Paddington in Peru is another great entry in the series, but it feels like there’s something missing from the film. Before the first movie released in 2014, it would have been hard to predict that a series of films based on Paddington Bear would become one of the most critically acclaimed franchises ever. However, that’s exactly what has happened, and the person who is largely responsible for that happening is director Paul King. The first two Paddington movies were both directed by King and received incredible reviews.

Reviews for Paddington in Peru, the most recent entry in the series, have also been great, but not quite as good as its two predecessors. After the mᴀssive success of Paddington 2, which was actually the highest-rated movie on Rotten Tomatoes for years, Paddington in Peru was stuck in development for several years. Finally, eight long years after the second entry in the series, the third Paddington movie has been released in the United States. Paddington in Peru tells a fresh story in the series, but proves that Paul King is the most important figure in the Paddington franchise.

Paddington In Peru Is Good, But Paul King’s Absence Is Felt

Paul King Did Not Return To Direct Paddington In Peru

Paddington in Peru tells a drastically different story from the previous two films in the series. In Paddington in Peru, Paddington and the Brown family travel to Peru to visit Aunt Lucy after receiving word that she has been acting strangely. However, after discovering that she has gone missing, they go on a journey through the Amazon rainforest in an attempt to find her. By the end of Paddington in Peru, they learn Aunt Lucy’s disappearance was a set-up, but they still come out on top and Paddington even discovers the clan of bears that he came from.

Paddington in Peru is quite an important movie in the series since it expands on Paddington’s backstory. However, it’s change of tone is quite jarring compared to the first two Paddington films. Paddington in Peru feels more like an Indiana Jones movie than a Paddington film. While Paddington on an Indiana Jones-like adventure sounds like a genius idea on paper, it doesn’t fully work in execution. Paddington in Peru has many great moments, but it is definitely missing the influence of King, who didn’t return to direct the third film.

Paddington In Peru Proves How Important Paul King Was To Making The First 2 Movies Great

Paddington In Peru Isn’t As Good As The First Two Movies

This is not to say Dougal Wilson did a bad job directing Paddington in Peru. There are still some incredible sequences in the film, such as the Reverend Mother’s musical number and Paddington being chased by Hunter Cabot during the climax of the movie. However, Paddington in Peru is definitely missing some of the charm that made the first two movies great. Years before Paddington in Peru, King figured out how to make two arguably perfect Paddington movies.

In the first two Paddington films, it’s hilarious and heartwarming to see Paddington interact with people in London. Unfortunately, he doesn’t really get to do that in Paddington in Peru, since he and the Brown’s are in the middle of a jungle. It is also disappointing that Paddington and the Brown’s get separated from each other about halfway through the movie. Paddington does get to interact with Hunter Cabot quite a bit in the film, but it is not quite the same as seeing the impact he has on his neighbors in Windsor Gardens, or the prisoners from Paddington 2.

Paul King Was Still Involved In Paddington In Peru

Paul King Helped Come Up With The Story Of Paddington In Peru

As a result of King not directing the third entry in the series, Paddington in Peru has a slightly lower Rotten Tomatoes score than the two other movies in the series. Paddington in Peru’s score of 93% on Rotten Tomatoes is still amazing, but it is lower than Paddington’s 96% and Paddington 2’s near-perfect 99% (via Rotten Tomatoes). Even though Paddington in Peru was missing the influence of King behind the camera, he still contributed to the film.

While he didn’t direct the movie, King helped conceive the story for Paddington in Peru. Therefore, King is one of the ones responsible for moving the third Paddington movie out of London and into the dangerous jungles of Peru, which are never actually that dangerous in the movie. Setting the third Paddington movie in Peru wasn’t necessarily a bad idea, but it did result in it missing some of the elements that made the first two movies great. Overall, it would have been very interesting to see how Paddington in Peru would have been different if King had directed it.