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.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Mondo bizarro. No offence man, but you’re in way over your head.

The X-Files 8.7: Via Negativa I wasn’t as down on the last couple of seasons of The X-Files as most seemed to be. For me, the mythology arc walked off a cliff somewhere around the first movie, with only the occasional glimmer of something worthwhile after that. So the fact that the show was tripping over itself with super soldiers and Mulder’s abduction/his and Scully’s baby (although we all now know it wasn’t, sheesh ), anything to stretch itself beyond breaking point in the vain hope viewers would carry on dangling, didn’t really make much odds. Of course, it finally snapped with the wretched main arc when the show returned, although the writing was truly on the wall with Season 9 finale The Truth . For the most part, though, I found 8 and 9 more watchable than, say 5 or 7. They came up with their fair share of engaging standalones, one of which I remembered to be Via Negativa .

You know what I sometimes wish? I sometimes wish I were ordinary like you. Ordinary and dead like all the others.

Séance on a Wet Afternoon (1964) (SPOILERS) Bryan Forbes’ adaptation of Mark McShane’s 1961’s novel has been much acclaimed. It boasts a distinctive storyline and effective performances from its leads, accompanied by effective black-and-white cinematography from Gerry Turpin and a suitably atmospheric score from John Barry. I’m not sure Forbes makes the most of the material, however, as he underlines Séance on a Wet Afternoon ’s inherently theatrical qualities at the expense of its filmic potential.

A ship is the finest nursery in the world.

A High Wind in Jamaica (1965) (SPOILERS) An odd one, this, as if Disney were remaking The Swiss Family Robinson for adults. One might perhaps have imagined the Mouse House producing it during their “Dark Disney” phase. But even then, toned down. After all, kids kidnapped by pirates sounds like an evergreen premise for boy’s own adventuring (more girl’s own here). The reality of Alexander Mackendrick’s film is decidedly antithetical to that; there’s a lingering feeling, despite A High Wind in Jamaica ’s pirates largely observing their distance, that things could turn rather nasty (and indeed, if Richard Hughes’ 1929 novel  had been followed to the letter, they would have more explicitly). 

Duffy. That old tangerine hipster.

Duffy (1968) (SPOILERS) It’s appropriate that James Coburn’s title character is repeatedly referred to as an old hipster in Robert Parrish’s movie, as that seemed to be precisely the niche Coburn was carving out for himself in the mid to late 60s, no sooner had Our Man Flint made him a star. He could be found partaking in jaundiced commentary on sexual liberation in Candy, falling headlong into counter culture in The President’s Analyst , and leading it in Duffy . He might have been two decades older than its primary adherents, but he was, to repeat an oft-used phrase here, very groovy. If only Duffy were too.

You have done well to keep so much hair, when so many’s after it.

Jeremiah Johnson (1972) (SPOILERS) Hitherto, I was most familiar with Jeremiah Johnson in the form of a popular animated gif of beardy Robert Redford smiling and nodding in slow zoom close up (a moment that is every bit as cheesy in the film as it is in the gif). For whatever reason, I hadn’t mustered the enthusiasm to check out the 1970s’ The Revenant until now (well, beard-wise, at any rate). It’s easy to distinguish the different personalities at work in the movie. The John Milius one – the (mythic) man against the mythic landscape; the likeably accentuated, semi-poetic dialogue – versus the more naturalistic approach favoured by director Sydney Pollack and star Redford. The fusion of the two makes for a very watchable, if undeniably languorous picture. It was evidently an influence on Dances with Wolves in some respects, although that Best Picture Oscar winner is at greater pains to summon a more sensitive portrayal of Native Americans (and thus, perversely, at times a more patr

You’re a disgrace, sir... Weren’t you at Harrow?

Our Man in Marrakesh aka Bang! Bang! You’re Dead (1966) (SPOILERS) I hadn’t seen this one in more than three decades, and I had in mind that it was a decent spy spoof, well populated with a selection of stalwart British character actors in supporting roles. Well, I had the last bit right. I wasn’t aware this came from the stable of producer Harry Alan Towers, less still of his pedigree, or lack thereof, as a sort of British Roger Corman (he tried his hand at Star Wars with The Shape of Things to Come and Conan the Barbarian with Gor , for example). More legitimately, if you wish to call it that, he was responsible for the Christopher Lee Fu Manchu flicks. Our Man in Marrakesh – riffing overtly on Graham Greene’s Our Man in Havana in title – seems to have in mind the then popular spy genre and its burgeoning spoofs, but it’s unsure which it is; too lightweight to work as a thriller and too light on laughs to elicit a chuckle.

My Doggett would have called that crazy.

The X-Files 9.4: 4-D I get the impression no one much liked Agent Monica Reyes (Annabeth Gish), but I felt, for all the sub-Counsellor Troi, empath twiddling that dogged her characterisation, she was a mostly positive addition to the series’ last two years (of its main run). Undoubtedly, pairing her with Doggett, in anticipation of Gillian Anderson exiting just as David Duchovny had – you rewatch these seasons and you wonder where her head was at in hanging on – made for aggressively facile gender-swapped conflict positions on any given assignment. And generally, I’d have been more interested in seeing how two individuals sympathetic to the cause – her and Mulder – might have got on. Nevertheless, in an episode like 4-D you get her character, and Doggett’s, at probably their best mutual showing.

I tell you, it saw me! The hanged man’s asphyx saw me!

The Asphyx (1972) (SPOILERS) There was such a welter of British horror from the mid 60s to mid 70s, even leaving aside the Hammers and Amicuses, that it’s easy to lose track of them in the shuffle. This one, the sole directorial effort of Peter Newbrook (a cameraman for David Lean, then a cinematographer), has a strong premise and a decent cast, but it stumbles somewhat when it comes to taking that premise any place interesting. On the plus side, it largely eschews the grue. On the minus, directing clearly wasn’t Newbrook’s forte, and even aided by industry stalwart cinematographer Freddie Young (also a go-to for Lean), The Aspyhx is stylistically rather flat.

The best thing in the world for the inside of a man or a woman is the outside of a horse.

Marnie (1964) (SPOILERS) Hitch in a creative ditch. If you’ve read my Vertigo review, you’ll know I admired rather than really liked the picture many fete as his greatest work. Marnie is, in many ways, a redux, in the way De Palma kept repeating himself in the early 80s only significantly less delirious and… well, compelling. While Marnie succeeds in commanding the attention fitfully, it’s usually for the wrong reasons. And Hitch, digging his heels in as he strives to fashion a star against public disinterest – he failed to persuade Grace Kelly out of retirement for Marnie Rutland – comes entirely adrift with his leads.

Just wait. They’ll start listing side effects like the credits at the end of a movie.

Contagion  (2011) (SPOILERS) The plandemic saw Contagion ’s stock soar, which isn’t something that happens too often to a Steven Soderbergh movie. His ostensibly liberal outlook has hitherto found him on the side of the little people (class action suits) and interrogating the drugs trade while scrupulously avoiding institutional connivance (unless it’s Mexican institutional connivance). More recently, The Laundromat ’s Panama Papers puff piece fell fall flat on its face in attempting broad, knowing satire (in some respects, this is curious, as The Informant! is one of Soderbergh’s better-judged films, perhaps because it makes no bones about its maker’s indifference towards its characters). There’s no dilution involved with Contagion , however. It amounts to a bare-faced propaganda piece, serving to emphasise that the indie-minded director is Hollywood establishment through and through. This is a picture that can comfortably sit alongside any given Tinseltown handwringing over the Wa