_"It happened again."_

I get it now. I think I read that each film in this trilogy was practically the same, but I guess I forgot. I suppose it's also because you have to experience it to understand it: and reading about it doesn't have much effect. I've experienced it. This film was pretty much the same as the first one with minor differences, like the setting, the one getting married, and how certain things in the first film _play out_ in this one. I must've thought that it's not _that_ alike. But the first film worked, so I understand why they recycled it.

I liked the little variety this time compared to the first film by using the knowledge of the previous events in a self-aware/meta sort of way, only for that to be one thing that wasn't 100% the same as before. And even though some people didn't like this one as much or disliked it, it had a box office of $586.8 million from an $80 million budget. You can't argue with those numbers: this film worked, too.

As shown by my rating, which is lower than what I gave the first one, I didn't enjoy it as much. I can't accurately say whether the similarity is to blame for that, in the sense that I already saw the first film, so this one didn't have as much of an effect. But generally, I feel like it just wasn't as good as the first one.

Even other aspects, like the soundtrack, and the cinematography, weren't as good. Don't get me wrong: both were still decent. More than that, to be fair. They just weren't quite up-to-par with the first film. Especially the soundtrack, to an extent: which seemed to disappear further into the film; the first few songs were good.

Everything seemed to blend better in the first film, the song choices, the editing, and the cinematography: things just fell into place/were right, maybe with some luck. With this film, it's like those elements were on the right track but only _there_, and that sweet spot eluded. There wasn't any synergism. But maybe there wasn't any of that in the first film, and the novelty aspect was what made everything feel complementary.

The performances by our three leads were good and better than in the first film. Their chemistry seemed stronger. Ed Helms ramped up his performance in this one compared to the first one, and it, surprisingly, wasn't that bad; he/his character was the weakest in the first film. Zach Galifianakis (whose performance seemed ramped up as well, or more so his character) and Bradley Cooper did a good job again, as expected. I still like Bradley's performance/his character the most, just like in the first one. I guess it's a matter of the personality his character has. It allows a charismatic nonchalant performance, and that does so much, even for the overall film.

One thing that took me by surprise and realization was Yasmin Lee. I remember knowing she appeared in one of these films, and that was so long ago, so I completely forgot. I think I already knew who she was, but I'm not sure. I don't think that's how I came to know about her. Now, I can confidently say that I do know who she is. She is hot, attractive, beautiful, gorgeous, stunning, etc. You guys should check out some of her "stuff."

So, yeah. This film was enjoyable enough, and aspects like the soundtrack, cinematography, and performances were good, although the first two seemed better in the first one. Even though my rating may imply otherwise, this film was entertaining; I still enjoyed the first one more.