"Ted 2" Bearable, and Sometimes Not

Ted 2, is the sequel to writer, director, and actor Seth MacFarlene's, creator of such hit animated comedy TV shows like Family Guy and American Dad, hit 2012 comedy, Ted. MacFarlene returns as the voice of Ted the foul-mouthed pot smoking teddy bear, alongside Mark Wahlberg returning as John Bennett, Ted's best friend since John was a child and wished on a shooting star for Ted to come alive. In this film we see the "thunder buddies" as Ted gets married to his girlfriend, Tammy-Lynn (Jessica Barth). But after a year of marriage, Ted and Tammy don't seem to get along and are constantly bickering. What can possibly save their marriage? Having a child of course! But since Ted does not have the male requirements to produce a child with his wife, he needs a sperm donor. But things don't go so well including a fiasco at a fertility clinic and with New England Patriots quarterback superstar Tom Brady. The next solution, adoption. But another problem arises as suddenly the government does not recognize Ted as a person. Suddenly the bear loses his job, identity, and his marriage is unrecognizable to the state. Ted with the help of John, and his hired lawyer Sam (Amanda Seyfried), must take this situation to court and regain is identity as a person. Now I had a blast with the first movie, I think it is one of the most enjoyable, entertaining, and funniest comedies in recent years. This film has good intentions to go bigger, grander, funnier, and even a little more complex and meaningful. Good ingredients for a more than tolerable sequel. It does that, but at the same time it does not go fully all the way or it tries too hard, leaving for an adequate at most movie. 


One thing the film has going for it is the performance and dynamic chemistry between MacFarlene and Wahlberg. Like the first movie, their chemistry on screen is great and they turn great quips and jokes together. You really believe these characters are best friends. When a new character enters the mix, like Seyfried's Sam, she is pretty likable too and quickly picks up joining Ted and John's dynamic. She seems suited with them and fits in perfectly. I would say that she's even a better female lead than Mila Kunis' character in the first movie. Not that she was bad, her issues were understandable, but most of the time Kunis' character would just complain and nag. Here Sam is all in with Ted and John on the jokes and the misadventures, and it is a lot of fun. Ted's love, Tammy-Lynn, also gets more scenes to shine and be funny, as she plays a more important role than in the first film. There are also other funny characters and cameos that bring a good amount of laughs. But the only problem is that they brought back the villain from the first movie played by Giovanni Ribsi. Why? Ribsi is not bad at all but, why bring him back? Why not have a new villain? Isn't Ted's fight to become and identified person enough conflict? That and he has the same PLOT! To kidnap Ted so he can have him as his own! Why rehash this? I don't know, for the most part the characters are decent, but isn't the point of a sequel to continue on so you can differ from the original?



You'll probably hear this from a million reviews for this movie like this one, but during the first act of the film, the jokes really work and are laugh out loud funny. But then once we get into the main plot and during the third act, that's where they falter. And as jokes continue to bomb, the film then has the need to repeat the good jokes from the first act and even ones from the first movie, and then they are not funny anymore. The jokes even begin to get weird and don't make a lot of sense like one that's supposed to be a Jurassic Park parody, but instead of looking at a herd of majestic dinosaurs, they are looking at fields of pot. There is also one where Amanda Seyfried is singing around a fire and forest animals start to appear, but then other animals start to appear like a penguin, a monkey, and a lobster. How does that make sense? There are jokes like these that just do not hold up. Another problem is at times the film takes itself too seriously, especially the courtroom scenes. There are courrtoom dramas that are great and iconic like To Kill a Mockingbird and A Few Good Men, but I did not pay to see that, I paid to see a comedy about a man and his foul-mouthed teddy bear! They could have been hysterical as well as satirical during these scenes, nobody is stopping them. But then you have to sit through a bunch of predictable cliche's and dramatic moments that are not warrented in a film like this. Again, it's a movie with a live talking teddy bear that curses a lot, and smokes pot out of a bong, why are there scenes that need to be too dramatic. It's almost like this film wants to be an rated R version of Pixar movies like Toy Story, Finding Nemo, and the recent Inside Out, where they are laugh out loud funny but they have good dramatic scenes as well. They are warranted to have those scenes because yes even though those films have tons of comedic elements in them, there is still an engaging and emotional arc to those characters that welcomes drama. Here we have again...A FOUL-MOUTHED TEDDY BEAR THAT DRINKS, MAKES SEX JOKES, AND SMOKES POT! Why does this warrant drama? It's like if Beavis and Butthead suddenly wanted to talk about the Holocaust, it doesn't seem right. I guess Seth MacFarlene wanted to make a sequel that makes an impact and has meaningful themes, and while those intentions are nothing to scoff at, it seriously doesn't work here. 



Like I said before, this movie has worthy intentions and some of the right things to make a good comedy sequel. But the movie does not seem to go all the way, makes little use of its advantages, or all the good stuff is just out poured by lazy rehashes, unfunny jokes, and tired cliches. I won't give this movie a harsh grade, as for people who really liked the first movie, I still recommend it. Really because it has got mixed reaction out of people who either say it's a s good or better than the first one, or this film really does not hold that much to the original. I am personally more on the side of the latter, but you may never know. If you were never a fan or wanted to be of the original film, this will not sway you much. It tried, it had its moments, but it had too much of what he had already seen before, or too much unnecessary elements that really in the brings it down. 

GRADE: AP