Page 18 THE VILLADOM TIMES II & IV • June 5, 2013 Misadventures continue in ‘The Hangover: Part III’ by Dennis Seuling “The Hangover: Part III” continues the bizarre adventures of pals Phil (Bradley Cooper), Stu (Ed Helms), Alan (Zack Galifianakis), and Doug (Justin Bartha). Foregoing the odd surrealism that characterized the first film, this edition is tame by comparison and plays more like a tradi- Justin Bartha, Zack Galifianakis, Ed Helms, and Bradley Cooper in ‘The Hangover: Part III.’ tional caper film. Gone are the inspired lunacy, mysterious plot, and raunchy touches. What is left is a tepid, ho-hum conclusion to the franchise. Alan is out of control. He is a boy-man who indulges every whim, however immature, inappropriate, or politically incorrect. His family’s wealth allows him to flit through life unfocused. His “Wolf Pack” buddies come together for an intervention and agree to drive him to a rehab facility in Arizona. On the way, they are carjacked by mobster Marshall (John Goodman), who takes Doug hostage. Marshall’s real object is Chow (Ken Jeung), a thief who has stolen $20 million in gold from him. Only when Doug’s friends deliver Chow to Marshall will Doug be freed. Thus begins what should have been a comic odyssey, but instead turns into a surprisingly unfunny road trip, with jokes and comic setups few and far between. Because the three principals reprise their roles from the first two pictures, viewers know them well and anticipate plenty of comic hijinks. There are a few good moments, but the movie has a dark, mean-spirited tone that thwarts any attempts at humor. The journey takes Phil, Stu, and Alan to Mexico and Las Vegas, where all the trouble originated in the first movie. There are a few interesting plot twists along the way, but they are not clever enough to shore up a shaky plot. Director Todd Phillips incorporates lots of gratuitous profanity and audacious behavior, which are meant to push the envelope of good taste, but only come off as desperate attempts to be witty and adventurous. Galifianakis’ Alan dominates this film, and that is its primary problem. He seems to have a repertoire of one expression, looks stiff throughout, and is downright annoying. His Alan grates on and eventually alienates the viewer. His antics seldom evoke even a weak smile, let (continued in Crossword page)