Last night I went to the second-run theater to see a movie I’d missed when it came out – The Hangover. While not as side-splittingly hilarious as I’d hoped, I still liked the film. In particular, I thought its mystery novel-like structure was unique and original, and the effeminate Asian gangster character was hilarious. The film concerns the aftermath of a bachelor party in Las Vegas in which the main characters, alpha Phil (Bradley Cooper), beta Stu (Ed Helms), and omega Alan (Zach Galifianakis) have to search for their missing friend Doug (Justin Bartha), who is due to be married two days after the party occurs. A couple of points:
- While omegas are largely stuck where they are, betas’ wounds are self-inflicted. Alan is a pedophile (he mentions early in the movie that he’s not allowed to go within 2,000 feet of schools) and a moron (his spiking of his and his buddies drinks with roofies, which he thinks is ecstasy, causes the blackout that drives the plot). Both Phil and Stu treat him the way you’d treat a cat vomiting on the carpet – something you can’t change but simply have to put up with. The film makes it clear, however, that Stu’s woes are the result of his own sacklessness. Stu is constantly hounded by his bitchy, controlling girlfriend, whom he must lie to repeatedly in order to even go on the trip (claiming they’re going to a wine-tasting instead of Vegas), who emasculates him by calling him “Doctor Faggot,” and refuses to let him kiss her. It is later revealed that she cheated on him while on a cruise years ago (the characters’ confusion over the profession of the guy who fucked her being a running joke throughout the film), and despite this, he still plans to propose to her after he returns from Vegas.
- These sorts of comedies work when the beta underdog character wins out in the end. A English professor I once studied under stated that the chief difference between Shakespearian tragedy and comedy is that tragedy ends badly while comedy ends happily. This holds true in Shakespeare plays that address similar subject matter, such as Romeo and Juliet (tragedy) and The Taming of the Shrew (comedy). Part of the reason that Funny People bombed (as mentioned by Whiskey here) was due to the depressing ending, in which Seth Rogen’s character is penalized for being moral and ends up losing everything. In contrast, The Hangover ends with Stu, the central character of the film, gathering up the nerve to break up with his cunt of a girlfriend to potentially pursue a relationship with an attractive single mom stripper he accidentally married while in Vegas. All of the other characters also end up victorious in their own ways, with Doug marrying his betrothed, Phil reuniting with his family, and Alan…remaining Alan. All of the plot threads are wrapped up in a way that is satisfying to the viewer.
UPDATE: z.g. reminds me of something I forgot:
See how even this is now pushed as being a “happy ending�
He does not get to marry an
“Attractive university student he met in a Vegas churchâ€
He gets to marry a stripper with a kid in tow.
A young man watching this will face another brainwashing in the form of “be happy you get the stripper with a bastardâ€.
See how the standard “Want to marry a virtuous girl to build a family with†is pushed down the drain, and a man is almost made ashamed of wanting that.
Be happy you get some attention from a non-openly bitchy woman.
Hurrrray!
{ 9 comments… read them below or add one }
The Hangover ends with Stu, the central character of the film, gathering up the nerve to break up with his cunt of a girlfriend to potentially pursue a relationship with an attractive stripper he accidentally married while in Vegas.
No.
An attractive single mother stripper.
See how even this is now pushed as being a “happy ending”?
He does not get to marry an
“Attractive university student he met in a Vegas church”
He gets to marry a stripper with a kid in tow.
A young man watching this will face another brainwashing in the form of “be happy you get the stripper with a bastard”.
See how the standard “Want to marry a virtuous girl to build a family with” is pushed down the drain, and a man is almost made ashamed of wanting that.
Be happy you get some attention from a non-openly bitchy woman.
Hurrrray!
Whoops, missed that.
z.g. – “He gets to marry a stripper with a kid in tow.”
Actually, in his inebriated state, he DID marry the stripper.
Now, personally, I did not get that he intended to pursue that relationship any further (the marriage was to be annulled).
What I did see happening was that the stripper (Heather Graham) treated him with some respect and kindness. During their brief time together, she made him feel more like a man than his girlfriend Mellisa (Rachael Harris) ever had. It was part of his “awakening”.
While the “situation” was all wrong for him, Stu was given the chance to consider what he could be as a man, a husband, and even a father. It wasn’t as if a light bulb popped on for him, but it definitely presented him with a clear contrast to what life with Melissa held in store for him.
later, at Doug’s wedding, Melissa starts her typical condescending whining at Stu, bitching about something or other “not working” for her; at which point Stu finally tells her off, retorting that their relationship is what isn’t working for him.
Of particular note for me, was that when I saw this in the theater with my wife, when Stu finally stood up to Melissa, I noticed that not only did my wife cheer for him, but so did numerous women in the theater (audible expressions of enthusiasm for his long over-due action).
My impression was that, while women do not naturally like beta men, having had to “follow” Stu through the misadventure in Vegas, they never-the-less found themselves sympathizing with him. To my mind, that the women in the theater would actually cheer him suggested that they were actually “pulling” for him to over-come his deep beta-tude and become a man that they could respect.
Anyway, that’s the impression I got.
Slwerner, yes he did get married, and yes she showed no objection to the annulment of the marriage.
Close to the end somewhere he said that now he will go to LA, or that he has a date waiting in LA or something.
The baby may have showed him about a different life – banging the baby’s head to the car door is not in this context – but I still do not see the big effect of the baby on stu’s choice.
Yes, the stripper treated him with dignity and respect, but so could a non-working girl also.
The reason women in the movie cheeed for Stu could be threefold:
- They cheered for Stu because they felt for him
- They cheered for Stu cause his bitchy girlfriend was being openly bitchy. Many girls are like that behind closed doors. Not in the open tho. So a disdain for the bitch
- They cheered for Stu cause now the stripper with baby in tow would get a decent, well earning beta sugga daddy
(I vote for the third)
For me, it is too late.
For a young boy, the message given to him is: “Be happy that a stripper with a kid in tow treated you well, and better than your bitchy girlfriend. The stripper should be a well appreciated upgrade for you”
That was my point.
Changing the acceptable standards that men have.
Btw, a question to the Americans:
What the fuck is the deal with PUA’s advertising they dated/fucked a stripper? (Or the guys who think it is an honor badge and ask for tips on dating a stripper?)
“What the fuck is the deal with PUA’s advertising they dated/fucked a stripper? (Or the guys who think it is an honor badge and ask for tips on dating a stripper?)”
1) Strippers are generally hot.
2) Strippers generally know how to fuck.
3) Strippers are generally difficult to pick up, owing to the fact that they spend their days showing off their bodies to men who slobber all over them.
Still…
It is not an honor badge.
“Heeeey I’m dating/banging a porn actress”…
So?
It is like me saying I am driving a Ferrari, but it has no engine, yippie yeah.
And if strippers are generally difficult to pick up, I really do not see them being difficult for thugs.
This is really a concept I cannot get my head around.
Just does not make sense.
Hot yes. Knows to fuck? Probably. Fucked in the head? Definitely.
z.g. – “Yes, the stripper treated him with dignity and respect, but so could a non-working girl also.”
Thee way I took it, the greater effect was that another women, any woman, could and would treat him so much better than Melissa did.
Perhaps the baby was only placed in the story as a way to connect to single mothers in the potential audience for the film – I don’t think that Heather Graham being a mother or not would have made any significant difference.
As for Stu’s effect on women in the theater, they all seemed to be heartily laughing (at him) when both Melissa and Alan “dis” him early on, and there seemed to be quite a bit of snickering when he revealed that he planned to propose to her – while being reminded that she had already cheated on him. Stu started out as a pathetic character, who, through the course of the story became increasingly assertive.
You may be right that Melissa was simply too bitchy for the female audience, but I got the impression that they had actually started to feel for him, and were cheering for a the change in him.
Of course, from a guy’s perspective, it’s all just speculation.
What would be interesting would be to get women’s opinions on Stu and Melissa.
Strippers are not difficult to pick up. They are just always taken. There is a big difference there. In fact, the “always taken” status of strippers is due to the fact that they are not difficult to pick up.
z.g., you are absolutely correct in your intuitive assessment that these men are morally bankrupt. I cracks me up when I read these young men thinking they are going to save Western civilization by using Game to get laid.
Justin,
PUA are not morally bankrupt, they are just doing what is necessary.
I was focusing only on the group which thinks bagging a stripper is some honor badge.
Strippers may not be difficult to pick up, if 1. you are willing to thug it up, if 2. you are willing to deal with a headcase.
I have read some of your comments and I am in the group that thinks PUA is a necessary school of thought, which helps the men who employ it.
If the women of today are screwed in the head and respond to “you got snot in your nose” better than “hey you look cute, I woudl like to get to know you”, that really is not something you should blame the PUA (arts, or artist) for.
A man’s gotta do what a man’s gotta do,
And if one does not 110% believe in eternal justice, then, that is not “read the bible, and treat every woman like God’s gift”.
that just sets you up to pick the tabs of a reformed Mary.
{ 2 trackbacks }