?`s and ANNEswers

Ten minutes to write. Less time to read.


I don’t know how it started, but a few days ago the movie “Paddington” came on the radar and went viral in our coffee group.

So this afternoon two friends and I saw movie, although none of us remembers reading the books about a small talking bear from deepest, darkest Peru who journeys to London to find a new home.

You might think this is far-fetched, but the truth is Paddington has been around since he was first introduced by author Michael Bond in 1958, making him (the bear, not Bond) in the comfy-ness of middle age today.  I looked him and his author up on Google® and recommend you do likewise if you want a true appreciation of this phenomenon, which reminds me in some ways of a latter day Winnie the Pooh.

I understand the movie isn’t in the lexicography of the original books.  How could it be when it involves a villainess who wants to make Paddington into a taxidermy version and features such new London attractions as the Eye?

I appreciated how the movie recreated London, since I’d been there in late 2012 and could remember London Bridge, the Queen’s Guards, and the train stations. Each was lovingly rendered. But most of all, it was the bear that moved me from disbelief of a modernized plot to acceptance that this was merely the next volume in the revered series.

The movie used live actors and a digitized bear that truly looked real instead of animated characters all around. Paddington’s emotions, timing, and voice all worked. This isn’t to say the humans weren’t believable, but in the end one small bear who loves marmalade brought them along for the ride.

See more 10 Minutes in category | Leave a comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *