Rotten Tomatoes is one of the most formidable movie review sites today, using their “tomatometer” to rate movies on a scale from one to one hundred and deeming them “fresh” or “rotten.” Their top 100 list is filled with indisputable treasures—“The Godfather,” “Schindler’s List” and “Good Will Hunting,” to name a few. One movie that is rated higher than all of these classics, scoring 99 percent and earning the title of “certified fresh,” is “Paddington 2,” which has only ever received one bad review on the site. If you ask me, the 2017 sequel to “Paddington” is a perfect movie, filled with elements of mystery and themes surrounding justice and prison reform, while still providing moments of fun and laughter that make it an enjoyable watch for people of all ages. It is not often that a sequel greatly surpasses its predecessor, but “Paddington 2” does so effortlessly.
When it was announced in February 2021 that there would be a third installment to the series, I was skeptical of how it could possibly live up to the undeniable greatness that is “Paddington 2.” The only way to truly find out if this new movie measured up to the legacy of what came before it was to see for myself. So, I am here to let you know if “Paddington in Peru” is “certified fresh” or not worth the watch.
Going into the movie, I was aware of two major differences from the prior films, the first being a directorial difference. Paul King was the writer and director behind the first two Paddington movies, but the third was instead directed by Dougal Wilson. Although I suffered from initial panic at the thought of such a large change, I was certain that the fate of London’s favorite bear had been placed in the hands of someone capable. However, upon completing extensive research (looking at his Wikipedia page), I discovered that this would be Wilson’s feature film directorial debut. Needless to say, my stress levels were heightened about the fate of this movie.
The second major change from the first two masterpieces to the newest installment is the portrayal of one of the most important characters: Mary Brown. As the matriarch of the Brown family and initial rescuer of Paddington, she plays an integral role in the series. Sally Hawkins, the actress who portrayed Brown in the first two movies, is responsible for creating a large portion of the whimsy present in this movie, making Brown a fan favorite character (and my personal favorite). For the third movie, however, Hawkins has passed the baton to actress Emily Mortimer.
Understandably, these revelations altered my expectations for this movie significantly. Nevertheless, I knew I still needed to give “Paddington in Peru” a fair chance to prove itself. So, I donned my finest blue sweater and red hair ribbon, threw an orange from Gordon Commons in my bag, and drove down to the Regal Cinema at the Poughkeepsie Galleria.
The movie starts off the same way any great Paddington movie does: with the aforementioned bear writing to his aunt, Lucy, back in Peru about the happenings of the Brown family. He details his experience becoming a new citizen of England, explaining how he feels a bit out of place being someone who has two homes now. I loved this striking and emotional choice for the genesis of the movie, and I was excited to see how this theme played out, but it felt like it was instantly side-swept by the overarching plot of the treasure hunt that Paddington and the Browns embark on to find El Dorado—the lost city of gold—and save Aunt Lucy, who has gone missing.
Throughout the majority of the movie, I felt certain that my fears had been correct and that “Paddington in Peru” would in no way surpass “Paddington 2.” The movie followed a very generic treasure hunt plot that I have seen a lot recently in movies like “The Lost City,” “Uncharted” and “Jungle Cruise.” The jungle setting was traditional for this type of movie, and the villains were easily predictable. Now, this is not to say that I did not enjoy watching the bear and his family fight against the forces of greed and evil to save Aunt Lucy, but the majority of the movie just felt unremarkable.
Everything changed, however, in the last half hour or so. What I had assumed was a conventional treasure hunt story held a much deeper meaning than I assumed, referring back to the original theme of belonging. By the end of the movie, Paddington, the Browns and even the villains realized what true treasure is: the people you love. I do not want to spoil too much about what happens, but I will say that Paddington once again reminds viewers of the importance of family. You might be thinking that sounds awfully cliché, and maybe it hit me so hard because I am a homesick freshman, but the waterworks really started flowing. And to end it all off perfectly, the final montage—shown through another one of Paddington’s letters updating Aunt Lucy, of course—had nostalgic ties back to the previous movies, providing a perfect conclusion to what I assume is the final film in the series.
All in all, “Paddington in Peru,” while not able to reach “Paddington 2” status (and let us be honest, few movies can), is still an enjoyable watch that had me laughing and crying, reminding me of the importance of prioritizing the people you love. In the wise words of Mr. Brown, “You should take the risk if it is for the greater good, and especially if it’s for the people you love.” So although the movie might not be as “certified fresh” as its predecessor, I still 100 percent recommend that you take the risk and go see “Paddington in Peru.”