‘Paddington in Peru’ is a Wonderful Adventure Not Just for Kids, But the Whole Family

I initially avoided the “Paddington” movies upon their initial release. Watching the trailer for the first one had me under the belief that the filmmakers were determined to dumb down the classic works of Michael Bond as I watched the beloved bear clean out his ears with toothbrushes and almost eating what was on them. Yuck! Plus, Colin Firth, who was originally supposed to voice Paddington, dropped out of the original film during post production, and this did not give me a lot of hope for the final version which was eventually going to be unveiled before a worldwide audience.

Alas, I was proven wrong with not only “Paddington,” but also with “Paddington 2” which proved to be an even better film than the original. “Paddington 2” also earned a rare 100% score on Rotten Tomatoes for a time before some bastard critic made the blasphemous decision to give it that one negative review. I would shudder to call them kid movies as that would simply mean they were meant for a certain age group and only that one group. Truth is, these are movies for the whole family, just like the best Pixar films are, and they have something for every age group to enjoy. Hollywood does not make enough movies like them these days, and they threaten to become a rarity now more than ever before.

The same goes with “Paddington in Peru,” the third movie in this beloved franchise which arrives to us seven years after “Paddington 2.” After watching this marmalade loving bear and the only creature, animal or human, who can make a red hat look cool these days, brave the adventures London has thrust upon him, he now returns to Darkest Peru where he once grew up. This time, it’s personal! Granted, that last sentence was the tagline for “Jaws: The Revenge,” one of the worst films, let alone sequels, ever made, but it seems inescapably appropriate to use here.

His sudden exodus from London comes when he is told that his Aunt Lucy (voiced by Imelda Staunton) has gone missing from the Home for Retired Bears, and no one can find her. Joining him on this expedition is the Brown family: Henry (Hugh Bonneville), Mary (Emily Mortimer), Judy (Madeleine Harris), Jonathan (Samuel Joslin), and Mrs. Bird (Julie Walters). Through thick and thin, the Browns have had Paddington’s back even as this bear’s adventures have proven to be as exasperating as they have been thrilling.

What I really love about the “Paddington” movies is how wonderfully realized the human characters are. Just when I expected they would be rendered as one-dimensional doofuses, they prove to be more complex than the average family movie would allow them to be. I also love how the kids have evolved from then to now as this is not always the case in movies, let alone sequels.

And like any good sequel, “Paddington in Peru” does take the time to introduce new characters into the mix. Among them is Hunter Cabot, a tour guide and treasure hunter played by Antonio Banderas, who is clearly having the time of his life in this role. In addition, he gets to play many members of Hunter’s family from generations before him, and it results in one memorably hilarious moment after another.

But even better is the ever so brilliant Olivia Colman who steals every scene she has here as the Reverend Mother who oversees the Home for Retired Bears. She makes a grand entrance singing a song which almost turns “Paddington in Peru” a musical along the lines of “The Sound of Music,” and when she finished, the need to applaud her efforts was quite justified. Also, I love how her voice says one thing, but her eyes are quick to say something else. Seriously, watching Colman’s eyes dart back and forth is a wonderful delight throughout.

Hugh Bonneville remains an entertaining presence as Henry Brown who always goes from being an uptight dad to a loving and risk taking individual even when a tarantula presents an unwelcome presence in his life. I also love how Madeleine Harris and Samuel Joslin continue to grow into their roles as Judy and Jonathan, and watching them traverse the perils of adolescence into adulthood is a welcome sight for me. As for then lovely Emily Mortimer, she does a lovely job of stepping into the role once inhabited by Sally Hawkins of Mary Brown to where calling her a replacement would be insulting and unfair to both her and Hawkins.

And at the center of it all is Ben Whishaw who once again voices Paddington to where it would be unthinkable to consider anyone else in this role. Right from the start, Whishaw has given this bear we all want to look after a solid dignity and politeness which might seem far too easily manipulative in the hands of any other actor. Some will be quick to say that the computer did all the work for Whishaw here, but he adds to the visual effects in an immeasurably way to where when Paddington gives an adversary that hard stare, he makes that stare even harder than it already is, and we should all be expecting that at some point here.

Of all the “Paddington” movies to date, “Paddington in Peru” is the least of the three. I don’t say this to degrade it in any way as saying the least does it more justice than calling it the worst as doing so would be a grave insult. Granted, this one threatens to be a more formulaic adventure movie as we watch Paddington go from unfamiliar surroundings to more familiar ones, but this sequel still proves to be a wonderful adventure for all ages, and that is saying quite a bit in this day and age.

And, as always, I leave you with the immortal words of Michael Bond which continue to speak volumes:

“Please look after this bear. Thank you.”

Also, when it comes to the online attacks Tony Farinella and I continue to get, I feel the need to add this:

“Please look after this film critic. Thank you.”

* * * ½ out of * * * *

‘The Garfield Movie’ – This is Not the Cat I Was Looking For

I grew up on Jim Davis’ “Garfield.” I loved this lazy cat whose affection for lasagna and reveling in his own laziness and selfishness often had me laughing quite uncontrollably. I even got my first-grade teacher to initiate a celebration which I proudly called “National Number One Garfield Day” which my classmates were eager to participate in. And yes, I reveled in those animated classic television episodes in which the orange tabby cat was voiced by the late great Lorenzo Music who perfectly captured Garfield’s sarcasm, gluttony and eventual self-awareness without missing a beat.

Years later, Hollywood brought Garfield to the silver screen, but with limited, if any, critical success. While the 2004 live action “Garfield” movie had the brilliant Bill Murray voicing the infamous cat, the story felt more like a “Toy Story” clone instead of representing the feline we all grew to love in our youth. And seriously, when we see Jon Arbuckle get lucky with someone of the opposite sex, I have to believe something is rotten in the state of Denmark.

Now we have “The Garfield Movie” which brings the infamous cat back to the animation realm with Chris Pratt voicing him. It starts off introducing Garfield into the age of the internet and apps as he proceeds to order an obscene amount of Italian food which he scarfs down in record time. Following this, we jump back in time to when he seemingly gets abandoned by his father and ends up wandering into an Italian restaurant across the street where he meets Jon Arbuckle who is all by his lonesome eating a pepperoni pizza. They quickly form an unbreakable bond as Jon, like us, cannot resist this cat’s infinite cuteness in the slightest.

At the start, it looks like “Garfield The Movie” is going to respect the comic strip’s history perfectly as it acknowledges this feline’s love of lasagna among other things, and it was a kick to see him land flat on Jon’s face while he is in bed as if to tell this human, “Get up asshole, make me breakfast!” But from there, Garfield and everyone else is thrown into a story which is generic at best.

While doing a raid on the refrigerator for midnight snacks, Garfield and Odie get kidnapped by a Shar Pei and a Whippet who take them to an abandoned mall where they meet Jinx, a Persian cat who is bent on revenge against Garfield’s father, Vic, who abandoned Jinx at a very inopportune moment. While Garfield wants nothing to Vic after all they have been through, the both of them quickly realize they need one another in order to secure their freedoms and obtain an obscene volume of milk for just one cat.

From there, this movie goes into the usual tug and pull of a father trying to make amends to a child he wasn’t there for, and a child who wants nothing to do with a parent they feel abandoned by. I think you have a good idea of where the story goes from there as it goes through the usual tropes and cliches father-son motion pictures have to offer, and it quickly became apparent to me that this was no “Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade.”

On top of that, there is a lot of retconning going on here. Those who kept up with the comic strip know Garfield reunited with his mother at one point, and this gave the orange cat more dimension than he had previously. Here, he reunites with his father, and it doesn’t have the same dramatic heft. Also, Odie is made to look like some super genius whom Garfield can only dream of being as smart as. But one of the delights of the comic strip is how Odie is as dumb as a post, so this dog’s genius behavior feels completely out of place.

And when it comes to Garfield’s relationship with Jon Arbuckle, it is much too loving to where there is no drama between owner and cat found here. Garfield revels in his selfish endeavors to where Jon is constantly infuriated beyond repair, and none of this animosity is found here. I kept waiting for Jon to admonish Garfield for playing with the power seat in his car or for eating a fern plant he just bought. But no, they just get along all too well here. Even a trip to the vet feels routine, and I remember just how terrified Garfield was about going to the vet.

As much as I wanted to appreciate what director Mark Dindal and company did here, and there’s no doubt kids will enjoy this movie, I really came out of this cinematic endeavor feeling like this wasn’t the Garfield I grew up on in the slightest. Moreover, as we watch Garfield traverse a critical portion of Lactose Farms where every conceivable form of security was put in place, it only reminded of infinitely superior scenes in Pixar films like “Monsters Inc.” That the “Mission Impossible” theme plays at one point is no surprise, and it made my eyes roll as this addition feels much too obvious.

The voice cast is clearly having a lot fun here. Chris Pratt clearly revels in voicing Garfield, and he does a good job even though he still can’t hold a candle to Lorenzo Music. Samuel L. Jackson is an inspired choice to play Garfield’s father, Vic, and I say this even though I kept waiting for the bad ass motherfucker within Jackson to erupt. Yes, this is a family movie, but still…

If there is one cast member to single out above all others, it is Ving Rhames who voices Otto, a bull and former mascot for Lactose Farms who is pining to be reunited with his long-lost love. While he could have played this lovelorn bull as if he was in on the joke, Rhames instead plays this animated character ever so straight to where his dramatic pauses provide the biggest laughs this film has to offer.

For what it’s worth, “Garfield The Movie” is bound to delight the kids, and their parents are bound to watch it with them hundreds of times once it arrives on physical and digital media. Still, I came out of it frustrated as this really didn’t feel like the Garfield I know and love. Instead, you have an orange tabby cat stuck in a movie with a story unbefitting to his legacy and easily pales in comparison to the average animated classic.

Perhaps Garfield as a character has long since outlived his usefulness in popular culture. Jim Davis’ creation is nowhere as popular today as it was back in the 1980’s, and perhaps studio executives are afraid of making this orange tabby cat look as lazy in this age of Me Too, Times Up and an intense desire for true representation in Hollywood.

All of this reminds me of a scene in “Here Comes Garfield” in which Garfield attempts to explain to Jon, without words, why Odie didn’t come home with him after they both went outside to play. Jon, of course, doesn’t understand what Garfield is describing to him in the slightest, and Garfield ends up telling him ever so dryly:

“What we have here is a failure to communicate.”

When it comes to Garfield and Hollywood, this still remains the case.

* * out of * * * *

Exclusive Interview with Lorene Scafaria about ‘The Meddler’

While recently going through my large archive of interviews I have done over the years, I came across the one I did with filmmaker Lorene Scafaria on her film “The Meddler.” Released in 2015, it stars the great Susan Sarandon as Marnie Minervini, an aging widow who, to cure herself of loneliness and heartbreak, moves from New Jersey to Los Angles to be closer to her daughter, Lori (Rose Byrne). In the process of trying to restart her life, Marnie starts getting a little too involved in Lori’s life to where her daughter gets increasingly aggravated, she comes to make various new friends she desperately wants to help out, and she becomes especially friendly with a retired policeman named Randall Zipper (J.K. Simmons) to where a new chapter in her life begins to form.

Born in Holmdel, New Jersey, Scafaria previously wrote and directed “Seeking a Friend for the End of the World” which stars Steve Carrell and Keira Knightley as strangers who form an unexpected bond, and she penned the screenplay for “Nick & Norah’s Infinite Playlist,” a romantic comedy starring Michael Cera and Kat Dennings. Since making ‘The Meddler,” she gave us “Hustlers” which featured a critically acclaimed performance by Jennifer Lopez which somehow got snubbed by the Oscars, and she has directed several episodes of the acclaimed HBO series “Succession.”

I had a lot of fun talking with Scafaria about “The Meddler” and how the screenplay was inspired by similar situations with her mother. We also discussed what it was like working with Sarandon and Simmons, and we even talked about the time when she used to fake book reports to get a bunch of Pizza Hut gift certificates. It turns out she was not the only one who did such a thing.

Please check out the interview below, and be sure to subscribe to our YouTube channel if you haven’t already. There are many more videos yet to come!

The Meddler” is now available to own and rent on DVD, Blu-ray and Digital.

‘Moon’ – Sam Rockwell Lost in Space

WRITER’S NOTE: This review was written in 2010, long before a certain actor in this film became quite the pariah.

You know, in retrospect, maybe 2009 wasn’t such a bad year for science fiction movies. It’s just that the stench from some of the biggest movies in that genre lasted much longer than the memories we had of the movies we saw.

With “X-Men Origins: Wolverine,” we sadly watched a strong franchise fall victim to a prequel which lacked the thrills and the complex characters that made the three previous entries so good. “Terminator Salvation” will probably be remembered best for Christian Bale’s angry rant on set than with what ended up onscreen.

And then came “Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen,” and I still have the impulse to bitch and moan about that sequel whenever necessary. Michael Bay left a giant robot turd for us which we just couldn’t resist seeing, so it of course made hundreds of millions of dollars. It put such an enormous dent in my enjoyment of things science fiction, and I am still getting over my frustration with it even after all this time.

But getting past that awful stench, there were a number of sci-fi gems to be found in 2009. “Star Trek” turned out to be an enormous surprise and a fantastic piece of entertainment. Imagine that, a prequel heading in unpredictable directions. And although I keep running into more and more haters of this one, “Avatar” for me was a great reminder of why experiencing movies on the big screen with an audience can be so much fun. And let us not forget “District 9,” a film that paralleled the Apartheid movement which overtook South Africa for far too long. These films were so good that I believe they will stand the test of time as opposed to the others which let me down to an infinite degree.

And then there is “Moon” which came out in limited release and did not have the same publicity as those big blockbusters did. This one proved to be the most thought provoking and original sci-fi movie of 2009. Granted, it does borrow from many classics of the genre like “2001” and “Alien” to name a few, but first-time director Duncan Jones takes all these influences and molds them into a motion picture which feels very fresh compared to what we generally get year to year. Jones is also aided greatly by another in a long line of superb performances from Sam Rockwell who is more or less doing a solo show this time out.

Rockwell plays Sam Bell, an employee of Lunar Industries who is under a 3-year contract to extract Helium-3 from the moon’s surface; a natural gas which will provide much needed clean energy back on Earth. You would figure he would get more than just a robot companion as company during all this time far from home. But I guess corporations managed to find a way to cut the whole workforce down to one person in the future, hence saving them an obscene amount of money for themselves. Sam’s only human contact is the messages he gets from his wife and infant daughter as well as his superiors who are always checking on his progress. For him, it must be like staying at “The Shining’s” Overlook Hotel with outer space to deal with instead of snow. But at least here, he is spaced out instead of snowed in.

While doing his daily work on the land rover, Sam crashes and is knocked unconscious. When Sam comes to, he is back in the lunar base but has no idea of how he got back. He also ends up hallucinating to where he sees a little girl he does not know. In short, a number of things happen to where he goes outside the base and back to the damaged harvester to find someone barely alive: himself. To reveal more would be criminal because it would spoil the many surprises this film has for you.

For a moment, I thought “Moon” was an adaptation of another Philip K. Dick novel like “Blade Runner” or “Total Recall.” It turns out, however, it is not, but “Moon” does deal with some of the same themes. How would you feel if one day you woke up and found you were not who you thought you were? Would you continue on in life if you found you were nothing more than a copy of another person? How long can a secret be kept before it comes out into the open? While scientists may continue to play around with the evolution of human beings, they can never fully control the desires and actions of them. Throughout history, humanity has always found a way to break through its collective suppression to get at a reality which cannot be forever contained.

As I said, “Moon” borrows from many other sci-fi movies. The design of the lunar base looks much like the Nostromo from “Alien,” and a lot of the lettering and fonts seem very similar to those seen in “Aliens.” And there is no mistaking the influence “2001: A Space Odyssey” had on this film, especially with Sam’s robot companion GERTY (voiced by Kevin Spacey). Instead of an eerie looking red dot like HAL, GERTY has a smiley face which illustrates the different emotions which better relate to Sam’s emotional needs. This is that same smiley face Wal-Mart co-opted, and although this company is not mentioned here, seeing that icon makes me believe this particular corporate monolith may very well have the last laugh on the unions and remain more dominant in the future. Be afraid. Be very afraid…

Other directors would just take these elements and throw them up onto the screen without much forethought. Jones, however, takes all these familiar elements and more than makes them his own. “Moon” looks familiar in some ways, but it feels quite unique in others.

But what is especially impressive about “Moon” is how it was made for only $5 million dollars. Most sci-fi movies these days cost at least $150 million, and this does not include advertising and other promotion costs. Heck, when I see a sci-fi movie that costs only $30 million, I expect subpar effects and am usually forgiving about them. But Jones takes the budget he has and makes everything look like it cost ten times as much. I guess this further proves what Robert Rodriguez said about having less money forces you to be more creative.

“Moon” also benefits from an excellent music score by Clint Mansell whose career as a film composer keeps getting better and better. His music adds a strong emotional quality that strengthens our need to understand Sam on an emotional level. Ever since “Pi” and “Requiem for a Dream,” Mansell has proven to be one of the most original sounding composers working today, and the musical themes he typically deals with are perfectly suited to this kind of material.

In the end though, this is Rockwell’s show, and he has quite a challenge as he is essentially acting opposite himself. You have to wonder how an actor plays off of himself and yet makes it look so natural at the same time. Rockwell has become better known for playing bad guys or heavies in mainstream movies, but he is more than capable of playing outside of that and continues to prove so in movies like this, “Frost/Nixon,” and “Choke” to name a few. In giving his character a strong complexity to someone who may not really actually be human ends up forcing you to identify more with something which may simply look like a machine from the outside. As a result, you could say that “Moon” also has a bit of “A.I.: Artificial Intelligence” in it as well.

And I do not want to leave out Kevin Spacey whose voice as GERTY creates a soothing trust Sam wants to hold on to and, at other times, test. GERTY is HAL but without the homicidal tendencies, and that has to be reassuring if you are stuck on the moon with no one else but a robot. Spacey makes GERTY seem like more than just a robot, and he makes us see how GERTY more in common with Sam than at first glance.

“Moon” is easily one of the most intelligent sci-fi movies of 2009, and it got lost in the shuffle of all the other big Hollywood releases, both bad and good. It deserves a long shelf life at your local video store, if there are any left where you live. In the end, it will last much longer in the memory than Michael Bay’s desecration of all things Hasbro. But enough of that one already…

* * * * out of * * * *