Quantcast
subscriber help

artisanal film reviews | by maryann johanson

The Hangover (review)

Arms and Legs Inside the Movie

Surely, whatever tourist board copywriter or marketing guru came up with “What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas” deserves a cut of the profits of every movie set in Sin City these days. Because they’re all about idiots who appear to take that slogan as a command to engage in the most disgusting, most amoral behavior conceivable, and as a prepurchased absolution for such. As if Vegas weren’t merely a slightly tacky amusement park for grownups who’d like to pretend they’re debauched, and need permission to even think about cutting loose.
The Hangover suffers from precisely that kind of constrained naughtiness: it thinks it’s edgy and envelope-pushing, but there’s nothing terribly risque or dangerous about it, at least not in the kinds of things that ensured it got an R rating. Oh, there’s the brand of nudity that all of sudden Hollywood deems shocking (ie: nonsexual male nakedness intended to be comedic, as if we all don’t know what men’s bodies look like), there’s copious, irresponsible consumption of alcohol and other mind-altering substances, there’s even flirtation with the criminal elements of an urban environment possibly more organized for the benefit of criminals than the law-abiding.

But as with most movies aimed at mainstream audiences, there’s nothing at all to threaten the staid, boring, conventional status quo, which is always infuriating to see in a movie like The Hangover, which does hint at possibilities far more dangerous than it ever dares go near. Just as the Julia Roberts fairy tale Pretty Woman morphed from something, in its script stage, dark and harrowing to, on the screen, something sweet and cheery, this could-have-been foray into either the seamier side of life or the less-than-squalid but more-than-ordinary steers clear of ever getting near the truly treacherous. It’s driving with a seatbelt and airbags five miles over the speed limit — if it had any real balls at all, it’d be doing 90 on a motorcycle, with no helmet.

The script, by Jon Lucas and Scott Moore (who as a team also wrote Ghosts of Girlfriends Past and Four Christmases), is at its most daring in how it is constructed. Four pals head to Vegas for the bachelor party of one of them, and they wake up the next morning in a trashed hotel suite, massively hungover, with no memory of what happened over the previous 12 hours. No memory at all. Oh, and they’ve lost the groom, Doug (Justin Bartha: National Treasure: Book of Secrets, Failure to Launch), and don’t even know where to begin looking for him.

That’s clever: The Hangover is a mystery tale, the guys following up on the few clues they have at hand. Phil (Bradley Cooper: Yes Man, Wedding Crashers), the suave, handsome one, is wearing a hospital bracelet. Stu (Ed Helms: Monsters vs. Aliens, Meet Dave), the dorky dentist, is missing a tooth. Alan (Zach Galifianakis: Into the Wild, Below), the borderline-retarded one, is missing his pants. There’s a tiger in the bathroom and a baby in the closet. How they retrace their doings of the night before is intriguing, in a narrative sense.

But this is a comedy — or it’s meant to be — and as much as I would have loved for the sense of the sinister inherent in this concept to turn into something deeply, blackly funny (I’m thinking of Very Bad Things as a possible precedent for this, but The Hangover is never so audacious), Lucas and Moore and director Todd Phillips (School for Scoundrels, Starsky & Hutch) go for the easy, cheap laughs, things that will shock a juvenile mindset — a mother breastfeeding? gross! a fat old man? gross! — instead of the things that would have unsettled a grownup one. Some are just plain disturbing without being funny: there are multiple intimations, for some reason that’s never clear, that Alan is a pedophile. Why would a doctor examine a patient while three total strangers are in the room? Why is a taser to the testicles “funny”? As if it knows, somewhere deep down, that it’s cheating, the movie has Stu insist, “You can’t just tase people because you think it’s funny,” but the movie does it anyway.

The Hangover’s opening credits run over some very fresh angles on Vegas, showing us sides of the city we don’t usually see. And I got my hopes up: could this possibly dare to not be yet another example of harmless pretend-risk, a roller coaster with padding and safety bars? But no: as soon as those credits wrap up, it’s straight on to the postcard views of the Strip and the seatbelt ride through fake seediness. Yawn.


Watch The Hangover online using LOVEFiLM’s streaming service.


MPAA: rated R for pervasive language, sexual content including nudity, and some drug material

viewed at a private screening with an audience of critics

official site | IMDb | trailer
more reviews: Movie Review Query Engine
  • Tim1974

    As much as I enjoy disagreeing with you, I will admit that I believe your review is right on. The only suggestion that I would make is instead of “waiting for the DVD” why not put it in the garbage right now were trash belongs ?

  • Isn’t the myster after the fact the storytelling device of the less-than-edgy-but-occasionally-funny “Dude Where’s My Car?”

  • MaryAnn

    *Dude, Where’s the Groom*? :->

    The only suggestion that I would make is instead of “waiting for the DVD” why not put it in the garbage right now were trash belongs ?

    Because, as the yellow light suggests, it’s not a complete loss. It’s interesting enough that I wish it were better, and I think it could have been, if the filmmakers had any balls.

  • Because, as the yellow light suggests, it’s not a complete loss.

    After all, you could use the DVD as a substitute for a lost Frisbee. Or for skeet shooting.

    Of course, that wouldn’t work too well with a rental copy but still…

  • Tim1974

    Because, as the yellow light suggests, it’s not a complete loss.

    I am color blind and can’t tell the difference between the lights. But, in either case, it doesn’t affect my opinion. It is trash !!!! The only thing they could have done to help improve any part of it would have been to add an equal amount of female nudity. However, with the double standard and gay Hollywood agenda it doesn’t appear that will happen any time in the near future.

  • I haven’t seen the movie (yet!) but I will say this, idiots and assholes were going down to Vegas to do crazy dumb shit for decades before the “What Happens in Vegas…” commercials. All that slogan did was shed light on something everybody already knew. Kinda like “They’re boxy but they’re good.”

    Meaning, also, that any idiot could’ve come up with it.

  • Victor Plenty

    … gay Hollywood agenda …

    Well, now it’s official. Tim1974 has jumped the shark.

  • JoshB

    “Jumped the shark” is a TV term. I think “nuked the fridge” is more appropriate in a movie discussion.

  • Paul

    I think “jumped the shark” is fine. “Nuked the fridge” is too ambigious. “Nuked the fridge” made me laugh more than “jumped the shark” but only after a few moments in which I puzzled out the different possible images and realized Josh was talking about, I think, the most recent Indiana Jones movie. At first I thought of Ghostbusters, but nah, that was a good movie. However, one should keep in mind that both terms would imply a slide in quality from good to bad, not from bad to worse.

  • Gia

    My gay agenda for this week:

    -Do laundry
    -Clean the kitchen
    -Call my doctor to ask for records to send to a new health insurance company
    -Iron my work uniform
    -Cook dinner
    -Buy more wine
    -Dare to ask for equal rights under the law
    -Take over Hollywood

  • Gia

    Also, Tim sweetie. The color of MaryAnn’s review is not the only indicator of her opinion. Perhaps if you weren’t so blinded by the rainbow, you might notice that.

  • zids

    Ahh, nuked the fridge. Sadly the only thing that fourth Indy film is going to be remembered for.

  • Gia (Thu Jun 04 09, 9:35PM):

    My gay agenda for this week:

    -Do laundry
    -Clean the kitchen
    -Call my doctor to ask for records to send to a new health insurance company
    -Iron my work uniform
    -Cook dinner
    -Buy more wine
    -Dare to ask for equal rights under the law
    -Take over Hollywood

    OMG you are so gay! ;)

  • Tim1974

    Well Gia sweetie. It doesn’t matter what the color is or isn’t it doesn’t change the reality of the film industry or my opinion. Maybe if you weren’t so blinded by feminism you could actually see that.

  • mortadella

    Hey everyone, clue me in….

    Is Tim1974 for real? Or is this just someone who enjoys posting dumb shit to see what kind of reactions he can get?

    Aw come on Timmy,confess…you’re not for real. If you were, you wouldn’t keep coming back to this site. Reading the uncensored opinions of a feminist critic ONCE would have sent you crawling into your sock drawer for weeks. Why would you come back for additional trauma? Or maybe you’re a chick with a ironic sense of humor.

    But if you are real Timmy…beware! The amazon uprising is in full gear, and the sisters are coming for YOU! Tee-hee.

  • Victor Plenty

    Does it matter whether Tim1974 is real?

    Whether he’s a genuine crank or just a brilliant parody of one, the sad fact is there are indeed men out there who agree with him. Not with his preposterous penis/pussy portrayal parity platform, perhaps — but with his underlying claim that gays, feminists, and their “liberal” Hollywood allies have somehow succeeded in rendering the average straight white male a precariously endangered victim of oppression.

    Since there is no way such a ludicrous belief could ever arise from rational examination of factual evidence, it is useless to attempt to change such a belief by presenting rational evidence.

    This leaves us with few places to go other than where we’ve pretty much ended up, which is to mock his bizarre mode of presentation while mostly ignoring the unknowable mystery of what leads him to do whatever it is he thinks he is doing.

  • Tim1974

    I find this site very amusing. Here all along I thought feminists were interested in equality. However, I find that you are but hypocrits only interested in equality when it benefits yourself. I find it even more interesting when males such as Victor are so blinded by feminisim that he can’t even think for himself. And Victor, no need to get your panties in a bunch, there are plenty of films that show just male genitals and very little female exposure so you have no need to be embarrassed. But some time how about actually trying to comprehend what it is being stated without your blinders on. I will go for now so all you gals can get together and give yourself a high five. And , Mortadella, your comments had me laughing for minutes. You are quite the comedian. Don’t lose your sense of humor.
    All kidding aside, I do agree with you Victor on one point. Everybody should have a place to go and this is yours and your friends. I am the intruder. But as was once stated, “Can’t we all just get along ?” lol

  • JoshB

    preposterous penis/pussy portrayal parity platform, perhaps

    Oooh, alliteration. Skillz, man.

  • mortadella

    Timmy wrote: “Mortadella, your comments had me laughing for minutes. You are quite the comedian. Don’t lose your sense of humor.”

    Um, I won’t, but seriously, I have Xena on speed dial. She’s probably on her way to your place right about now. Gosh, where’s Ares when you need him, huh Timmy?

  • Wow!

    For better or worse, we Americans now live in a society where it’s possible for even the most desperate voyeur to view as much as female nudity as he could possibly want, either through magazines or videos or the Internet or even strip clubs.

    So what does Tim1974 choose to complain about?

    The fact that there’s not enough female nudity in movies to suit him…

  • For better or worse, we Americans now live in a society where it’s possible for even the most desperate voyeur to view as much as female nudity as he could possibly want, either through magazines or videos or the Internet or even strip clubs.

    Obviously meant to say this:

    For better or worse, we Americans now live in a society where it’s possible for even the most desperate voyeur to view as much female nudity as he could possibly want, either through magazines or videos or the Internet or even strip clubs.

  • Victor Plenty

    Wow, did Tim1974 just accuse me of being a gay transvestite? Hmm. Methinks perhaps our penis portrayal prober doth protest too much.

    (All of you with super secret Shakespearean decoder rings will know exactly what I’m getting at here.)

  • Nathan

    not a great movie, but a fun enough diversion, and that’s all i expected from it.

    ***spoiler***

    as for Alan being a pedophile, he mentions that it’s not the first time he’s found a baby, making it sound as if he took off with someone’s baby at a cafe. not quite the same as a pedophile but maybe with the same legal ramifications.

    but the movie didn’t follow up…

  • MaryAnn

    When I say that the movie suggests Alan is a pedophile, it has nothing to do with the baby. It has to do with him telling another character early in the film that he cannot be within 200 feet of a school or a Chuck E. Cheese. And a little later, he behaves in a lascivious way toward a girl who appears to be about 12 years old.

    Also, I’ll remind everyone not to feed the trolls, which Tim1974 has now demonstrated himself to be.

  • Nathan

    well, that’s what i meant. if you had been accused of having walked off with someone’s baby, the legal ramifications might be that you have to stay away from schools and whatnot. but i don’t know…

    the Chuck E. Cheese remark comes almost straight out of Galifinakis’ stand-up act. something like, “Try getting a table for one at Chuck E. Cheese with this look.”

    i don’t remember the 12 year-old.

  • Moe

    The film was silly
    I laughed at Stu’s tiger song
    That was the best part

  • MaryAnn

    idiots and assholes were going down to Vegas to do crazy dumb shit for decades before the “What Happens in Vegas…” commercials. All that slogan did was shed light on something everybody already knew. Kinda like “They’re boxy but they’re good.”

    Meaning, also, that any idiot could’ve come up with it.

    No, the twisted brilliance of that marketing campaign is that it made mainstream the idea that there is a place where it’s okay to be as completely debauched as you might dare to be. It took not an idiot but a demented kind of vision, as if someone tried to sell hard-core porn as something appropriate for the whole family… and succeeded.

    the Chuck E. Cheese remark comes almost straight out of Galifinakis’ stand-up act. something like, “Try getting a table for one at Chuck E. Cheese with this look.”

    But there’s a HUGE difference between feeling like people look at you as if you must certainly be a pedophile even though you’re a perfectly nice and decent fellow (and this does connect with the very real fear that some men now do have that if they’re kind to stranger-children in any way, they’ll be suspected of nefarious motives), and the outright admission that the legal system has reason to believe that you should not be allowed anywhere near where children congregate.

    i don’t remember the 12 year-old.

    While they’re driving to Vegas, we see Alan stand up in the convertible and hoot and leer at someone offscreen — we’re meant to presume that there’s a passle of attractive females in the next lane, because that’s what some idiot men do when they’re cutting loose and spot an attractive female on the freeway. And then the “joke” is that the attractive female that has prompted Alan to this action is not a hot blonde in a bikini driving a sports car but a preadolescent girl in the backseat of a family car. She might actually have pigtails, too, if I remember correctly.

  • MaryAnn

    Ah, Nathan, I get it now: You’re suggesting that Alan is not a pedophile, but was mistaken for one because he rescued a baby once and was mistaken as its kidnapper.

    I could buy that, maybe, if not for the 12-year-old. That’s pretty unequivocal, any way you slice it. Even if Alan is “merely” too stupid to realize that a young girl is not an appropriate object of such desire, then he’s too stupid to know where to draw a line in acting on that desire.

  • Nathan

    okay, i remember the scene with the girl, and now that i think about it there was also a reference to Alan having tickets to a Jonas Brothers concert that he wasn’t willing to miss.

    so, yeah, the movie is definitely portraying him as pervy, but in a way, as you mention, that paints him as socially unformed and too stupid to know where lines are… which is also shown by his inappropriate nudity and his child-like adoration of Phil.

    in any case, i don’t think it’s a movie that rewards a lot of deep thought about its motives.

  • Blank Frank

    I’m going to be ridiculously nitpicky and suggest that it should be “immoral behavior” in the first paragraph, rather than “amoral.”

    “Amoral” is the absence of morality-as-a-concept altogether; “immoral” is knowing the rules and breaking them anyway.

    I had such mild hopes for this movie after seeing the commercial with Mike Tyson rocking out to Phil Collins. Ah, well.

  • Tim1974

    I have no desire to see a movie of this type which includes male frontal nudity only, an NC-17 picture at the end credits, and a “fondling” the baby scene. After reading reviews and message boards it has become obvious that this film presents a huge double standard in regards to frontal nudity. When males are at a bachelor party, and going to a strip club, female frontal nudity would certainly fit into the context. However, they choose to show only partial female nudity but have no problem displaying male genitals, including a disgusting NC-17 picture at the end in an “R” rated film. I see nothing that would be humorous in this film. In fact I believe it is time for films to start showing males in a more positive light instead of crude, booze drinking exhibitionists.

  • MaryAnn

    Ah, but if there were a shaved pussy in the film, Tim1974, that would be okay, not-disgusting, and totally appropriate?

    It’s clear you haven’t seen the film, because there are no strip-club scenes.

    Tim, if you haven’t seen *any* movies that depict men as anything other than “crude, booze drinking exhibitionists,” I submit that you have never seen any movies at all.

    Unless you have something new to add to the discussion about nudity onscreen, please refrain from posting the same thing over and over again.

  • amanohyo

    Tim1974, you are a credit to your race and I applaud your decision to boycott this film. I wish you luck in your quest to locate a movie showing a fully naked woman at a strip club. Though it may take months of meticulous research, I am certain that you will someday triumph over this pernicious double standard and discover a site where enlightened gentlemen such as yourself post such movies, boldly fighting against the status quo that so obviously favors the depiction of flacid male genitalia.

    Unfortunately, regarding your second point, I am unable to think of any movies which show male protagonists in a positive light. No filmmaker has yet had the courage or integrity to push the artistic envelope to those outer limits. There have been a few wild attempts in avant-garde literature to include a sort of male heroine side character; however, these have all failed to obtain anything more than a niche audience. Will your future efforts include the first male heroine to capture the world’s imagination? I sincerely hope so.

  • Tim1974

    “Ah, but if there were a shaved pussy in the film, Tim1974, that would be okay, not-disgusting, and totally appropriate? ”

    First, I said nothing about a emlae being shaved. Would it be appropriate ? No, but it isn’t for a males to be exposed in this manner either. If they are showing the males this way then why not the females ? That is my question in reference to the double standard.

    “It’s clear you haven’t seen the film, because there are no strip-club scenes.”

    That is correct I have not seen the film nor do I have any intention of seeing it. However, I thought I read there were at a strip club and one of the guys got a lap dance. However, if not it could have been included as part of their “wild” night.

    “Tim, if you haven’t seen *any* movies that depict men as anything other than “crude, booze drinking exhibitionists,” I submit that you have never seen any movies at all.”

    As a matter of fact, yes, I have sen many films. But it seems recently that this immature depiction of males acting like idiots has gotten out of hand. It would be nice to see a comedy where the male lead actually acts like an adult with some sense about him. One that doesn’t need to be crude or nude.

    “Unless you have something new to add to the discussion about nudity on screen, please refrain from posting the same thing over and over again.”

    I am finished for this film. However, I feel that when there is another example of a double standard towards males that it should be pointed out. However, I will include other points along with any nudity issue that a film brings up so it is not just about the nudity. I will also attempt to comment on films where there is no nudity as well and ones that I have actually seen.

  • But it seems recently that this immature depiction of males acting like idiots has gotten out of hand. It would be nice to see a comedy where the male lead actually acts like an adult with some sense about him. One that doesn’t need to be crude or nude.

    Males acting like idiots have been a staple of movies since the days of Laurel and Hardy.

    However, as much as I hate to admit it, on this one instance, Tim1974 has a point.

    For as much as I hate the racial attitudes of the 1930s and 1940s, I more often find myself relating better to the characters of the movies made back then than many of the male characters of today’s movies. Why? Because as silly as certain movie characters may act in those movies, at least there’s some notion of adult behavior. Today it seems to be more rare.

    Which might explain why the one recent movie I remember wholeheartedly due to the maturity of its adult characters is Miss Pettigrew Lives for a Day–which, of course, is a period piece…

  • Which might explain why the one recent movie I remember wholeheartedly due to the maturity of its adult characters is Miss Pettigrew Lives for a Day–which, of course, is a period piece…

    Ay, Dios!

    That’s recommend, not remember

  • There may be plenty of movies that show male genitalia, but this isn’t one. That penis in the photo during the credits is so very obviously a dildo. Seriously, if you’re gonna go all the way and show your dick on screen, why bother keeping the pants on so it looks fake? Go the full monty. Anyone who thinks that is a real penis has never seen a real penis. Here’s some proof though, if you need it.

    I laughed a lot during The Hangover, but as always most of the good jokes were given away in the trailer. I get why they do it (to put butts in seats) but I wish there was a way around this movie-ruining marketing tactic.

    What i didn’t like were the two full bits ripped from other movies: the wild animal in the convertible scene (Tommy Boy) and the inappropriate wedding singer (Old School). These two scenes left me slack-jawed and (honestly) a little upset.

    The tooth thing was impressive. Not sure how they did that, short of actually pulling Ed Helms’ tooth out. Great effects.

  • MaryAnn

    Maybe Ed Helms really is missing a tooth, and just removed the fake one he’s been wearing all this time. I remember reading somewhere else ages ago about a similar situation (maybe Jim Carrey in *Dumb and Dumber*?), where an actor’s existing dental issue was incorporated into the story.

    There may be plenty of movies that show male genitalia, but this isn’t one.

    Hence the references in my review to “nonsexual male nakedness.” The way the camera lingers on Alan’s all-but-naked ass not once but multiple times is truly bizarre. Phillips has to go out of his way to ensure that we get a good long look at Alan’s rear end, and I really don’t understand why.

    Why couldn’t we see Bradley Cooper all but naked, and gratuitously so? *That* would have been the equivalent of how female nudity is typically treated in mainstream movies.

    However, I feel that when there is another example of a double standard towards males that it should be pointed out.

    Tim, you keep using those words — “double standard.” I don’t think they mean what you think they mean…

  • Victor Plenty

    Helms got a dental implant years ago. When he got cast for this particular role, his dentist agreed to temporarily remove the implant. That tooth was really missing while they were shooting the movie.

    Oddly enough, he says the missing tooth was already written into the script before he was cast, and they didn’t have to rewrite anything for it. Of course he could be just saying that, but it makes sense from a comedic standpoint to have the dentist lose a tooth.

    Anyway, that’s what I heard in an interview a few days ago. It was on NPR’s Fresh Air if I recall correctly.

    (Resisting the temptation to rejoin the fracas with Tim1974 at this time.)

  • Albert Hahn

    I agree with a lot of what you say MaryAnn,
    as usual considering you’re my favorite reviewer,
    but I look at this glass as half full.
    Enuf great humor for a thumbs up.
    Anybody analyzing this outrageous
    one (or slightly more) joke flic from a viewpoint
    of feminism or masculism or gayagendaism
    deserves to get their shark jumped,
    their fridge nuked and their skull
    bashed in by a naked Asian with a crowbar.
    Pedophilia is horrifying and even the
    suggestion of it unsettling.
    However the point of the references
    here were to make the other three guys
    even more comically alarmed at
    the fourth wolf they’ve just latched onto.
    I’m sort of buoyed by the fact that
    the more fundamentalist the religion
    the greater the incidence of pedophilia.
    This leads me to hope that a more
    enlightened approach and acknowledgement
    of the problem as was done in this
    movie may actually result
    in less abuse. Of course that wouldn’t
    have been the goal of the film makers.
    Their goal is to get the movie going
    public (mostly people a third my age)
    to pay to see the movie. I can only hope
    that by some accident I happen
    to be entertained as well. Here I was.

  • MaryAnn (Fri Jun 12 09, 10:24AM):

    Why couldn’t we see Bradley Cooper all but naked, and gratuitously so? *That* would have been the equivalent of how female nudity is typically treated in mainstream movies.

    I have two words for you: Kathy Bates.

    Admittedly, I’m ignoring the “typical” bit and just shooting from the hip for laughs. But, tit for tat, I think we’re even. :)

  • Blank Frank

    In re: the unfairness of men being depicted as buffoons: We are aware we’re talking about a comedy here, right? You’re not going to find many comedies that don’t have a buffoon for easy comic relief.

    Besides, if we’re going to talk about double standards, at least men in comedies get treated as good-hearted fools who learn a lesson and Become Better People. Women are either cruel harridans (who, of course, get a nasty comeuppance in the third act), desperately clingy harpies, single-minded eating machines used for a gross-out joke (fat women only), or trophies for the male protagonist once he learns his lesson. And they never seem to get any redemptions or changes of heart, either.

    Why yes, I did read MAJ’s article on the lack of dynamic female characters in modern mainstream film-making…

  • Dexter Morgan

    I thought the movie was funny enough; I won’t be running out to get the DVD when it’s released but I may watch it again on cable in six months.

  • From a Lady

    Mrs. Johanson, I think we both agree it would be better if your wit and sophistication where as highly emphasized as your randomly vulgar language, for indiscrete reviews are really unnecessary for a site that allows itself to carry the word “filosopher” in it’s title.

    I have no intention of repeating any of your rudely chosen words, so let me skip that and say:
    We both know why women like you attack this movie. It has shown something your fellow associates try desperately to erase from the movie industry, imposing their own picture and image instead; an issue concerning female personalities.

    The movie was a hit; a greatly esteemed comedy that unlike American Pie or similar movies did not contain forced dirty language and scenes, rather completely natural and honest humor.

    You cannot erase what that movie has said and shown with such reviews being put around the place, what you can do however is turn too much attention to yourself and your peers who have a strictly identical (or should I say unoriginal) and intrusive stile of criticizing.

    Take an advice: complain less and chose your words more discreetly.

  • amanohyo

    a Lady, I don’t fully grasp everything you’ve written, but am I to understand that you are criticizing MA for her use of gratuitous profanity? And why on Earth did you start to say something about female personalities and then randomly stop before it could get interesting? That kind of shameless topic-teasing is immoral, vulgar, and completely beneath a woman of your standing. You cannot erase what this review has said and shown with such intrusive comments, and if you will permit me to be indiscreet for a moment, you have not successfully demonstrated that you are qualified to give an advice to MA about word choice and writing stile. Good day to you madam.

  • JoshB

    @From a Lady

    I’m gonna guess that English is not your first language, cause that comment was tough to parse.

    Having reread your comment I’m still not sure whether you have a more compelling reason for disliking the review than, “Ooh, you used potty language, gross!”

    However, if that is your only reason then I hope you won’t be too offended if I say “Grow the fuck up!”

  • gay as in happy

    Just dropping by to say the gay agenda sucks balls.

  • MaryAnn

    Mrs. Johanson,

    Who is “Mrs. Johanson”?

  • Who is “Mrs. Johanson”?

    Your mother?

  • MaryAnn

    Also my sister-in-law. But why would someone here address either of them?

  • Well, I think it’s best to go with the theory that English is not the writer’s first language because otherwise A Lady would come off as being even more annoying than she already is.

  • Paul

    I just had the fortune of seeing the movie for free (or a ton of money for the airplane ticket), so I could feel free to laugh. These are four men at different stages of maturity despite being roughly the same age, which resulted in a few too many immature jokes, but I kept finding the situations in of themselves funny. It probably helped that the dentist’s character arc reminded me of my late 20s, except I remember all of it. I feel as if I liked it more than I should have; it might have been a better movie if they hadn’t tried too hard to be funny.

  • Tyler

    I think Alan screaming at the little girl isn’t meant to have any sexual connotation or relation to the “Chuck E Cheese” joke later at all. I think the joke is just that he’s extremely stoked to be on the road to a Vegas weekend and wants a passerby to share his enthusiasm, but all he finds is a 12 year old girl and he cheers at her anyway. I believe he’s yelling “VEGAS! WHOOO! VEGAAAAAS!”

  • Troll Spotter

    Ah, methinks *From a Lady* is a troll. Best to ignore.

  • MaSch

    Troll Spotter: So glad you made that observation right on time. Better not to imagine in which direction this discussion would have gone had you not warned us.

  • James Monroe

    You are a stupid cunt.

  • LaSargenta

    Oh. Good. Grief.

    I couldn’t let that just sit there in the “Recent Comments” list on your front page.

  • Bettie

    “The Hangover” just plain sucked from start to finish. (And for all those brilliant and witty fans of this mess, who usually rebut with comments like “”hangover” was the best film EVER…you’re the one who sucks!”: yeah,right, I just don’t have a sense of humor and don’t know how to have fun. And I suck. Got it. You ‘re right.
    OK. Now moving on, this movie was stupid without being funny or charming. My boyfriend – my horny, often-silly, easy-going boyfriend – also hated it. We were both disgusted with the child-molesting moron, the male nudity for shock value and no other reason, the blowjob scene.
    By the way, the gratuitous male nudity and cutesie “gay” scenes in almost every TV show and movie is not enlightening. I know there are gay people and they have sex. But they are a minority. They don’t belong in all these mainstream movies and shows whose target audience is straight/mostly straight. I wouldn’t expect straight love/sex scenes in movies/shows that feature a gay hero/heroine and whose target audience is gay. It seems like the Hollywood gay agenda is to make fencesitters (not sure who they are) and horny young males who can’t get a girlfriend – think “hmmm…maybe I should walk on the wild side? It’s considered normal these days … Maybe even cool …”
    Anyway, it’s too bad that the Hollywood establishment serves up so much slop. Not everyone is a garbage-eating pig. Yet.

  • Wow, it’s a bummer that everyone is complaining about this… everybody on facebook is RAVING about how this is the funniest thing they’ve seen all year.

  • MaryAnn

    I know there are gay people and they have sex. But they are a minority. They don’t belong in all these mainstream movies and shows whose target audience is straight/mostly straight.

    Wow, Bettie. You’re right. Now, if only we could get Hollywood to stop making movies about all those other pesky minorities who keep insisting on being treated like people, maybe we’d get somewhere.

    It seems like the Hollywood gay agenda is to make fencesitters (not sure who they are) and horny young males who can’t get a girlfriend – think “hmmm…maybe I should walk on the wild side? It’s considered normal these days … Maybe even cool …”

    It’s true! All the gay men I know chose to be gay because they were horny and couldn’t get a girlfriend. It’s the best-kept secret of the homo community.

  • Accounting Ninja

    Sounds like someone is upset that her now-gay boyfriend dumped her in high school.
    You nuts who actually believe in the “gay agenda” are delusional.
    Whenever I ask one of these nuts if they, for the sake of argument, could be gay (providing they are straight, and most would identify as such) for just one day, they get all flustered. Of course not! They are straight!
    Yet they think everyone else can change their orientations at the drop of a hat. I am straight too, but even if I wanted to be “daring” and try to choose to be a lesbian, I couldn’t.
    Even confused kids and “fencesitters” won’t be gay, even if they experiment, unless that’s been their orientation all along. If a kid you know “turned gay”, um, s/he was probably gay the whole time. Sorry to break it to you.

    And, as always, it’s always about gay MALES. Lesbians remain invisible, as do bisexuals, btw.

Pin It on Pinterest