An Ode To Timon and Pumbaa, Comedy and Good Friends
Who else loves this dynamic duo?
In every great show there’s a great pair of characters. Buddy movies, comedy duos, they are called. Once Upon A Time..In Hollywood. Suits. Men In Black. Fry and Laurie. And..The Lion King?
Whilst these two aren’t the main characters of the movie they star in so to speak; they are a comforting addition in a collage of colourful and lively characters.
They help Simba stay alive, and stay out of trouble. They got his back when he needed them to distract the hyenas on his return to Pride Rock. They are the cool uncles in the young lion’s life.
Whilst they have been disparaged for making Simba live and aim for a little less in life; I feel that Simba’s time with them was a necessary time of being able to grow up outside the confines of a ‘palace’, and its requisite in-fighting and fratricide. Until he came of age and life led him back to Pride Rock.
Intelligence — Yay or Nay
Much has been said about their perceived intelligence quotient — I would say a passing bystander would probably view them as somewhat comical. Their contrasting sizes (Timon is the wispy meerkat and Pumbaa is the hearty warthog), and also somewhat differing personalities make them an unlikely pairing. That seems to be the intended effect. But after a recent re-watching, I realised Disney must have left a few other Easter eggs that went unnoticed previously by yours truly.
I had always assumed Timon was the wilier of the two.
This is probably still true. Timon displays street smarts and a strong sense of survival. For example, when he observes,
“He’s on top of the food chain!”
and however many times he astutely says,
“Let’s get outta here!”
Still, Pumbaa defies traditional duo roles (where one guy is smarter, and the other musclier).
Rather than merely being the brawny one, Pumbaa has some lines that demonstrate a deep scientific insight or wisdom beyond his warthog years. In doing so, Pumbaa also defies the specifications of his name, which means “foolish or weak-minded” in Swahili.
For example, when he says,
“I always thought they were large balls of gas burning far away from us.”
to describe what he thought stars were.
Or, when he is the one who comes up with the idea that Simba could be a sort of bodyguard/protector,
“Maybe he’ll be on our side.”
Which Timon initially rejects but then takes on as his own idea (a running joke, to me).
Lean On Me
As a matter of fact, more nuanced duo roles that take centre stage are all the rage these days. Spoilers ahead.
For Once Upon A Time In Hollywood, Leonardo Di Caprio plays what his character Rick Dalton self-proclaims a “has-been”, a semi-but-not-quite washed up old-school leading man, with Brad Pitt as his trusty, salt-of-the-earth main guy (stunt double), Cliff Booth. Booth has a (winning) altercation with no less than Bruce Lee, is arguably more mentally stable (though there’s a rumour that he’s killed his wife) and is boss of a lovely pit bull Brandy, a creature that will play a substantial role in the denouement. Dalton, meanwhile has a mini-intra-trailer-breakdown after forgetting some lines (a wink at the actor himself, with his extreme method-acting, perhaps?).
Dalton is the more successful man, in the sense that he lives in a house next to (then) rising movie director Roman Polanski and owns a swanky sports car parked in front of a billboard of his face, whilst in contrast Booth lives in a trailer and dines on canned beans and macaroni at 9pm when he gets off work. But Booth is the moral support that Dalton needs. The former reminds the latter that he’s “Rick ***king Dalton”, i.e. to keep his chin up and not let any of the up-and-coming young upstarts unsettle him. It’s later revealed that Rick had secured the job for Cliff after he went through a hiring freeze because of afore-mentioned rumour of uxoricide.
Of course, both of them display similar chutzpah (Rick with a fire-blower set-piece, and Cliff with Brandy and some half-filled tin cans) when the time for classic Tarantino violence arrived.
Though they are connected professionally, rather than personally, it’s hard not to say that there is a gentle kind of friendship between these two characters. It’s not the big gestures that one does, but what one does within one’s means and power. They are loyal and love each other. Rick may have had to let Cliff go when he could no longer afford to hire him, but we know he kept him as long as he could, and that they’ll miss each other.
Such is the bittersweetness of life and perhaps what makes their time and sacrifices for one another more meaningful. I enjoyed that this relationship was a main vein in the storyline, that it did not revert to mere stereotype, but rather, had two characters that were well-developed with relatable problems and real emotions.
From Main-Sidekick, to Big Brother-Young Punk to Competitor-Competitor
It is no mean feat not to revert to stereotype, especially with a structure as ingrained as a pairing in comedy.
The earliest and flattest presentation would have to be a main-sidekick combination, where the sidekick serves to make the main all the more handsome/strong/capable. The sidekick often did things in an unimaginably clumsy or illogical manner, and there was no reason for the character except to serve as contrast for the main.
An evolution to that is the mentor-mentee relationship, like the one in Suits, or in the original instalments of Men In Black; where both characters have a right to behave as they do. Their comic fodder can come from the young padawan messing up in a spectacularly harmless fashion. Or, the mentor being particularly absent minded until a time of crisis comes and s/he transforms into a protective powerhouse. But even pushing the limits of this formula, if only by inches, can bring results.
In the latest instalment of Men In Black (Men In Black International), with the two agents being less mentor-mentee and more Big Brother-Younger Sister, the budding duomance between Agent H and Agent M is refreshing to see, as how they vie early on in their acquaintanceship for one-upmanship in a variety of spying sectors. M wanting to drive, but not realising that the UK is a right-handed drive as she flash-hops onto the left side is one of the more memorable moments of chucklesome relief.
It mustn’t have been easy to make that adjustment on such a successful franchise, and I applaud the filmmakers for doing so.
More Eclectic Duos
In recent times, we’ve also seen more of a different kind of comic pairing: adversary-agitator, competitor-competitor, “forced pairings”. The latest Fast and Furious pitted Dwaye “The Rock” Johnson against “Transporter” Jason Statham, both behemoths in their own right, and of course, hating each others’ guts. Captain America and Iron Man in The Avengers is an example of lone players coming together in a group setting. Ford v Ferrari is another one. Batman v Superman, or even Batman and the Joker are interesting duo relationships to explore, though perhaps not entirely comic.
On that note, I wonder if the main characters in a romantic comedy may be considered in and of themselves a type of comedy duo. The main characters involved often engage in questionable behaviour in order to obtain a certain, and in itself also questionable first-goal: sometimes to find a date for an important event, sometimes to find a venue for an important event, sometimes to plan for an important event. The final result is predictable, and it is this plot safety that allows for comedy: the pair fall in love and live happily ever after.
And what about Alfred Pennyworth and Bruce Wayne as a possible duo? For the uninitiated, Alfred is billionaire Bruce’s loyal manservant and keeper of the mansion. Alfred provides one of the few diverting lines in an otherwise solemn Batman Begins by saying “What’s the point of all those push ups if you can’t even lift a bloody log?” as he rescues Bruce from a flaming inferno.
Or, “You really scared me Master Bruce, if you had died…Who employs butlers anymore?” in Gotham.
Finally, “You can borrow the Rolls. Just bring it back with a full tank.”
“I suppose they are going to lock me up as well…as your accomplice.”
“Accomplice? I’m gonna say the whole thing was your idea.”
It’s always the truth that is the funniest.
In real life, as in theatre, there are and will be so many combinations of the duo: mentor-mentee, adversary-agitator, brothers, brothers-in-arms, competitors, girlfriends, co-founders, main-sidekick— the list goes on.
Bottom line, whatever the age gap or gender gap, it’s possible to find a thread, or river of comic material.
A Tradition of Comedy Pairings
Even so, the idea of gentlemen’s gentlemen uttering droll quips is not new. Jeeves and Wooster is a classic in that style — the “inimitable” Jeeves is the “affable” Wooster’s valet, and the book and series is an examination of the various excursions that happen in the bachelor life of this young gentleman of money but with no income. I haven’t read the entire series of books, nor watched all of the television collection, but I would argue theirs is less a true friendship and more a platform for P.J. Wodehouse to tamely mock the English 1930s upper class.
Speaking of real-life comic pairings, Jeeves and Wooster, the television series, were played by real-life comedy duo Stephen Fry and Hugh Laurie (yes, the Hugh Laurie of House fame). They had their own comedy bit in A Bit of Fry and Laurie at that time, with the pair role-playing various skits of their writing — it is quite good, and I recommend it.
Similarly, in Chinese cross-talk, the standard structure is a pair, a so called main actor, and a supporting actor. The main actor proposes certain lines of thought, and the supporting actor either agrees or disagrees, prompting the main actor to expand on his/her theory, or defend it.
So even in other forms of entertainment outside of the silver screen, such as theatre, or the small screen, we see this reliable structure of a comic pairing permeate.
Back To The Savannah
Timon and Pumbaa may have been supporting characters meant to provide comic relief, but they are perhaps not as poorly developed as we might expect.
In some ways, Timon is the inside joke on agents in the movie industry; fast talking, possessing strong survival instincts, not very trust worthy, and though not in possession of talent himself, channels the talent of another individual; in this case the ‘star’, Pumbaa, who either tolerates or does not mind Timon taking ‘credit’ as what’s most important is their time together and looking out for one another in this jungle of a world.
Which to Timon’s credit, is what he does do when the time calls for it.
Recall that Timon sticks his neck out for Pumbaa when the latter was being chased by a hungry Nala. Even though Simba is the one who eventually saves the day, that was the fella’s life on the line. The lack of cynicism in a time of flight really commends him to me.
The fact that Timon is the smaller one but the more gregarious of the two is also quite amusing.
I’m not saying that’s the way one should live, but perhaps with friends, it is.
These fellas are not very calculative, take care of one another, and at the end of the day, that’s what all good relationships are built on.
To another decade of Timon and Pumbaa!
Food for thought
How similar are the roles of Mike and Sulley (another favourite of mine) in Monsters Inc. to Timon and Pumbaa? Leave your thoughts below.
