Paddington

Michael Bond who wrote the original stories is not too happy about the film having to be given a PG rating. I would agree with you NanKate - the makers should have thought about the fact that very young children would want to see this film.

I know that in the end it is up to the parents (or grandparents if they are looking after the children) to decide what is suitable but lots of people would not want their children to be exposed to even mild swearing or sexual references.

How ridiculous....my memories of Paddington books and the delightful tv series were based on its gentle and whimsical subject matter. One felt it reflected a kinder, slightly old fashioned age of courtesy and good manners. Why the need to up-date it, when it was actually delightfully old fashioned when it originally written?

Why should the parents / grandparents have to think about that at all? The Paddington stories don't include anything of the sort so why put it into the film? I can't believe it enhances the story in any way.

Recently I commented on the use of the word 'dickhead' in a children's film (forget which one). My daughter, an adult who has no children, said she saw no problem with it as young children swear non-stop when they get the chance.

That may be, but it doesn't mean that parents & grandparents should feel happy about presenting it to them as acceptable.

This story is so depressing! Who thought it necessary to introduce 'mild swearing' and sexual references into Paddington? It's bad enough when some twelve year old producer decides the sexual element in some classic work has to be made explicit in the TV or film version because otherwise we won't recognise it. Gratuitously putting it in beggars belief.

I saw a short trailer for it and didn't like what I saw. I'm still getting over the Americanisation of Winnie the Poo .

I'm with you tegan

I've seen the trailer too, I thought it was a sort of adult version, not really for children.

I feel sorry for children these days, so many don't seem to have a proper childhood.

I was thinking of taking the DGDs to see the Paddington film but I may have to think again.

I was in F&F today looking at children's clothes and heard a male voice from round the corner saying 'You look so sexy in that hat'. I thought it was a young man complimenting his OH but then they all appeared - two young women and a young man pushing a toddler who was sitting in the trolley. The young man was speaking to the little boy! Sexy? Is that an appropriate adjective to use to describe a tiny child? Am I old-fashioned?

I think that, with films like Shrek and The Lego Movie working so well at different levels and being as much fun for adults as children filmakers are under pressure to think of the adult audience [The Muppet Films were great in that respect, too]. But sometimes they get it badly wrong. rose; you're not old fashioned at all; that sounds horrid to me .

They have changed 'sexual references' to 'innuendo' now, apparently relating to a scene in which Mr Brown, disguised as a cleaning lady, is flirted with by a security guard...

And the 'swearing' is one mumbled 'bloody'

It seems like yet another case of going way too far to protect themselves just in case someone complained (and possibly sued!).

www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-30105052

It certainly does seem odd to make a film from a book aimed at pre-school children that finishes up with a PG rating - rather misses the whole point of the book (charming fantasy/whimsy for little ones) - very strange. I am sure that most little ones will just let the mumbled "bloody" pass them by along with the innuendo and will be unharmed significantly by it - but why put them in in the first place? If the adults watching need something to stop them getting bored, then that is a bit sad - just watching little ones lapping up entertainments suitable to them is a joy in itself.

The trailer I have just looked at involves....eating earwax, drinking a whole bottle of mouthwash, vomiting down the toilet and destroying a bathroom. Hmmm.

I didn't really like the look of the animated Paddington, he had a beady mean look in his eye.

I have just remembered, Tegan (at least I remembered in the middle of the night!) that what he actually said to the toddler was 'You look dead sexy in that hat'. Not much different, but slightly worse I think!

Senior moments!
Becoming a Grumpy Old Woman.

He does look a bit nasty, I agree. And although I know the red wellies weren't in the original books, I found the lack of them in this new thing made his legs look too...exposed somehow.

The ear wax scene in Shrek made me laugh; the one in this film actually made me feel nauseous.

There is a nose picking reference in 'Frozen'.

I suppose that pantomime is based on fairy tales (some gruesome) and aimed at children but full of innuendo which supposedly goes over their heads.

Such a pity that these cynical directors and producers have to add their own slant on to something which should be full of childhood innocence. I suppose they think they are exceedingly clever.

I took my 4 year old granddaugher to the cinema for the first time to see Paddington this afternoon. On the whole she enjoyed the film, although some of it went over her head, particularly the role of taxidermist, I didn't explain. Too much information at her age "a baddie" sufficed.

I quite forgot how funny it is to be in the cinema surrounded by loads of little people, cinema etiquette completely out the window, loads of wailing and talking out loud, there were some very young children next to us who were quite distraught whenever anything bad happened to Paddington,or his relatives.

Quite pleased I read this. I was seriously planning to treat DGS and take him to see Paddington, as when he comes to stay he has his mum's much loved Paddington duvet set on his bed.

I'm revising that idea now. I haven't been to the cinema in the UK for decades, and after reading Terribull's last paragraph, the audience noise sounds like the last straw. Think I may wait for the DVD and we'll watch it together in peace and quiet when he's next here on holiday.

I do hope they haven't buggered messed about with poor old Paddington too much. I too can remember what the Disney Corp did to Winnie

I'm not keen on the look of Paddington from the photos I have seen. If DGC want to go I may take them but I really don't want to be disillusioned by the film about the real Paddington Bear.

Hugh Bonneville says it will not upset any four or five year olds - or any 75year olds.

In the report I read he said he wouldn't recommend it for any under-eights.

"I was scratching my head thinking 'what are the censors talking about?" he said. "There were four and five year olds watching it the other day laughing uproariously, so I don't think it's going to damage any young children - or indeed any 75 year olds."

Quote from the BBC link put on by you at 13.20, Ana.
Perhaps you should read your own links, even though you always complain about mine.

My son phoned up and told me he's booked tickets for us all to go and see it tomorrow, ages 7 to 65.

I admit that I got that wrong, durhamjen - it was another actor who said Paddington wasn't (in his opinion) suitable for under-eights.

At least my link was reliable...no comment or apology from you about your IDS tweets links, I notice.

Sorry, what are you on about?
Don't answer that one yet. I'm off to see Paddington. See what my 7 year old granddaughter thinks of it.