Two reviews, two rather different films. One contains lots of marmalade, the other contains lots of blood. Which one\u2019s which, well, you\u2019ll just have to work out that conundrum for your good old self.<\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
Paddington 3<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The first Paddingto<\/em>n film was a breath of fresh air. It was a nice little distraction for all the family with some creative animation and a general warm atmosphere. It was weird thinking that Paul King, the guy who created The Mighty Boosh<\/em>, a beloved series that I\u2019d watched from a (far too) young age, could be helming such a wholesome endeavour. But it worked. That scene with the bathtub scared my younger cousin silly. But I guess seeing all that chaos could be traumatising at a young age.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Paddington 2<\/em>, though? That was a different kind of ursine beast entirely. It was the\u00a0Shrek 2<\/em>\u00a0of sequels. The\u00a0Spiderman 2<\/em>\u00a0of sequels. The\u00a0Terminator 2: Judgement Day<\/em>\u00a0of Sequels. The\u00a0Blade Runner 2049<\/em>\u00a0of sequels.\u00a0The Dark Knight<\/em>\u00a0of sequels. The Godfather Part II <\/em>of sequels.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Ok. That\u2019s enough autistic superior sequel film mentions for now. Anyway, the point is that Paddington 2<\/em> was outstanding. So outstanding, in fact, that Nicolas Cage and Pedro Pascal made sure to wax lyrical about it in\u00a0The Unbearable Weight of Massive Talent<\/em>. Everybody loves it. So naturally, when the third part was announced, expectations were high.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Signs were off, however, when King announced back in 2023 that he wouldn\u2019t be helming the project. Without King\u2019s distinctive quirky style, it didn\u2019t seem like the threequel had much of a chance. Whenever there\u2019s a change of director in a franchise, there\u2019s always that worry of inconsistency. Well, hopefully they\u2019ll bring in a director with a bit of experience. So, they chose Dougal Wilson. His previous filmography consists of…uh, nothing. He\u2019s directed some John Lewis Christmas adverts though. Yay? I guess there\u2019s nothing wrong with trying out fresh talent, but with the previous film\u2019s legions of fans, I\u2019d have thought they\u2019d have gone with a more seasoned creator.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The film\u2019s got a nice feel, and it\u2019s not quite as bad as everyone been saying, but it\u2019s still the most rotten orange of the trilogy. It basically follows Paddington searching for Aunt Lucy in Peru after she goes missing from her retired bears home. Ultimately, it\u2019s\u00a0The Godfather III<\/em>\u00a0of threequels. Hey,\u00a0The Godfather<\/em>\u00a0uses oranges as a metaphor for death, right? Whoa. I made a connection right there. It also doesn\u2019t benefit from virtually reusing the same scene from the first film and trying to reintroduce a beloved character from the second film in the closing scene. It just feels like some cynical nostalgia baiting.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n Also, the film is lacking with the absence of Sally Hawkins. Hawkins has claimed she just felt her time with the series was finished, but it seems like something fishy (marmade-y?) might me going on there? Who knows. But since Mrs Brown was the heart of the family and the one who brought the bear into her home, her absence is definitely felt. The villains are fairly bland in comparison to the other films. Let\u2019s face it, you\u2019re not going to beat Hugh Grant\u2019s devious Felix Buchanan, but I was still expecting some more entertaining bad guys. Paddington in Peru<\/em>\u00a0is a disappointing conclusion to the franchise, which could\u2019ve done with a bit more creative, marmalade-flavoured juice. This joint\u2019s getting a hard Paddington stare.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Heretic<\/p>\n\n\n\n Speaking of Hugh Grant though, he\u2019s certainly been having a renaissance with bad guy characters over the last few years. A Granaissance, perhaps? While Phoenix was a cartoonish villain, however, Grant leans into full evil bastard territory here as Mr Reed, a shady individual who invites Mormon Sisters Barnes and Paxton into his home feigning interest in their religion. And he\u2019s certainly interested in religion generally. Just not in the way they were hoping. Anyway, even if you didn\u2019t have any idea of plot going into the film, then the A24 logo at the beginning, a studio steeped in horror classics like\u00a0Hereditary<\/em>\u00a0and\u00a0Midsomer<\/em>, lets you know things are going to go sideways. Or, in this case, inwards, as Reed forces the girls to challenge their faith by going through a series of doors in his darkened house.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Directors Scott Beck and Bryan Woods have cited the films\u00a0Contact<\/em>\u00a0and\u00a0Inherit the Wind<\/em>\u00a0as major influences, but\u00a0Heretic<\/em>\u00a0is also steeped in the traditional psychological horror halls of\u00a0Misery<\/em>, particularly with the isolated, snowy landscape surrounding Reed\u2019s abode. The pace is decidedly slow, so could try the patience of some. And don\u2019t expect to venture too far away from the house.\u00a0\u00a0Heretic<\/em> also makes a nice change to a constant flow of cheap shock horror, dealing out tension and dread through more subtle avenues. Violence is present but used sparingly, only introducing gory moments during the final act. Its portrayal of violence against women apparently drew criticism from the Latter-day Saints Church, but\u00a0Heretic<\/em>\u00a0largely deals in psychological tricks.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n The film also marks Hugh Grant\u2019s first proper foray into the realm of horror, and he does a fantastic job with minimal body language, instead relying on subverting his mannered British accent into a source of terror for the Barnes and Paxton as they try to escape. Beck and Woods claimed to be inspired by Grant\u2019s multiple roles in Cloud Atlas<\/em>, and it\u2019s clear that Grant is just as effective here sticking to a single maniacal role. The glacial pacing might not be for everyone, but it\u2019s worth investing in this chilly, haunting tale on a crisp November night.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" Two reviews, two rather different films. One contains lots of marmalade, the other contains lots of blood. Which one\u2019s which, well, you\u2019ll just have to work out that conundrum for your good old self.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1652","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/nancyepton.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1652","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/nancyepton.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/nancyepton.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nancyepton.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nancyepton.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1652"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/nancyepton.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1652\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1653,"href":"https:\/\/nancyepton.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1652\/revisions\/1653"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/nancyepton.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1652"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nancyepton.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1652"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nancyepton.co.uk\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1652"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}