THE CAMPAIGN (2012 - Cert 15)

I didn't have high particularly expectations for this film. It hadn't had good reviews on release and it didn't take anything close to a respectable figure at the box office, but after a Friday off work, a wine drenched lunch followed by a spell in a beer garden, I needed to watch something that wasn't going to be taxing but was going to be funny, I wanted to laugh but I also fancied not having to use my brain particularly. Surely Will Ferrell and Zach Galifianakis and a race for congress would fit the bill.



Well it certainly was intellectually challenging, but it also wasn't particularly funny either.

Ferrell is Cam Brady, about to enter his fifth term as congressman of North Carolina, the only reason he's managed such a successful stint is the lack of any actual challengers, which is a good job because it's immediately clear that he is useless. One plot contrivance later, and two wealthy brothers are putting their support behind someone to oppose him - in steps Galfianakis as Marty Huggins. Neither of these characters feel fresh or new creations, Ferrell is channeling Ron Burgundy with a different accent and without facial hair and Galfianakis is a weirdo again, a slightly camper weirdo than we are used to, but a weirdo nonetheless. It's also worth nothing that parts of Huggins also appear to be a carbon copy of another comic creation, Ned Flanders from The Simpsons. The similarities aren't subtle either. If you are going to rip off one of the most successful comedy series ever, maybe be a little bit clever about it.

The film is essentially the campaign trail of these two as they go head to head, making a hash out of everything they do, from punching babies and dogs (yes punching babies and dogs), to inappropriate TV ads and interference with each others families. I appreciate that story and narrative aren't going to be top of the list of priorities in this type of film, but as the campaign trail develops, the polls chop and change between the two, seemingly having nothing to do with that they are actually doing. This could be a satirical look at the polls and the political system, but I strongly doubt that. That might require someone involved in making this film actually having to use their brain.

There is an interesting, funny and smart film to be made out of the political process, oh hang on, it has - In The Loop. The American political system is so ripe for taking the mickey out of, The Campaign had a wealth of material with which to play with, but just didn't bother. It instead chose to put together a load of different sketches which could have been slotted into many other comedies, none having anything to do with politics. A rushed, wasted opportunity. Even more irritating when you see that one of the writers was also involved in Spin City (Chris Henchy) and it's directed by Jay Roach (Austin Powers 1 & 2 and Meet The Parents).

There's not really much more for me to say, in fact I only saw it 12 hours ago and it's already slipping from my consciousness (I'll accept that a small percentage of that may be down to the excesses of yesterday afternoon).

Don't bother. Any film that makes an 81 minute running time feel in excess of two hours is clearing not doing something (or anything) right.

THE HANGOVER: PART 2 (2011 - Cert 15)

The one thing that offends me most about The Hangover: Part 2 is the title. Not the whole thing (I am partial to a hangover myself occasionally), just the Part 2 aspect. Almost as if Todd Phillips really believes that this is something more than it is, a larger, epic story arc that this movie is just a fraction of. The Godfather this ain't.



Before wading in here, I've got to say that I enjoyed the first film. It was funny, with funny characters, particularly Stu and Alan (Ed Helm and Zach Galifianakis), and as a massive fan of Las Vegas, I've got a bit of a soft spot for it. Admitedly, further viewings of the film have seen my enthusiasm and patience start to wane but all in all, it was a good comedy. I felt the need to qualify that because I wouldn't want my hatred of the second instalment to be misconstrued as a sense of humour failure.

The real problem with Part 2 is that it just isn't funny. I did not laugh once. Not even smiled. Fundamentally this is a problem for what is billed as a comedy. The same formula of the first film is applied to a different location, Bangkok. Phillips clearly thought that losing the same character, but somewhere else would be a stretch too far so instead we lose Stu's soon to be brother in law a couple of days before the wedding. The same three chaps wake up, Stu, Alan and Bradley Cooper's Phil, in a bad hotel room in Bangkok and have to put the pieces together.While the wake up scene in the first film was funny, unexpected and felt a little fresh, on this occasion we know it's coming and it feels immediately tired. We have all seen pictures of the face tattoo, it's on the poster, in fact there was even stuff in the press about Mike Tyson suing because of it (well done publicity department). So a joke that may have caught us off guard, has instead been bled to death before the film has even started.

And that's the problem with the whole film. The same jokes are used again, Todd Phillips and his 'writing' team, believing that the fact that we know what's coming next will be funnier than actual jokes. The baby is replaced by a drug dealing monkey (yes, I know, on paper it sounds funny but I assure you that the reality is not. In fact, the spying monkey in the first Indy film beats him hands down). Mr Chow (Ken Jeong) is back again through arguably the most tenuous plot line ever conceived, Stu's taste for ladies of the night (not vampires) crops up again, as does a Mike Tyson cameo.

The writers then seem to lose even more confidence in their ability to write a good joke and send us on a nonsensical action plot where Paul Giamatti turns up to collect some cash and leave me wondering what on earth he is up to. Car chases, gun fights, double crossing all take place, relentlessly smashing me in the face to the point where I was left feeling completely numb.

I can't even be bothered anymore to continue to tell you how awful The Hangover: Part 2 is. It's not funny, it's not entertaining, it's not a patch on the first film and it stinks of a sequel made solely with cash registers in mind. Having said that, if that was the aim, it's succeeded. And then some. Hollywood is after all a business and this film has taken £34 million (the 5th most this year) at the UK box office alone, despite it suffering awful reviews and being terrible. The truth is that because of the success and widespread enjoyment of the first film, the second film was always going to rake the cash in, it just would have been nice if someone actually paused and considered making something good.

During his recent press appearances for the DVD release of the film, Bradley Cooper has said that a third is on the way, and, hold the front page, it may have a new structure. What that deviation entails has yet to be seen, but it could be a bold move, and if they bother to write some jokes, it could make amends for this monstrosity. It could of course just be shite as well.