Review: The Trip to Spain


Comedically inclined colleagues/rivals Steve Coogan and Rob Brydon reunite for another culinary road trip, continually trying to one-up each other along the way.



Filmmaker Michael Winterbottom (“The Trip”, “24 Hour Party People”) and stars Steve Coogan and Rob Brydon pretty much steer the ship back on course with their third outing. This 2017 film thankfully corrects many of the mistakes made in the previous “Trip to Italy”, which was virtually a repeat of the first film’s best bits done poorly, and with the roles unsuitably reversed. Rob Brydon as a sleazy ‘pants man’? I don’t think so. This time out Brydon is back to being his affable, mild-mannered (if to some rather irritatingly eager to amuse with rapid-fire impressions) self, and Coogan continues to project a maturing version of the self he first offered up in the original “Trip” (These aren’t documentaries, and so obviously the actors/comedians are at best playing fictionalised versions of themselves). Here he’s less randy mid-life crisis and more self-reflective and a bit beyond the sports cars and skirt-chasing phase of his life. They’re an interesting couple of characters.



Things get off to a good start with a very funny bit involving domesticated Brydon eager to escape noisy young children at home. I don’t necessarily believe it, but it’s funny at least. Also funny? Three films/seasons in and the two stars still won’t acknowledge that they’re clearly good friends. There’s also a genuinely funny bit where Brydon reads a travel guide as the late Sir Roger Moore (‘We filmed much of “Moonraker” here…’). As always, the two stars comedic riffing and impressions provide the highlights, with funny duelling Mick Jaggers, with Rob even doing Mick doing Sir Michael Caine, leading to Brydon then doing a Michael Caine bit (A later bit of Mick doing Shakespeare is funny, too). Meanwhile, Brydon’s patented ‘Small man in a box’ routine is better integrated into this one than the previous film in a larger joke between the two stars this time. Also, 23 minutes in and Brydon actually makes Coogan smile. A minute later he makes him laugh, and laugh harder a minute later. Mr. Coogan and Mr. Brydon are actually rather fond of each other, folks. It’s unmistakable. It also helps that Brydon’s tumour joke is quite funny. Brydon getting pissed off at Coogan constantly referring to “Philomena” is hilariously petty. Brydon telling a story about how David Bowie very nearly said his name on TV is funny enough on its own, but Coogan’s reaction to Bowie following Brydon on Twitter is priceless. Admittedly neither of their David Bowie impersonations is very good, but Coogan’s is better. In fact, Coogan overall wins out on the impressions front in this film. As good as Brydon’s Terry Wogan impersonation always is on “Would I Lie to You?”, Coogan does a great one in this. He also does a good Michael Palin, and rightly points out that Brydon’s Marlon Brando is really just an impersonation of Brando’s “Godfather” character. We also get a good routine with Coogan playing a Spanish Inquisitor stretching Brydon on the rack with the latter hoping to get taller. It’s a fun film, and the stars seem to be more openly enjoying themselves (and each other’s company) than previous outings. Brydon’s best moment in the film, in fact the funniest scene in the film, plays on Brydon’s inability to shut the fuck up and stop performing. The guy just can’t help himself and we wouldn’t want it any other way.



On the downside, Brydon’s Scaramanga/Christopher Lee isn’t as good as Coogan’s in the previous film, but Coogan does do a rather good John Hurt at one point and Brydon does a great Sean Connery. Along with his Sir Ian McKellen (Coogan’s sounds too much like Peter O’Toole), it’s one of the few times Brydon comes out on top here. There were a lot of dull spots in the previous film, but none this time out. In fact, my only problem with the film is that of the three this is the only one where I felt completely aware that I was watching a TV series edited together. It was far more seamless in previous films.



It’s a solid 90 minutes or so of entertainment and a definite improvement over the previous film. However, if the series is to continue, I suggest they venture somewhere outside Europe next time. That part of the franchise is getting a tad stale.



Rating: B-

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Review: Hellraiser (2022)

Review: Cinderella (1950)

Review: Eugenie de Sade