CliqueClackThe Hangover Part III on Blu-ray finishes an unlikely trilogy
It’s time to say a final farewell to the Wolfpack, and there’s no better way to do it than with Warner Home Video’s Blu-ray of ‘The Hangover Part III.’
I doubt when The Hangover was being made, anyone ever thought it would gross over $400 million dollars and spawn two sequels. I had the (mis)fortune of seeing Parts I and II basically back-to-back and was dumbfounded by all of the “this is the funniest movie ever” comments I had heard. The first one was mildly amusing — perhaps it played better with a large audience rather than on home video — but the second one was a carbon copy with the same comedic beats set in a different location.
I suppose I’m a glutton for punishment, or just a completest, so it was with much trepidation that I attended an advance screening of The Hangover Part III before its theatrical release. Surprisingly enough, I enjoyed it much more than either of the first two movies simply because (and this seems to be the reason a lot of people disliked it) it was different. A completely different story with the same characters, and returning characters from the first movie including someone who was just mentioned in passing, that totally ignored the series’ title! There was no hangover-induced confusion, no constant “what is going on here?” wailing, just a pretty tight story that picks up after the end of Part II and then pretty much ignores it in order to backtrack to events that happened off-camera in Part I.
Unfortunately, the fact that the movie was so different from the first two — or that people were just expecting another regurgitation of the same plot — left Part III with a much smaller box office total than either of the previous films. Which is a shame, because the movie is actually more entertaining, much funnier, has some amazing action scenes and John Goodman to boot! If you decided not to see the movie at the cinema, now is your chance to see for yourself how the Wolfpack’s journey ends.
Warner Home Video has just released The Hangover Part III on various home video formats. The Blu-ray edition of the film (which also comes with a DVD and a Digital HD copy) presents the film perfectly. I don’t know if this was shot digitally or on film, but a close look at the image shows what appears to be very fine grain giving it a film-like quality. The colors are appropriately saturated and replicate the best theatrical presentation. The DTS-HD Master Audio 5.1 surround track is vibrant, directional and booming during the intense action scenes. Dialogue is clear, but music and effects never overpower that center channel. It’s definitely a great, demo-worthy mix.
The extras included on the Blu-ray range from behind-the-scenes footage to some not very humorous pieces. These include:
- Behind the Scenes: Replacing Zach: The Secret Auditions (6:09) — Director Todd Phillips would have us believe that he thought of recasting the “difficult” Zach Galifianakis after the second movie with potential candidates such as Jason Sudeikis and Bobby Moynihan. Mildly amusing.
- Behind the Scenes: The Wolfpack’s Wildest Stunts (5:10) — This is a great, but much too short, look at some of the film’s action scenes including the Vegas parachute finale which pretty much shut down the Strip and required the cooperation of all the hotels in the area. There is also an amazing look at the scene on top of Caesar’s Palace that wasn’t quite as terrifying as it looked on screen. Movie buffs will love this … and want more!
- Behind the Scenes: Zach Galifianakis in His Own Words (2:32) — Someone just pointed a camera at Zach and let him ramble as if he was being interviewed. Zach “dishes” on his co-stars, his character, Dockers and Solid Gold. It’s a mercifully short piece.
- Behind the Scenes: Pushing the Limits (3:36) — In the movies, they say never work with animals or children. This brief feature shows the movie magic behind working with a giraffe, angry roosters and a 4-year-old boy. PETA can breathe a little easier.
- Featurette: Inside Focus: The Real Chow (5:24) — A “newsmagazine” look at the career of Ken Jeong … or is it Leslie Chow? The piece implies that Jeong is just a character and Chow is the real person, but either way this is the least amusing extra on the disk.
- Featurette: Action Mash-Up — One minute and nine seconds of the film’s action scenes. Best viewed after seeing the movie as it’s full of spoilers.
- Extended Scenes (2:03) — Three short cuts that weren’t missed by not having them in the movie.
- Outtakes (7:51) — Pretty funny flubs and behind the scenes footage.
The question is, is this all there is? Will there be an extended director’s cut sometime down the road, or perhaps a full trilogy box set (which is set to be released in December, according to Amazon, but not officially announced by the studio … yet)? If you own the first two and want to finish the set, then you’ll want to pick this one up. It looks and sounds great, and the bonus material is satisfactory, but there could be some more in depth material. Your enjoyment may vary, but for me, this was the best film of the trilogy.
This review was based on the Blu-ray/DVD Combo generously provided to CliqueClack by Warner Home Video.
6 Comments on “The Hangover Part III on Blu-ray finishes an unlikely trilogy”
I feel like your review grossly misunderstands what actually happened with audience reaction. Everybody loved Part 1, because of this they were willing to give Part 2 the benefit of the doubt and go see it, which created 2’s large box-office numbers. At this point no one had any idea that the creators would have the audacity to make the exact same movie all over again, but once people had seen Part 2 everyone agreed that it was a terrible film. Because Part 2 failed so spectacularly to meet audience expectations, no one was willing to give Part 3 a shot because “Fool me one shame on you, fool me twice shame on me”. People did not shun Part 3 because it was “trying something different” (way to be cynical and elitist dude), people shunned Part 3 because they weren’t willing to fork over 12 bucks for something that had the potential to be just as terrible as Part 2 had been.
I’m not quite sure what article you’r reading, but the “quote” you attributed to me (“trying something different”) is nowhere be found in the piece. In fact, in your rush to condemn me for being “cynical and elitist” (which is a direct quote from your comment), you completely overlooked what I actually wrote. And I quote (or copy and paste, as it were):
“Unfortunately, the fact that the movie was so different from the first two — or that people were just expecting another regurgitation of the same plot — left Part III with a much smaller box office total than either of the previous films.”
We actually agree, although you somehow completely missed that. I did say that those who actually did see the film were disappointed because it was different, and I know that from speaking to people first-hand. So, yes, some people didn’t go because they expected to see the same movie a third time, while others went and were disappointed that it wasn’t the same movie a third time. I enjoyed it more exactly because it wasn’t the same movie a third time and that’s what I’m trying to impart to those who skipped Part III for that reason.
Weird response to the trilogy, man. The first movie was excellent, the second movie was a retread but still entertaining, and the third movie was pretty devoid of humor. I think most people agree with me on that, but I’d say so even if they didn’t.
Dude, comedy is subjective. Just because I liked something you didn’t doesn’t make it “weird.” You, I assume, fall into the category of fans of the first film who hated the third because it was different. I think it’s more “weird” to go into a third movie and not expect, or want, some kind of growth in the characters and plot but hope for yet another retread that equals the first one. And let’s be real here, not many people liked the second one much either … because it was a retread. Like I said, I saw the first two back-to-back so the first one was still very fresh in my mind, and I could see where the placement of each moment in the second one was in relation to the first one. It really just made me angry.
I honestly don’t know how they could have made the fans happy with the third one.
Nah, I didn’t think the second one was anything special and I wish they’d tried to cover new ground. But the third movie just didn’t contain many attempts at comedy. I understand that whether comedy is funny is subjective, but whether an attempt at comedy is present seems reasonably objective to me. I don’t hate the third film because it was different; I just didn’t like it because it wasn’t particularly good. I actually was on board with the plot they had, but the writing really kind of let them down in comparison to the first film. I definitely don’t think it would stand on its own.
I didn’t mean to offend by calling your response “weird”. I just meant that it doesn’t line up with the popular response, which I shared (and therefore seemed “normal” to me).
Well, I laughed more during the third one than I did with the first two combined. And I’ll be the first to admit that I find things enjoyable that most people don’t (ask Ivey West!). But, even though it has a terrible Rotten Tomatoes rating, there are still a few others there who gave it decent reviews. We’re all different.