The Hangover Part 2: My Review

I sat in the theater with my nachos in my lap anxiously awaiting that time to come when the theater would get filled, the previews would start and it gets extra dark because the movie is about to start. Soon there it was on the big screen, The Hangover Part 2 starring Bradley Cooper (Phil), Ed Helms (Stu) and Zach Galifianakis (Alan). Also, reprising their roles Justin Bartha (Doug) and Ken Jeong (Leslie Chow). There is even another cameo by Mike Tyson.

The film takes place two years later after the Las Vegas fiasco in Thailand where Stu is getting married to a woman named Lauren (Jamie Chung) and that is what brings the Wolfpack all together again. They go on the beach to have a beer and to celebrate Stu's upcoming wedding. Next scene Phil, Stu and Alan wake up groggy in a hotel room with a monkey and the rest is revealed during the course of the movie.

I don't want to ruin the movie for those of you that have not seen it yet, but basically: same premise, different place.

The movie is good and it gives you, the watcher nothing more or less. It definitely pushes the limits a bit. There are a couple scenes when the N-word is used, but it seems not to bother people particularly Black people. The word was not used toward anyone Black, but it was something that surprised me. Also, there is a short scene where the monkey is performing a simulated sex act.

Is it better than the first one? In my opinion NO. I say no because the first film was somewhat an original and this one just piggybacks off the first one which is the point of a sequel, but there is also room for originality in a sequel.

Overall I give The Hangover Part 2 a thumbs UP. Go join the millions of others that have already seen this film.

The Hangover Part 2 Controversy

Missouri tattoo artist S. Victor Whitmill is suing Warner Bros. for copyright infringement for the tattoo he inked on boxer Mike Tyson's face. Mike Tyson did a cameo appearance in the first installment of The Hangover in 2009. Whitmill claims that the producers of The Hangover Part 2 used the tattoo without his permission. It appears on Stu's (Ed Helms) face. He wants to push back the release date of The Hangover Part 2 that is set to release in theaters on May 26, 2011. So far seems like that is not going to happen because it is still being advertised to release on that date.

Can a person really copyright a tattoo? I am not an attorney so I am giving my honest thoughts on the matter. I believe in some way it is possible to copyright a tattoo not from someone's personal use though. For example: A man walks into any tattoo parlor anywhere in the world and says he wants the Mike Tyson tattoo then the artist can draw it and put it on the person's body. Now in the case of The Hangover 2 a person cannot use it in a promotional way to sell something without getting the holder of the copyright permission.

With so many producers, co-producers, writers and lawyers that are in Hollywood and on movie sets something like this should not even happen. Although in all probability Warner Bros. will just settle with Whitmill it cannot be overlooked that this was a major screw up. All avenues have to be checked.

Was this all just a publicity stunt? This is possible because it will build more anticipation and make people that were not fans or seen the first film rush out and buy it on DVD or watch it OnDemand and fill the seats in the theater during the Memorial Day weekend, ergo making more money.

I will see it, but I was going to see it even before this controversy.