Discuss as:

Critics gang up to hate 'Hangover Part III'

It's been a while since critics have been as unanimously negative about a big movie as they are about "The Hangover Part III." Some of the reviews are so angry, it's as if the film gave the critics themselves a pounding, painful hangover. But bad movies give us some delightfully good bad reviews. Here are snippets of just a few -- and oh, how we wish we could have read what the late Roger Ebert would have said about this one.

"Death abounds in this non-comedy. Many things die. Animals get killed; people get killed; needless to say, our patience gets thoroughly slaughtered." --Globe and Mail

"There must be a hole in the desert somewhere big enough to bury this sorry, sordid franchise once and for all." --CNN

"This is an ugly, angry picture. Todd Phillips, the man who directed all three and co-wrote the last two 'Hangovers,' seems to have gone out of his way to take a blowtorch to the goodwill he earned from the original." --Seattle Times

"If late some night 'The Hangover Part IV' gives you a call, you should probably consider getting your number changed." --St. Louis Post-Dispatch

"This is a smug, witless picture that makes you feel like you’ve been had." --Miami Herald

"The Wolfpack rides again. Or rather, it limps exhaustedly over the tundra ..." --New York Times

"Let’s cut right to the chase: This thing exists only due to contractual obligations and the ever-present need for MORE FREE MONEY." --Geek Nation

"So it starts with the decapitation of a live giraffe. And it goes downhill from there." --The Movie Minute

"Director Todd Phillips delivers a film so different from the first two, I’m not even sure it’s supposed to be a comedy.” --Richard Roeper