|
|
Post by Spinderella on May 30, 2011 13:37:14 GMT -4
As for people taking children to see this movie? Some people are stupid. When I went to see the South Park movie in 1999, there were people there with kids under 10, who left in a hurry right after the first musical number. Some people don't read the reviews. What was sad was that it was the first movie of a double feature and this couple next to us had five children under the age of 10 (three of which were clearly under 6) and they were asking questions. Before the movie started, we asked them if we were at the right screen because we saw so many families, we thought maybe we were at a Kung Fu Panda screening. But alas, they said, "Oh, we bring our kids to these kinds of movies all the time. It's OK."  *sigh* |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Dec 1, 2024 7:31:03 GMT -4
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2011 14:44:02 GMT -4
My kids would have been bored to tears/ traumatized by this movie.
We went to see a matinee of Bridesmaids yesterday which was sold out. We did not want to waste the sitter so we saw this. LOVED the first one. This one was outrageous definitely. I don't think it made me laugh as much as it made me wonder what kind of crazy shit was going to happen next.
High Points:
Mr. Chow still cracks me up.
Ang Lee's son is adorable.
I just like to look at Justin Bartha. He is so hot.
Bradley Cooper's legs.
Some of Alan's throwaway lines were hilarious.
The music.
I thought that most of the photo montage was funny.
The Lowlights:
The prostitute scenes. It was the crying that took it over the line for me.
It just flat out needed more jokes, it was not funny enough.
Ed's speech at the end was horrible.
MrB read that a different screenwriter wrote this than the first. I hope for the third (and you know that they will make another one), they go back to the original writer.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Dec 1, 2024 7:31:03 GMT -4
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2011 20:06:58 GMT -4
I didn't hate it. It definitely wasn't as funny as the original. I wasn't offended by anything in it, including the transexual prostitute...I mean you know what kind of a movie you're getting into when you go to see the Hangover. That scene, and the picture at the end (which was immediately followed by a picture of him being really into the sex) were definitely meant for shock value, but I didn't think they were inherently transphobic. YMMV.
|
|
ross
Lady in Waiting
Posts: 496
Jul 17, 2008 13:12:59 GMT -4
|
Post by ross on May 30, 2011 20:24:53 GMT -4
You know maybe I'm totally wrong but I really don't think the "cruel" picture Ebert was so offended by was a sexual one at all, but rather the spoof of this famous photo.In fact Ebert outright says the photo he objected too was a "desecration of one of the two most famous photos to come out of the Vietnam War." |
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Dec 1, 2024 7:31:03 GMT -4
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2011 21:36:26 GMT -4
That picture was one of the few moments where I actually lol'ed. Idk, maybe I'm a horrible person.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Dec 1, 2024 7:31:03 GMT -4
|
Post by Deleted on May 30, 2011 22:34:12 GMT -4
Oh....that one. I could see why that would bother some people. I must be a horrible person too because I also laughed at it.
|
|
save lilo!
Blueblood
Posts: 1,195
Jul 25, 2007 17:38:37 GMT -4
|
Post by save lilo! on May 31, 2011 2:51:39 GMT -4
Yeah I had kids in my theatre too. They were definitely not even 15. I can't believe they had some kind of adult figure with them. I would have walked my kids out after the first nude scene.
|
|
|
|
Post by forever1267 on Dec 10, 2011 5:06:32 GMT -4
I missed something. Can Someone explain how they got that drunk/roofied in the first place?
It was entertaining, but not nearly as funny as the first. It just wasn't as relatable as the first one. I've had my, um, nights in Vegas. I haven't yet in Bangkok (and that itself was confusing. I thought they were in Bangkok, but I guess the wedding was actually in Phuket(?))
|
|
*sigh* 
