Film Review & Discussion: Paddington 2

Ripsnorter

Well-known Member
While I agree with your verdict, Kurmari, Paddington 2 really is an excellent film and Hugh Grant sends himself and his profession up fantastically, please refrain in future from introducing your own politics: "Of course, nothing is ever as simple as it seems, and before long Paddington finds himself – like so many other immigrants – wrongly accused..." Especially such unfounded, subjective ones as these, thrown in with no facts, no figures, or any other kind of correlation or attribution and with no other purpose than to virtue signal now toxic and corrosive political correctness. Not even the film itself draws this connection or conclusion: Paddington getting banged up has nothing whatsoever to do with his origin or status, immigrant or otherwise, although he most likely has a residence permit by now, and more to do with his being framed and barbershop skills, or lack thereof.
 

Steve Withers

Reviewer
While I agree with your verdict, Kurmari, Paddington 2 really is an excellent film and Hugh Grant sends himself and his profession up fantastically, please refrain in future from introducing your own politics: "Of course, nothing is ever as simple as it seems, and before long Paddington finds himself – like so many other immigrants – wrongly accused..." Especially such unfounded, subjective ones as these, thrown in with no facts, no figures, or any other kind of correlation or attribution and with no other purpose than to virtue signal now toxic and corrosive political correctness. Not even the film itself draws this connection or conclusion: Paddington getting banged up has nothing whatsoever to do with his origin or status, immigrant or otherwise, although he most likely has a residence permit by now, and more to do with his being framed and barbershop skills, or lack thereof.
Aside from the fact that Kumari is entitled to her opinion, I'd have to disagree with you there, Paddington has always been a subtle commentary on immigration, integration, tolerance and acceptance, I made a very similar point in my review of the first film: Paddington Review
I think your over-the-top knee-jerk reaction says at lot more about you than anything else.
 

Ripsnorter

Well-known Member
Aside from the fact that Kumari is entitled to her opinion, I'd have to disagree with you there, Paddington has always been a subtle commentary on immigration, integration, tolerance and acceptance, I made a very similar point in my review of the first film: Paddington Review
I think your over-the-top knee-jerk reaction says at lot more about you than anything else.
Indeed she is and I am just as entitled to take issue with something she has written. You are quite right about Paddington being a subtle commentary etc. etc. But what is the relevance of "like so many other immigrants"? Facts before feelings, please.
 
Last edited:

Winnie1221

Active Member
Not read the review (never read the full review of any film - prefer to make my own mind up) so cannot comment on the above. My better half and I along with the kids are all going to see this tomorrow..... I doubt any of us will be comparing it to the plight of any immigrants when we leave! Hoping it is as good as Kumari says!
 

dante01

Distinguished Member
I think the Symbolism of Paddington and his association with immigration and cross-cultural insemination into UK society is well known about already. This has already been something documented and commented upon well before the initial film was released. Paddington's circumstances aren't a coincidence and were a direct reflection of how Michael Bond saw London and indeed rascism at that period in time prior to writing the books.

A University of Sutherland academic even asked the question as to whether or not Paddington bear was an illegal immigrant:
Is Paddington Bear an illegal immigrant? University of Sunderland academic asks that question in her recently published paper
 
Last edited:

moraghan

Active Member
While I agree with your verdict, Kurmari, Paddington 2 really is an excellent film and Hugh Grant sends himself and his profession up fantastically, please refrain in future from introducing your own politics: "Of course, nothing is ever as simple as it seems, and before long Paddington finds himself – like so many other immigrants – wrongly accused..." Especially such unfounded, subjective ones as these, thrown in with no facts, no figures, or any other kind of correlation or attribution and with no other purpose than to virtue signal now toxic and corrosive political correctness. Not even the film itself draws this connection or conclusion: Paddington getting banged up has nothing whatsoever to do with his origin or status, immigrant or otherwise, although he most likely has a residence permit by now, and more to do with his being framed and barbershop skills, or lack thereof.
For Gods sake man ... get a grip ... it's a blinking AV forum.
 

stevelup

Distinguished Member
Steve, it’s not often I disagree with you but I’m with Ripsnorter. That comment has no place in a movie review and has absolutely nothing to do with the film. It shares little, if in fact absolutely nothing with your intelligent observations about the first film.

Those five extra words don’t add a thing to the review...
 

Kotatsu Neko

Well-known Member
I think that is -exactly- the point... It's an audio-visual forum not a place for exaggerated political comment!
I agree, it made an otherwise decent review seem amateurish. Casually throwing in such strong opinions without any evidence to support them is both counter productive and frankly ham fisted. There is a time and a place for breaking down art from a political perspective, but a review is not one of them.
 

eeBoBoBo

Active Member
For Gods sake man ... get a grip ... it's a blinking AV forum.
That’s precisely the point, and that awkward, silly statement has no place on this forum, in my opinion, and I’m glad to see I’m not the only one.

It left a sour taste in my mouth with regards to the movie review.

Looking forward to the movie, by the way.
 

Steve Withers

Reviewer
Fine, I've removed the offending five words. Now can everyone just chill out and go and see the film!
 

stigdu

Well-known Member
Good review, but I feel I'm missing some of the more political aspects, such as how Paddington's plight can be seen as parallel to illegal immigrants in the UK, specifically, wrong accusations being bandied about.

More of this sort of stuff in the film reviews next time, please? Thanks.
 

dante01

Distinguished Member
The passive aggressive political grandstanding was an unnecessary addition to this review.
The character is from books written by Michael Bond who purposefully wrote Paddington from the point of view of an immigrant. You cannot have the character as anything but an immigrant. The books were also written at a time when rascism was quite rampant in the UK and London. The fact that Paddington lives in Notting Hill, which was at the time where many immigrants ended up living, further endorses this. You cannot remove the fact Paddington is an immigrant or pretend that Michael Bond wasn't subtly making a point or you destroy the work on which Paddington is based. Like it or not, the Paddington stories are making subtle political points. If you cannot see these points then you are blind. If you purposefully ask that others not see them or ignore them you are something much worse than blind.
 
Last edited:

ozzzy189

Distinguished Member
I think mister withers owes mister ripsnorter an apology for this....
I think your over-the-top knee-jerk reaction says at lot more about you than anything else.
I can't believe he wrote that. He's not far from calling him a racist and belittling him from having his own opinion has no place here. He should know far better. That needs editing too imo.
 

dante01

Distinguished Member
I think mister withers owes mister ripsnorter an apology for this....
I think your over-the-top knee-jerk reaction says at lot more about you than anything else.
I can't believe he wrote that. He's not far from calling him a racist and belittling him from having his own opinion has no place here. He should know far better. That needs editing too imo.
So Ripsnorter didn't say what he wrote then and his comments should stand while those posts not agreeing with them are edited out? How's that fair or balanced?

The reviewer is correct and Paddington is an immigrant. All the Paddington books, cartoons and now the films portray Paddington from the point of view of an immigrant and most of his situations are an analysis of how others treat someone different to themselves. If Michael Bond had wished Paddington bear not to be an immagrant then he could have had Paddington come down from Leeds to stay in London. Maybe replacing marmalade sandwiches with black pudding and barm cakes?

What I find more disturbing is that anyone reading the review would hone in on the mention of immigration. I'm already aware of the pre existing subtleties associated with Michael Bond's books so I'd not find such comments within a review to be offensive given that it is quite a legitimate analysis of Paddington and his narrative.

You cannot remove the fact Paddington is an immigrant or the fact immigration has become an issue again in the UK, not without completely rewriting the narrative surrounding Paddington and his circumstances. Why you'd want to ignore it or pretend it isn't so is beyond me? Paddington and his escapades generally show people in a good light as far as how they welcome those that may be different to themselves into their society.
 
Last edited:

hooray33

Active Member
It's a talking bear people :laugh:

Wasn't overly smitten with the first but the sequel has garnered universal praise. Looking forward to seeing this.
 

eeBoBoBo

Active Member
So Ripsnorter didn't say what he wrote then and his comments should stand while those posts not agreeing with them are edited out? How's that fair or balanced?

The reviewer is correct and Paddington is an immigrant. All the Paddington books, cartoons and now the films portray Paddington from the point of view of an immigrant and most of his situations are an analysis of how others treat someone different to themselves. If Michael Bond had wished Paddington bear not to be an immagrant then he could have had Paddington come down from Leeds to stay in London. Maybe replacing marmalade sandwiches with black pudding and barm cakes?

What I find more disturbing is that anyone reading the review would hone in on the mention of immigration. I'm already aware of the pre existing subtleties associated with Michael Bond's books so I'd not find such comments within a review to be offensive given that it is quite a legitimate analysis of Paddington and his narrative.

You cannot remove the fact Paddington is an immigrant or the fact immigration has become an issue again in the UK, not without completely rewriting the narrative surrounding Paddington and his circumstances. Why you'd want to ignore it or pretend it isn't so is beyond me? Paddington and his escapades generally show people in a good light as far as how they welcome those that may be different to themselves into their society.

Try actually reading the first couple posts, and proof reading your own?


You stated the same blindingly obvious point about four times there in as many paragraphs, while conveniently missing what the issue statement was.
 

dante01

Distinguished Member
Try actually reading the first couple posts, and proof reading your own?


You stated the same blindingly obvious point about four times there in as many paragraphs, while conveniently missing what the issue statement was.
I read the posts in question and my posts stand. Why is it important how many times I mention something?

I'm not missing anything. You are or you'd tell me exactly how my posts and repetitive points don't address it. Why does Ripsnorter find it so alarming that the review mentions immigration and why it makes a quite legitimate analogy as to the situations many immigrants find themselves in. Paddington's entire narrative is based upon this and him being an immagrant. This has been the case since I was a child watching the cartoons. Why is it wrong to continue this same narrative now or indeed comment upon it within a review?

I actually think Ripsnorter was more agrieved by the suggestion that some immigrants might be given a hard time? Is this not the case then? Where are his facts and figures if this is in fact what he disagrees with. Has he evidence to prove otherwise?

please refrain in future from introducing your own politics: "Of course, nothing is ever as simple as it seems, and before long Paddington finds himself – like so many other immigrants – wrongly accused..." Especially such unfounded, subjective ones as these, thrown in with no facts, no figures, or any other kind of correlation or attribution and with no other purpose than to virtue signal now toxic and corrosive political correctness.
If the review had indeed included facts and figures and their sources would Ripsnorter have been any happier about the review? Would the review have been still a review and wouldn't others have thought it more bizarre of the reviewer to have such data in a review than a mention of the narrative behind Paddington and the fact that he is an immigrant?
 
Last edited:

tony @ suffolk

Active Member
Unless you live on the planet Zorg, or happen to only read the Daily Mail, you cannot fail to notice that, indeed, immigrants tend to get blamed for all sorts of things that aren't actually their fault. So well done, Ms. Tilakawardane, spot on with your remark.
 

Winnie1221

Active Member
Went to see the movie last night and thought it was very good. Just as good if not slightly better than the first one. I'd give it a solid 9/10.

As for the Political statement, if true or not, does not belong in a movie review, which I think was Ripsnorter's point. To me there is no place for that in a movie review or anywhere on AVForums as this is not a Political site.
 

tony @ suffolk

Active Member
Sad will be the day when a reviewer needs to restrict their views to what some might consider to be “politically correct”. There's historical precedent for this type of restrictive thought - I'll leave you to identify where...
 

Winnie1221

Active Member
I think her comments caused a stir is due to the fact that the reviewer didn't back her claims that Immigrants are treated a certain way with any real hard evidence or facts. Not that she actually had an opinion. Which we are, all entitled to.
 

Similar threads

The latest video from AVForums

Podcast: Samsung HW-Q950T Soundbar Review, Filmmaker Mode, Disney+ $30 for Mulan, AV news and more

Trending threads

Latest News

THX Spatial Audio app brings 360 degree sound to any headphone
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Xbox Series X November launch confirmed
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Xiaomi OLED is world’s first mass produced transparent TV
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Tron 3 lands star and director for Disney
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Kef announces KW1 Wireless Subwoofer Adapter
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Top Bottom