I liked the first one a lot but most likely the sequel will take the concepts of the first one and either repeat them or stretch them to ridiculous lengths, neither of which makes it funnier. Is there a comedy sequel that outdid its original? I am thinking and none come to me.
Supposedly they cut Mel Gibson’s cameo from the film. That has to make it a bit better, don’t you think?
Not sure, but I’ll point out that almost every time a thread starts with the conceit of “how will this not disappoint,” people usually end up liking it a lot.
They’re putting the guys in Bangkok this time around. Should be plenty of fresh material to work with.
If they actually try to make it original and new, it’ll probably be good. The fact that there WAS a shock cameo (Mike Tyson in the first, Mel Gibson in the second) doesn’t get my hopes up. Is there gonna be a baby, a tiger and a painful, visible self-mutilation too?
Has there ever been a comedy sequel which took the template from the original and repeated it, with superior results? I’d like to call that the Mike Myers trope, since this is exactly what both Shrek and Austin Powers did.
They’re supposed to be here in Bangkok any time now, maybe already here. We’re looking forward to it, although I suspect they’ll include the tired old joke about not realizing a girl is a transvestite.
Can’t possibly disappoint as much as the first one.
Do you suppose the words “bang” and “cock” will figure into a joke somehow?
I would be shocked if they didn’t.
I guess if Mel Gibson can’t be done, Bill Clinton is the next big thing.
Bill was in Bangkok last week, speaking at Government House, the complex where the prime minister’s offices are housed. And I’d heard the movie people had filmed a car-crash scene in one of the red-light bar areas, Sukhumvit Soi 7/1. Not sure if Clinton’s cameo is in that scene or not.
The link refers to the vehicle in one of the photos as a “rickshaw,” which is simply sheer ignorance. It’s no such thing. That is called a tuk-tuk, a motorized three-wheel open-air taxi whose name comes from the sound of its two-stroke engine. They’re sort of fun but should be avoided, especially since the advent of metered taxis in the form of regular cars in the early 1990s; the metered autos will always be cheaper, especially for farangs (Westerners), because with tuk-tuks you must bargain for the fare price ahead of time with the driver, and good luck not getting shorn like a sheep! And you can’t see much, because of the low-slung roof. And many if not most of these guys will try to get you to tailors or ghem shops for fantastic one-day-only deals. Try them once or twice just for the experience, then stick with the regular taxis.
I thought the Hangover original sucked, I wont be disappointed in the sequel if it sucks, then again, I won’t be watching the sequel.
If everybody knows the cameo before you see it in the film, doesn’t it sort of ruin the cameos? I thought the whole reason they work is the surprise factor.
This has always driven me nuts. You will write a couple of paragraphs in English and then throw in a “farangs (Westerners),” usually when you’re making fun of something westerners do. Why do you do that?
Wha… you mean Due Date wasn’t the Hangover II?
I had higher expectations for the original Hangover but was sorely disappointed. The potential was there for it to have been so much more. So no, I definately won’t be further disappointed, namely because, now jaded, I’m apathetic to further offerings from the series.
It’s not only when I’m making fun of farangs (Westerners). I can’t say I’m “making fun” of Bill here; I think it’s pretty neat of him. It’s just “farang” is a common term here, everyone over here uses it like English, but then I add “(Westerner)” as a translation for if I use the term further in the post. I’m not going to go searching, but I’m certain at least one person in the past has asked me something like: "What the hell is a ‘farang’? I don’t see anything offensive about it, and I’m not going to stop it. Get a grip.
I’m sorry if it bothers you, but if that’s all you have to get bothered about, I’d say you’re life is doing pretty well.
Love your custom title…
Sorry if I got snippy there a moment ago, but I found the complaint to be unbelievably petty.
What am I, some kind of robot who can only be bothered one thing at a time? And from one sentence you think I’m unbelievably petty? That I should get a grip? And when did I ask you to stop? And why do you think I was complaining? I find it annoying, but the question was because I wanted to know. To fight a little of my own personal ignorance.
I think you’re a little oversensitive if a simple question on a grammatical quirk that you do a lot sends into that kind of a rage (see, I can blow things out of proportion too).
Why do I think you were complaining? Let’s see, could it have been the part that went: “This has always driven me nuts”? And if you’d bother to read closely, I said I found the complaint to be unbelievably petty, not you.
But I’ll be sure to submit my posting styles to you for pre-approval in the future. :rolleyes: