Ted 2 (2015)
Content by Tony Macklin. Originally published on June 27, 2015 @ tonymacklin.net.
Comedy is a fickle buddy.
It has to be nourished, or it loses its potency.
When you have someone like Seth MacFarlane in the comedy kitchen, you probably are going to lack nourishment. You certainly crave more wit.
Is it MacFarlane's ego, his streak of nastiness, or his overreach that makes his recipe? Probably all three.
MacFarlane still is recovering from the rancid attempt at comedy in A Million Ways to Die in the West (2014), subtitled The Shat in the Hat. MacFarlane, who "starred" in that movie, is a weak actor, who couldn't even carry a two-gallon hat. Mark Wahlberg couldn't have saved that stage wreck.
MacFarlane has returned to familiar territory in Ted 2. Ted the furry friend (voiced by MacFarlane) and his human buddy John (Wahlberg) are together again. When they're bonding, the movie has life. But otherwise, Ted 2 is pretty much brain dead. It could be titled, The 2 Stooges.
MacFarlane has dragged Giovanni Ribisi to reprise his role from the original. It wasn't any good then. Now it's yesterday's leftovers. Stale and disposable.
MacFarlane has lost Mila Kunis, who is off branding her name on a barrel somewhere in the divine world of advertising. She is adequately replaced by Amanda Seyfried, who plays attorney Samantha, who is a new interest for divorced John. Divorced? He just got married. Don't ask.
Ted marries Tami-Lynn (Jessica Barth) and as their marriage sinks - along with the movie - Ted decides to try to get Tami-Lynn pregnant. That'll be a howl. Or a dirty whimper.
Comedy has to keep its sense of its originality. This year on tv, Veep nearly destroyed itself in the first few episodes of season 4. In its original creativity, Veep took cursing to a new level. It was the best use since Chaucer. The language in Veep was inventive and delightfully crude. It soared.
But in the first episode of this year, Veep lacked its hallmark language. Someone had decided to excise it. Maybe they thought that cleansing would appeal to a more general audience. It might have, but it lost its rare identity. It became just another generic, lame sitcom.
Fortunately someone realized the error of its ways, and went back to its articulate, profane spirit.
MacFarlane has lost his way. There is a little wit in Ted 2, but we see most of those bits in tv ads for the movie.
Seyfried says, "F. Scott Fitzgerald."
Ted responds, "What did he do to you?"
That's worth a smile.
But the wit is obliterated by the glut of attempts at physical comedy, e.g., a deluge at a sperm bank. And the dim-witted racial nonsense that is mere silliness, not sharp parody.
MacFarlane seems to aim at being the 21st century Mel Brooks. But Brooks had/has a more fertile imagination and greater style.
What separates them most is that Brooks possesses a quality that MacFarlane is lacking. Brooks has welcoming geniality.
MacFarlane doesn't.
