After watching the first one, I understood the comments of the other people about how it's the same movie, except instead of Las Vegas, they were in Bangkok, and instead of Doug, it was Stu getting married. In reality, there were a lot of parallel scenarios, a lot of similar elements, a lot of similarities, simple as that. Personally, I didn't mind because that's the whole concept of the movie. Getting so wasted, they could not remember a single thing. That;s the premise of the hangover so i really didn't mind.
I thought it had the same story as well, but with different (similar but different) elements. For starters, they were in Bangkok, and that gave them a lot of new opportunities. There were a couple of scenes I wish I didn't see. No matter how fast I turned my head to avoid seeing the scenes, there's a split second when I saw things I really wish I hadn't. It was done for entertainment purposes, for the comedy, for the laughs, but yeah, those scenes were just something. Having said that, I thought the movie maintained the quality of the first movie in terms of the comedic aspect of it,
I thought the sequel was a lot more sexual and raunchy. It was already on that route on the first movie, but I thought they took it up several notches up when it came to the dirty humor. It also had a lot more uncomfortable nude scenes. Maybe that's the goal, to make the movie into a dirtier version of the original. I still found it funny, but the more sensitive ones probably didn't. Then again, if they were sensitive, why did they watch the movie? So I guess nobody got offended by that. Regardless of that, the movie was still funny.
It's a shame Heather Graham didn't return as Stu's girlfriend. I liked Heather Graham in the first movie and it would have been awesome to see her back. But it;s hard to complain when the person who replaced her was Jamie Chung. Also, why won't they give Justin Bartha the chance to join the gang? He's part of the wolfpack but they ust won;t allow him to join the escapades. Hopefully they will in the third installment. But the trio of Bradley Cooper, Zach Galifianakis, and Ed Helms is always great to see. From the original movie to the sequel, they knew exactly how to produce the laughs, of course much credit must be given to Todd Phillips.
In an interview, Galifianakis said there was a worry to live up to the hype of the first movie. I didn't get that since clearly they had the right materials to create an even better movie. Was it surprising? Even I don't think so. But was it funnier? I think so. It's not as bad as people seem to think. I guess the problem was the sequel followed the exact same path and plot of the first. I didn't mind because I thought that's the premise of the hangover films. They'd probably change it up a bit for the third installment. I guess we'll have to wait and see how they do that.