Skip to main content

Exit bear, pursued by an actor.

Paddington 2
(2017)

(SPOILERS) Paddington 2 is every bit as upbeat and well-meaning as its predecessor. It also has more money thrown at it, a much better villain (an infinitely better villain) and, in terms of plotting, is more developed, offering greater variety and a more satisfying structure. Additionally, crucially, it succeeds in offering continued emotional heft and heart to the Peruvian bear’s further adventures. It isn’t, however, quite as funny.


Even suggesting such a thing sounds curmudgeonly, given the universal applause greeting the movie, but I say that having revisited the original a couple of days prior and found myself enjoying it even more than on first viewing. Writer-director Paul King and co-writer Simon Farnaby introduce a highly impressive array of set-ups with huge potential to milk their absurdity to comic ends, but don’t so much squander as frequently leave them undertapped.


Paddington’s succession of odd jobs don’t quite escalate as uproariously as they might, his messy encounter with the fearsome Knuckles (Brendan Gleeson) isn’t drawn out quite long enough before the latter becomes his protector (albeit Knuckles remains pleasingly gruff for longer), an incident with Buchanan dressed as a nun (featuring the returning Farnaby, running with a classic British comedy riff as he is once again infatuated by a man in drag: “Stop the stunning sister!”) speeds by too quickly, and the sequence in which Buchanan discovers Mr and Mrs Brown in his house needed an ever so slightly more outlandish explanation for their presence to knock it out of the park. Compared to the Brown household mishaps in the first movie, the inspired chase involving a skateboard and a policeman’s helmet, Mr Brown (Hugh Bonneville) dressed as a cleaning lady, or the marvellous use of the over-used Mission: Impossible theme (or even just the burst of Hello when Peter Capaldi’s Mr Curry first claps eyes on Nicole Kidman), and the sequel is more jackdaw but less sustained in its hilarity.


This time round, rather than a dedicated taxidermist, a pop-up book holding a treasure map fuels the plot, although really, it’s simply about the little bear spreading his values of openness, honesty, politeness, inclusivity and marmalade to all he meets, and touching even the hardest of hearts with his uncommon genuineness. This aspect can’t be faulted, unless you take objection to the Harry Potter-by-way-of-Richard Curtis presentation (or, as King puts itMary Poppins-like”): the tourist’s dream of a cosy, beatific, perpetually cheery London.


There are a few teething issues, truth be told; the first quarter of an hour is content to amble in the otherwise risky manner of a picture that knows it has a captive sequel audience, and the flashback detailing how it was Paddington came to be adopted by his aunt and uncle is only necessary to those who assume people go to follow-ups without first seeing the original.


But once King gets underway, he keeps us thoroughly diverted until the final act, at which point he ratchets the pace – and tension – up a gear for an all-out duelling train chase. His greatest achievement is how much we care for the CGI bear, though. Indeed, the chase culminates in a sequence rivalling any tearjerker for pathos, whereby Paddington looks set to succumb to a watery grave. Ben Wishaw’s contribution to the success of these movies can’t be understated either, giving voice to a gentle, unaffected bear who always puts others first, but it’s in the supporting players that these pictures flourish their colour. And top of the pack is Hugh Grant.


The only disappointment of Grant’s performance is that his best scene is left until the closing credits (a show-stopping, behind-bars musical performance that goes down a storm). He’s reminding us throughout, for any who refused to pay attention over the last two decades, what a talented comedic actor he is. Buchanan, a vain, washed-up thesp reduced to doing dog food commercials (dressed as a dog, eating dog food), sees the chance to produce a frightful-sounding one-man show (“An evening of monologue and song”) with the loot the pop-up book leads to, and pulls out every dastardly stop to achieve his goal, and a succession of goofy disguises and accents.


Grant switches from ingratiating charm to gleeful villainy with utmost ease, and also does a better ham Poirot than Sir Ken (and let’s face it, ham Poirot is the way you want your Poirot), as well as walking atop a (moving) train more convincingly than Sir Ken. There’s great enjoyment to be had from his hack actor dropping in of references to theatrical luminaries (“Larry”) and a succession of Shakespeare quotes (“Screw your courage to the sticking place”) and misquotes (“Exit bear, pursued by actor”. Well, mis-stage directions).


Possibly even surpassing Grant is Gleeson, who fits the cartoonishly foreboding prison like a big hairy glove. It’s with Knuckles that the picture’s redemption arc resides; he’s effectively required to accept Paddington and ultimately be his champion and rescuer much in the manner of Mr Brown in the original, a change of heart you can see half an hour off but which is no less satisfying for that when it comes. King is clearly having the most fun in this setting, transforming stir into a pleasant, pink-fatigued, plant-strewn patisserie off the back of Paddington’s mood-alerting menu for marmalade.


The New Statesman would have you believe Paddington 2 forwards a “welcome anti-Brexit message” (it must be a terrible burden to get your jollies from enthusing over the perceived politicisation of family movies – provided they fit your own political perspective, naturally) on the basis of Buchanan hating working with others, so it’s gratifying that King and Farnaby nursed no such intent, instead namechecking Capra – suitably as the picture feels like it comes from a different era – while getting in a dig at Star Wars along the way (“The need for kindness transcends all political debates…. I think Paddington is about seeing the good in everyone, and trying to break any of those deadlocks”).


It’s actually only Mr Curry who’s offered no redeeming aspects, although Capaldi makes the part a dishevelled delight – he’s much better in this than as the Doctor, although he can’t really be blamed for the latter, except perhaps for taking the part knowing what Steven Moffat inflicted on Matt Smith –  and if they ever remake Steptoe and Son (they’ve done Porridge, after all), he’s a shoe-in for a dirty, lecherous old Steptoe Sr (with a mutton-chopped Smith as his Alfred?)


In expanding the cast and canvas, the regulars aren’t quite enabled to make the most of plot threads introduced and subsequently resolved with nothing in between. The kids are now difficult teenagers and not quite as effective (J-Dog, indeed), while Bonneville continues to tap his flair for comedy as Mr Brown, just not quite as productively this time; occasionally, a recurring gag is on the lazy side (Henry’s biker days). Occasionally, even when it’s lazy, it’s still very funny (his meditation practice coming in handy while stretched amid two speeding trains). 


Sally Hawkins is ever adorable as Mary Brown, but where before she was Paddington’s empathically ardent supporter, now the whole family are. Julie Waters is a national treasure at this point, so immune to criticism, obviously, but as I mentioned in my review of the original, I much preferred her in slightly mental mode as Harry Hill’s nan. She does deliver of the best lines, however, warning, without winking, that “Actors are the most evil people on the planet”.


Other notables in the cast include Tom Conti as a cantankerous judge – understandably so, given what Paddington did to his hair – put in his place by an exasperated wife, Joanna Lumley as Buchanan’s agent, required to deliver an old (but amusing) “Nice buns” riff, and Richard Ayoade offering expert testimony on marmalade. Wolfie, the dog Paddington initially gives chase to Buchanan on also turns in a fine performance, although it did set me wondering, in Pluto and Odie fashion, why some of the animal kingdom can speak and not others.


Dario Marianelli’s score wallows in poignancy more than Nick Urata’s original, reflecting the slightly less irreverent tone. Erik Wilson ensures the visuals pop (his distinctive lensing was also brought to bear on Ayoade’s directorial efforts), but most of all, King shows himself to be one of those rare TV directors – and even rarer TV comedy directors, step forward also Edgar Wright – with genuine cinematic flair.  Paddington 2 looks great, a step up even on the impressive original, and King’s as comfortable staging an elaborate, expertly-martialled train chase as a flamboyant musical number. I’ve seen him compared to Wes Anderson, but much as I love Anderson’s work, that really only applies to his talent for the tableau; King’s otherwise for more kinetic in sensibility. Indeed, I’d love to see him take a crack at a more faithful Fantastic Mr Fox; I’m sure he’d do it justice. Perhaps after Paddington 3.






Agree? Disagree? Mildly or vehemently? Let me know in the comments below.

Popular posts from this blog

If I do nothing else, I will convince them that Herbert Stempel knows what won the goddam Academy Award for Best goddam Picture of 1955. That’s what I’m going to accomplish.

Quiz Show (1994) (SPOILERS) Quiz Show perfectly encapsulates a certain brand of Best Picture nominee: the staid, respectable, diligent historical episode, a morality tale in response to which the Academy can nod their heads approvingly and discerningly, feeding as it does their own vainglorious self-image about how times and attitudes have changed, in part thanks to their own virtuousness. Robert Redford’s film about the 1950s Twenty-One quiz show scandals is immaculately made, boasts a notable cast and is guided by a strong screenplay from Paul Attanasio (who, on television, had just created the seminal Homicide: Life on the Streets ), but it lacks that something extra that pushes it into truly memorable territory.

Your Mickey Mouse is one big stupid dope!

Enemy Mine (1985) (SPOILERS) The essential dynamic of Enemy Mine – sworn enemies overcome their differences to become firm friends – was a well-ploughed one when it was made, such that it led to TV Tropes assuming, since edited, that it took its title from an existing phrase (Barry Longyear, author of the 1979 novella, made it up, inspired by the 1961 David Niven film The Best of Enemies ). The Film Yearbook Volume 5 opined that that Wolfgang Petersen’s picture “ lacks the gritty sauciness of Hell in the Pacific”; John Boorman’s WWII film stranded Lee Marvin and Toshiro Mifune on a desert island and had them first duking it out before becoming reluctant bedfellows. Perhaps germanely, both movies were box office flops.

Piece by piece, the camel enters the couscous.

The Forgiven (2021) (SPOILERS) By this point, the differences between filmmaker John Michael McDonagh and his younger brother, filmmaker and playwright Martin McDonagh, are fairly clearly established. Both wear badges of irreverence and provocation in their writing, and a willingness to tackle – or take pot-shots – at bigger issues, ones that may find them dangling their toes in hot water. But Martin receives the lion’s share of the critical attention, while John is generally recognised as the slightly lesser light. Sure, some might mistake Seven Psychopaths for a John movie, and Calvary for a Martin one, but there’s a more flagrant sense of attention seeking in John’s work, and concomitantly less substance. The Forgiven is clearly aiming more in the expressly substantial vein of John’s earlier Calvary, but it ultimately bears the same kind of issues in delivery.

Haven’t you ever heard of the healing power of laughter?

Batman (1989) (SPOILERS) There’s Jaws , there’s Star Wars , and then there’s Batman in terms of defining the modern blockbuster. Jaws ’ success was so profound, it changed the way movies were made and marketed. Batman’s marketing was so profound, it changed the way tentpoles would be perceived: as cash cows. Disney tried to reproduce the effect the following year with Dick Tracy , to markedly less enthusiastic response. None of this places Batman in the company of Jaws as a classic movie sold well, far from it. It just so happened to hit the spot. As Tim Burton put it, it was “ more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie ”. It’s difficult to disagree with his verdict that the finished product (for that is what it is) is “ mainly boring ”. Now, of course, the Burton bat has been usurped by the Nolan incarnation (and soon the Snyder). They have some things in common. Both take the character seriously and favour a sombre tone, which was much more of shock to the

No one can be told what the Matrix is. You have to see it for yourself.

The Matrix  (1999) (SPOILERS) Twenty years on, and the articles are on the defining nature of The Matrix are piling up, most of them touching on how its world has become a reality, or maybe always was one. At the time, its premise was engaging enough, but it was the sum total of the package that cast a spell – the bullet time, the fashions, the soundtrack, the comic book-as-live-action framing and styling – not to mention it being probably the first movie to embrace and reflect the burgeoning Internet ( Hackers doesn’t really count), and subsequently to really ride the crest of the DVD boom wave. And now? Now it’s still really, really good.

Say hello to the Scream Extractor.

Monsters, Inc. (2001) (SPOILERS) I was never the greatest fan of Monsters, Inc. , even before charges began to be levelled regarding its “true” subtext. I didn’t much care for the characters, and I particularly didn’t like the way Pixar’s directors injected their own parenting/ childhood nostalgia into their plots. Something that just seems to go on with their fare ad infinitum. Which means the Pixars I preferred tended to be the Brad Bird ones. You know, the alleged objectivist. Now, though, we learn Pixar has always been about the adrenochrome, so there’s no going back…

I’m just the balloon man.

Copshop (2021) (SPOILERS) A consistent problem with Joe Carnahan’s oeuvre is that, no matter how confidently his movies begin, or how strong his premise, or how adept his direction or compelling the performances he extracts, he ends up blowing it. He blows it with Copshop , a ’70s-inspired variant on Assault on Precinct 13 that is pretty damn good during the first hour, before devolving into his standard mode of sado-nihilistic mayhem.

Twenty dwarves took turns doing handstands on the carpet.

Bugsy (1991) (SPOILERS) Bugsy is very much a Warren Beatty vanity project (aren’t they all, even the ones that don’t seem that way on the surface?), to the extent of his playing a title character a decade and a half younger than him. As such, it makes sense that producer Warren’s choice of director wouldn’t be inclined to overshadow star Warren, but the effect is to end up with a movie that, for all its considerable merits (including a script from James Toback chock full of incident), never really feels quite focussed, that it’s destined to lead anywhere, even if we know where it’s going.

When we have been subtle, then can I kill him?

The Avengers 6.16. Legacy of Death There’s scarcely any crediting the Terry Nation of Noon-Doomsday as the same Terry Nation that wrote this, let alone the Terry Nation churning out a no-frills Dalek story a season for the latter stages of the Jon Pertwee era. Of course, Nation had started out as a comedy writer (for Hancock), and it may be that the kick Brian Clemens gave him up the pants in reaction to the quality of Noon-Doomsday loosened a whole load of gags. Admittedly, a lot of them are well worn, but they come so thick and fast in Legacy of Death , accompanied by an assuredly giddy pace from director Don Chaffey (of Ray Harryhausen’s Jason and the Argonauts ) and a fine ensemble of supporting players, that it would be churlish to complain.

You ever heard the saying, “Don’t rob the bank across from the diner that has the best donuts in three counties”?

2 Guns (2013) (SPOILERS) Denzel Washington is such a reliable performer, that it can get a bit boring. You end up knowing every gesture or inflection in advance, whether he’s playing a good guy or a bad guy. And his films are generally at least half decent, so you end up seeing them. Even in Flight (or perhaps especially in Flight ; just watch him chugging down that vodka) where he’s giving it his Oscar-nominatable best, he seems too familiar. I think it may be because he’s an actor who is more effective the less he does. In 2 Guns he’s not doing less, but sometimes it seems like it. That’s because the last person I’d ever expect blows him off the screen; Mark Wahlberg.