southdavid

Having finally gotten back around to watching the first season of "The Trip", as it appeared on a "Guardian's Best of the Year" list, I decide to crack straight on into season two. Which was similar, obviously, but remains an enjoyable time.

Just as a role in an American TV show is coming to an end, Steve Coogan gets a call from Rob Brydon. Based on their previous culinary tour, which Brydon turned into a book, the Observer would finance a second trip, this time around the restaurants of Italy. The pair take a convertible mini on the tour and talk about culture, comedy and impressions. Coogan is reflective on the distance both physical and emotional, between himself and his son Joe. Meanwhile Rob auditions, via video, for a Michael Mann film.

As with the first season, I'd imagine that your tolerance for the content in "The Trip" varies and I would say that if you don't like one episode, don't try and persevere because that's all there is. Fortunately, I do quite like the content. They fire, often improvised, barbs at each other and regularly bring out the same few impressions. It's repetitive, sure - but it's also two top comedians going at each other. Call me an old romantic, but the best moments are the ones where one genuinely makes the other laugh, which are few and far between, but do occasionally happen.

There is a plot under all these kitchen shots and fine foods being placed on tables. They are both starting to head towards the lives they looked enviously at each other for. This time Rob gets to have the affair with the attractive young woman and go for the Hollywood film - whereas Steve heads towards the conclusions that no amount of fame or success is better than being around his family. We'll see come season three whether that is still the case.

I really like the show and could listen to them ad lib at each other all day. It'll not be long before I start season three.

So, perhaps not an ideal scenario but If I'm going to see as many films at the cinema as I can in 2025, I'm going to have to make some decisions like this. I haven't actually seen the first or second "Sonic the Hedgehog" films but I assumed that it wouldn't be so complicated a narrative that I couldn't just pick it up (it wasn't).

The happy life of Sonic the Hedgehog (Ben Schwartz) and his new family is upended when Shadow (Keanu Reeves) a second and more powerful alien Hedgehog, who is driven by the loss of a friend in his past, escapes from his cryogenic cell and begins a battle with G. U. N. Thoroughly defeated in their initial encounter, the team make the dangerous choice to team with their sworn enemy Doctor Robotnik (Jim Carrey) as they discover that Robotnik's technology is being used by someone else, both to release Shadow and to wage war on G. U. N

I've got to be honest and say that I'm surprised at how positive the reviews I'm seeing for the film are. There were several elements of this that I really didn't like, chief amongst them was the dual roles for Carrey as Robotnik and his grandfather. I'm probably not the target audience, I know, but I just found his constant gurning to be tiresome and the weird laser dance break a particular low point. I didn't particularly like the pop culture riffing from Sonic either - though generally I was OK with the performances from Schwartz, O'Shaughnessey and Idris Elba, as Team Sonic and particularly from Keanu Reeves as Shadow.

I could have done without James Marsden and Tiki Sumpter as Team Sonic's human parents, though I'm ready to assume that they played much more important roles in the previous films and so excuses were needed to keep them around in this one. It's not until reading the Wikipedia page that I discovered that they are the Wachowski's - wild. In fact, any time there was just a human character on screen it was a bit of a drag.

I liked how they work the Chao characters into the film though and enjoyed whatever game references that they could work in.

I did not think that this was good - but there were a few elements of it that at least have me intrigued enough to go on and watch the other two films.

I'd never seen "Yesterday" but some recent Beatles chat, inspired by Paul McCartney's concerts in Manchester led me to give it a try. It's sweet, but slight.

Struggling singer songwriter Jack Malik (Himesh Patel) becomes the only person in the world to remember the songs of the Beatles, following an unexplained worldwide blackout. He discovers that not only have they been forgotten, they seem to have never existed. He begins to perform Beatles songs, initially to appreciative but small audiences, until his story hits the local news and Ed Sheeran asks him to open for him on a World Tour. His successes take him further away from Lowestoft and his manager, and friend Ellie Appleton (Lily James) who has always been in love with Jack.

This doesn't feel like valid criticism of the film, as it's a romantic fantasy at heart and the mechanics of how it works aren't the point, but just to get it out. I don't think you could just release the Beatles songs as an unknown and have quite the same impact. The Beatles were influenced by the culture that they encountered at the time and the songs work within that context. The Beatles also dramatically changed music afterwards, with a proliferation of bands inspired by them around the world - which perhaps isn't properly reflected in the film.

The actual film though is solid and entertaining enough, but it's a fairly standard romantic comedy with the Beatles songs used to elevate the material. Patel's performance, including his live performances of the songs is good. Perhaps the films biggest stretch is the idea that he wouldn't be in love with Ellie anyway. The performances from Ed Sheeran and from Kate McKinnon are maybe a little more questionable, but there's a strong collection of British film and TV stars to fill out the cast. There's also an uncredited role for Robert Carlyle late on that is quite emotional.

I can't imagine I'll revisit the film very often, but it was diverting enough.