Oh geez I really wanted to like this one. Instead, I left “The Hangover Part III” feeling dazed and cheated. So what the heck happened? Or to paraphrase Mr. Chow, “I want answers, motherfuckers!” How could such a good comedy degenerate into a sloppy, unfunny one? The first “Hangover” was one of the funniest films of the last decade, and director Todd Philipps found just the right actors to turn a cliched plot into something fresh and memorable. Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms and Zack Galifianakis rocked it. So basically a sequel was inevitable, and while part 2 wasn’t as original as the first one, it still made me laugh. In part 3 however, laughs are nowhere to be found. Believe me I counted. Plot-wise, there’s nothing much to tell. The boys get in trouble again because of their stupid friend Alan (Galifianakis), whom they try to deliver to a rehabilitation facility in Arizona. No wedding this time around and no hangover. Instead, bad guy John Goodman is holding their friend Justin Bartha for ransom until they can bring Mr. Chow back. There’s no point in my telling you more than that, because the plot doesn’t make a lot of sense. One can’t blame the actors, who do their best, but even they aren’t as appealing as they were the first and second time around, because their characters were paper-thin to begin with, and the material they have to work with here is basically hopeless. They tell me the director is still Todd Phillips. Since he did wonders with the first “Hangover”, I’m going to assume he directed this one under duress and/or the hypnotic lure of a fat paycheck. Worse, seeing the great John Goodman stuck in a role of a silly gangster, well, that’s just sad. And Galifianakis needs a career intervention before it’s too late. “What the fuck am I watching?” says Cooper’s character at some point. I can say the same thing about this movie. Just flush it and forget it, motherfuckers.