. 

There has been a little bit of concern surrounding this film. The two Paddington movies that proceeded it are so widely loved that many people, myself included, feared that the quality may not be sustainable and that a third one might just be stretching it. Please don’t mess it up became the mantra that many adopted, particularly in UK where we have very much taken this bear to our hearts. The character was already a beloved part of many of our childhoods following the books and the 70s TV show but these movies have made him a true British icon. This was properly cemented, of course, when he appeared opposite the Queen, drinking tea in a short sketch made for the Platinum Jubilee. Taking this alongside our National inclination to assume, and maybe even hope, that anything and anyone that is successful must eventually succumb to crushing failure, then pending its release this has been marked by some level of pessimism. The announcement that the original director, whose sensibility appeared to be key, was not returning because he’d gone off to make Wonka did not help. People also worried that moving the setting to Peru when all the charm of the story seemed to be about the title character leaving Peru and learning to manage in England’s Capital, was also a bad idea. Taking the Brown family and making them the fish out of water instead was unlikely to work the same way.

Now that the film is out and the reviews have been published, some of the word from the critics is that our fears were founded. Empire Magazine said that ‘swapping Primrose Hill for the savage jungles of Peru meant a little of the enchantment had been lost in transit’ and The Guardian declared that the movie ‘lacks the wit and magic of its predecessors’. The Standard went as far to describe it as ‘ponderous and slow’ and a poor follow up. It seems to me though, taking everything into account, that these write ups might be somewhat due to self fulfilling prophecy and possibly even some of that distasteful desire to see icons shaken off their pedestals. Okay, sure this might be the weakest film in the trilogy but that’s a very high bear, as it were. I think Paddington in Peru is another delightful film mixing great characterisation, sweet set pieces and well measured sentiment in a way that, if not the equal of what has come before in this series, is still beyond the reach of most other family movies. Also, if I’d not been aware of it before I’m not sure I’d have noticed that Paul King had left the project, his gently surreal take is still here, and for my mind it’s better than his recent Roald Dahl spin off.

There has been some objection to the heightened elements of adventure as well, as Paddington and the Brown Family head off in search of the Lost City of Eldorado, running over rope bridges and getting washed away in the Amazon rapids. This became moot as soon as our ursine hero was being pursued by murderous taxidermists or getting caught up in prison breaks though. We immediately moved away from having trouble putting up wallpaper or mishaps with baking, which was about as big as his missions had been on the page, as soon as these movies started. Moving the location of the stories does give audiences something different too, even if there is no real South American culture or history on show here. You’d think the only significant citizens of the country in question are hazel coloured and furry. In terms of cultural representation this film does lean into Paddington’s status as a valued migrant though, which in light of recent political events feels both timely and important. It is nice to see this emphasised here just as it is on the new Paddington mural that has gone up near London’s Southbank. I don’t suppose for a second that the actions of this little brown guy are going to be able to be able to counteract those of the big orange one but that’s no reason not to celebrate it. 

.

.

For me it wasn’t the departure of director Paul King that was the biggest issue. As far as I’m concerned Sally Hawkins’ Mrs. Brown was always one of the best things about these films so I was sad she had been recast. In my review of Paddington 2 I described her as a genuine icon of female strength and empowerment, hailing her as Ellen Ripley, Katniss Everdeen and Lara Croft all rolled together in a roll neck jumper. She has been replaced by Emily Mortimer here and while she does not drive the plot as much this time, her character is consistent with what has been presented in the other movies. She is still dynamic and brave and serves as a positive role model. 

Mention has to go to the new cast members as well. Olivia Colman fits right in, as you’d expect, and actually brings most of the laughs. Puss in Boots notwithstanding, Antonio Banderas is not someone I’ve rated as a comedy actor in the past, based on fairly laboured turns in Dolittle and The SpongeBob Movie but he is also very good here. His multiple roles do not work as well as Alec Guinness’ in Kind Hearts and Coronets, which is what I think they were aiming for, but it is much better than Sylvester Stallone in Spy Kids: Game Over which is what I feared they’d done. 

In the end everything that has landed so well with Paddington audiences in the past is largely still here. Britain and the rest of the world need not worry. The series is rounded out here with a final instalment that mirrors and builds on what has always made these films such a wonder. Judged on its own merits it is a highly engaging and utterly endearing and if this had been the first in the trilogy rather than the last then we’d be excitedly looking forward to the other instalments that we are fortunate enough to already have. 

All in all, they didn’t mess it up. They are still looking after this bear.