. Zach Galfianakis once again steals scene after scene with his sweet, naive maniac act. Galifianakis plays the role of Alan so well that just a tilt of his head is enough to get a big laugh.

It's not for the faint of heart and definitely not for kids'"really, movie theaters shouldn't be allowed to show Hangover Part 2 in the same building as Kung Fu Panda 2, just to be safe--but I do recommend "The Hangover Part 2" for some very big, very outrageous laughs and a good deal of nostalgia left over from the first film.

Movie Review Gigli

Gigli (2003) 

Directed by Martin Brest 

Written by Martin Brest 

Starring Ben Affleck, Jennifer Lopez, Justin Bartha 

Release Date August 1st, 2003 

Published August 1st, 2003 

In Hollywood history, there have been some monumental disasters. MGM's failure to recognize that the musical had run it's course led to the massive bombs Kiss Me Kate and Paint Your Wagon. The vanity of stars Warren Beatty and Dustin Hoffman lead to the disastrous release of Ishtar Ishtar. And, of course, the greatest disaster of all time the, the costliest bomb in Hollywood history is 1963's Cleopatra.

With history in mind, where does the Ben Affleck-Jennifer Lopez disaster Gigli rank in this pantheon? Though it wasn't as costly as Cleopatra or as awful as Ishtar, Gigli is remarkable for taking two very appealing actors and turning them into two of the worst, most annoying characters ever put to film. Gigli somehow cost more than 75 million dollars to make and you can't see any of that money on the screen. If you told me that there was evidence that Gigli was the result of a The Producers style scam betting on its failure, I would believe you. 

The film's title, Gigli, is pronounced Gee-ly, or as  Ben Affleck explains in an embarrassing voiceover, his character’s name rhymes with Really, as in really, really dull. Affleck is Larry Gigli, a low level mob enforcer who, when we first meet him, is explaining to a potential victim what might happen if you put a human being in an industrial size clothes dryer and put it on permanent press. Whether this monologue is supposed to be humorous or menacing is a perfect example of the numerous problems with the film, which can't decide on a tone or genre. The monologue lands in a place where it isn't funny or menacing. 

From there, we move into the film’s plot. The story of Gigli centers on Larry kidnapping the mentally challenged brother of a federal prosecutor. As played by Justin Bartha, the character of Brian is yet another of those idealized Hollywood versions of the mentally handicapped, who exhibits his mentally challenged qualities with tics and through an obsession with the TV show Baywatch, which he calls 'The Baywatch.' 

The kidnapping goes quite smoothly but Larry's mob bosses don't think he can handle the job. Enter an independent mob contractor named Ricki (Lopez). Ricki's job is to keep an eye on Larry and the kid and be Larry's love interest. Of course, that is complicated by the fact that Ricki is a lesbian. Nevertheless, the film grinds forward on the premise that Larry is so charming that even a lesbian might be intrigued enough to give him a try. UGH! 

Once Ricki is introduced, we are treated to a series of exasperating and incomprehensible scenes featuring some of the worst dialogue in film history. The lines that have gotten most of the attention are the lead up to the big sex scene. For some reason when Ricki decides, at least temporarily, to switch teams, she says to Larry, quote "It's Turkey time, gobble gobble". What in God's name does that mean? Is it a reference to oral sex? Turkey's don't gobble, that's just our closest approximation to what we think Turkey's sound like. I'm over-thinking this, but still. What? Now, in fairness, there does appear to be a scene missing that might have given context to that dialogue but even so I can't imagine any scene that would make that dialogue sexy.

Another dialogue piece that has received notice is a pair of monologues celebrating the male and female genitalia. The monologues are well thought out and if delivered correctly could have been witty, insightful, even sexy. However, as delivered by Affleck and Lopez and contextualized by director Martin Brest, they are flat, ineffectual filler. Affleck delivers his monologue through the single worst accent in film history and Lopez delivers hers with an air of disaffection that connotes boredom when it's supposed to evoke, at the least, lust. It doesn't help that Brest lights the scene as if it was a rehearsal setup and employs a score that tries desperately to manipulate the audience into giving a damn.

Speaking of the score, it's one of the classic signs of a bad movie when you begin to make not of the film score. As employed by director Martin Brest, the score of Gigli helps to muddle the film’s tone and confuse its genre classification. Is this supposed to be a comedy, a romantic comedy, a drama? Determining a film’s genre has never been important to me. I believe a good film transcends any classification. However, when a film is so confused with its intentions it helps to be able to fall back on its own classification as a way of determining the director's intent. With Gigli, it's completely unclear what anyone intended this movie to be. 

I didn't want to believe that Ben Affleck could make a film as bad as everyone said this was. Affleck has been a favorite of mine for a while thanks to his stellar work with Kevin Smith and especially his self-effacing humor on the commentary tracks of the Smith film DVDs. Those commentary tracks are as funny as the movies they are about and Affleck is especially funny. So watching Gigli is that much more disheartening. Say what you will about Daredevil or Bounce, I liked both of those films, and Phantoms is at least good for a cheap laugh. Gigli has no redeeming values at all, it's simply horrendous and so is Ben's performance in it.

Sadly, a terrible performance is nothing new for Jennifer Lopez who seems to be settling into mediocrity like a comfortable sweater. Her ineffectual pop tunes and droning romantic comedies like Maid In Manhattan are the perfect primer for Gigli. I cannot be surprised to find her picking up another paycheck as she ineffectually contorts to whatever is written on the scripted page, no matter how insane the script may be. After her work in Out Of Sight and The Cell, I thought maybe she had something but since becoming a superstar J-Lo has decided to coast on her looks and image and simply pick up a paycheck.

As for Director Martin Brest, well God only knows what he was thinking as he put this mess down on paper and then on the screen. Brest hasn't made a good film since, well has he actually made a good film? Beverly Hills Cop was good but likely would not have been without the whirling dervish performance by Eddie Murphy. Then there is Scent Of A Woman, the highly overrated film that won Al Pacino an Oscar for best actor. Coming as it did at a time when sympathy for Pacino was running quite high, people unwilling to question Pacino allowed that film to skate on Pacino's reputation and forgave its many flaws. And how can anyone forget Brest's most recent travesty, Meet Joe Black, in which Brest took the very charismatic Brad Pitt and managed to suck out every last bit of charisma in him.

So maybe the pre-release buzz that focused on Affleck and Lopez's offscreen romance should have paid more attention to the director who may skate again thanks to his being overlooked in favor of his stars. It is Martin Brest who put this mess together and directed these completely misguided performances. And yet, it doesn't appear that Brest will take the brunt of the blame for it. Which he should, this thing is his fault. Forget about Ben and Jen and the tabloid nonsense for a moment and turn your scorn toward the director of this mess. Ben and Jen aren't blameless but Martin Brest is responsible for their humiliation.