Director:
Todd PhillipsCámara:
Lawrence SherMúsica:
Christophe BeckReparto:
Zach Galifianakis, Ed Helms, Bradley Cooper, Ken Jeong, Justin Bartha, Jamie Chung, Mamie Van Doren, Mike Tyson, Sondra Currie, Paul Giamatti, Jeffrey Tambor (más)Streaming (5)
Sinopsis(1)
Phil (Bradley Cooper), Alan (Zach Galifianakis) y Doug (Justin Bartha) viajan a la éxotica Tailandia para asistir a la boda de Stu (Ed Helms). Después de la inolvidable despedida de soltero en Las Vegas, Stu no quiere asumir ningún riesgo y ha decidido ofrecer un almuerzo tranquilo y contenido antes de la boda. No obstante, las cosas no siempre salen como está previsto. Quizás lo que ocurre en Las Vegas se queda en Las Vegas, pero uno ni siquiera puede imaginar lo que sucederá en Bangkok. (Warner Bros. España)
(más)Reseñas (8)
Where Vegas surprised with a refreshing take on summer comedies and incorrect humour, Bangkok surprises by doing EXACTLY the same. In addition to the characters, the premise and the style of humour, all the twists and turns have also remained, and some scenes look as if Todd Phillips had shot them again but with a different background. Yeah, it’s still a lot of fun even a second time, but the element of surprise is irreparably lost, which is a shame. Ken Jeong jumping out of a car boot was funny in the first one, Ken Jeong jumping out of a freezer is funny in the second one, but then, after several experiences of deja-vu, you’re certain that he will jump out of somewhere and it’s no longer effective. And Alan’s transition from a typical “moron” to almost dangerously close to a “mentally ill wreck” is no so funny as it is sad. But still, thumbs a little up, I laughed, I did…
()
Exactamente igual que Resacón en Las Vegas, pero en Bangkok. Básicamente una película idéntica con un nivel de calidad idéntico y con un mono traficante y unas transexuales asiáticas encima.
()
El segundo episodio es simplemente una copia fiel del primero, solo ubicado en una ciudad diferente y las escenas divertidas intensificadas o suavizadas, me gustó, me reí y me divertí mucho, a veces no entendía por qué nadie se reía en el cine, pero todos tienen un sentido del humor diferente. ¡Le doy un pulgar arriba y quiero una tercera parte con la boda de Alan, que podría ser una locura!
()
The first film was such a grown and sweaty American redneck, whilst the second is spoiled rice pudding that can overcome its predecessor in every way - except in that which is most necessary, and that is humor and fun. The recycling of jokes leads to the fact that it is even a tiny bit more over the line, but also to the fact that what seemed natural and surprising in the first film is only affective and predictable here. I also really laughed at the final slideshow... As expected, The Hangover is becoming a boring franchise that will make the most of the good idea of a wolf pack and a large window. For some, that may be enough, but I say: a complete waste of time.
()
I was pleasantly surprised that the next Hangover would be in Bangkok. Although for such a beautiful city, there was surprisingly little of it. I'm starting to adore Zach G. because his acting is truly incredible. The second one lags a little (really just a little) in terms of the story, but it was still a party from start to finish. After Alan's toast, half the theater even started clapping. That doesn't happen that often. End credits photo collage even better than the one from Vegas! So I'm satisfied.
()
The same as last time. The originality has gone, but everything is speeded up and, it has to be admitted, Bangkok is a much more interesting location than Vegas. Everybody fits beautifully in their roles and Paul Giamatti was super. The monkey was fun.
()
Second time, but actually the first time. "Hangover in Bangkok" is a continuation of "Hangover in Vegas", but it could easily be considered a copy. Once that principle worked, so we will do it the same way again, because it will work again. The American spirit of commerce has once again shown its dull face. I can't say that I didn't smile at some scenes, but making this film is simply pathetic. The same characters, different animal, Mike Tyson back on the scene, vulgar humor, which doesn't bother me, but mainly the ending, when everything turns out well in the end, even though it seems that everything is totally... you know where. No, I'm not giving it a second chance. I don't like remakes, let alone copies. Trying to get the maximum out of the viewer without added value is the bestiality of today's film world. And do you know what? A third part is coming... Copy of a copy is approaching. More: http://www.filmovy-denik.cz/2012/04/diar-milovnika-filmu-c-0003-eastwood.html
()
Yes, there are a few funny moments, but compared to the first installment, it is weaker in all respects and The Hangover Part II is just a bad copy of part one, not even trying to be different. Zach Galifianakis’s performance made me give it 3 stars instead of just 2.
()
Anuncio