Connect with us

Movie Reviews

Paddington In Peru (2024) – Movie Review

Published

on

Paddington In Peru (2024) – Movie Review

Paddington in Peru, 2024.

Directed by Dougal Wilson.
Starring Ben Whishaw, Hugh Bonneville, Emily Mortimer, Samuel Joslin, Madeleine Harris, Antonio Banderas, Olivia Colman, Julie Walters, Jim Broadbent, Carla Tous, Hayley Atwell, Oliver Maltman, Joel Fry, Robbie Gee, Sanjeev Bhaskar, Imelda Staunton, Ben Miller, Jessica Hynes, Ella Dacres, Aloreia Spencer, Nicholas Burns, Ashleigh Reynolds, Amit Shah, Ella Bruccoleri, Carlos Carlín, Simon Farnaby, Emma Sidi, Hugh Grant, and Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom.

SYNOPSIS:

Paddington returns to Peru to visit his beloved Aunt Lucy, who now resides at the Home for Retired Bears. With the Brown family in tow, a thrilling adventure ensues when a mystery plunges them into an unexpected journey.

Advertisement

A beary take on the treasurer of El Dorado, Paddington in Peru trades London fish-out-of-water hijinks and tear-inducing pleas for kindness for a CGI-heavy formulaic Amazonian adventure of peril that, while endearing, never reaches the highs of previous installments. It’s a noticeable step down in quality, often playing like your average family-friendly film, at a certain point mainly going for thrills rather than witty banter and heartwarming lessons in manners. Even the thematic messaging seems like an afterthought this time, reminding what the movie is about moments before the epilogue in a halfhearted, slapdash fashion.

Truthfully, none of this should be surprising. Director Dougal Wilson takes over duties from Paul King (responsible for the first two entries before moving on to his take on Willy Wonka, only contributing to the screen story here), working from a screenplay by Mark Burton, Jon Foster, and James Lamont (with Paddington created by Michael Bond), none of whom have worked on either of the previous movies. The latter two have worked on an animated TV series titled The Adventures of Paddington, which explains why Paddington himself (still voiced by Ben Whishaw with an innocent and polite gentle warmth) feels in character.

However, most of those amusing gags occur early on (a photo booth in London, a hilarious broken floorboard gag when searching for a clue, a struggle climbing into a hammock) and, as already mentioned, fade away once the plot transitions into three groups of characters competing for treasure. To clarify, Paddington is looking for his missing Aunt Lucy (voiced by Imelda Staunton), who had written to her nephew saying she was feeling lonely, only to be gone when he and the Brown family arrive in Peru’s Home for Retired Bears. In charge is the suspicious Mother Reverend (a playful Olivia Colman, also getting a chance to do some equally silly singing), who often blatantly incriminates herself in a running gag of obviously having something to do with the disappearance. All that remains left behind are Aunt Lucy’s glasses and a sacred bracelet connected to El Dorado that might have something to do with where the bear went.

Together with the supportive Brown family, now with grown-up children and becoming increasingly distant, deciding that this vacation is just what they need to reconnect, Paddington and they enlist a boat tour guide named Hunter Cabot (Antonio Banderas) alongside his daughter Gina (Carla Tous) to navigate the waters and into uncharted territory. It is a journey that Gina advises against, but Hunter sympathizes with the emergency and braves the danger. It also turns out he sees literal ancestral ghosts (also funnily played by Antonio Banderas) egging on a family curse and obsession to find the El Dorado treasure.

There are encounters with potentially deadly spiders, treks throughout the jungle, and character betrayals on the path to the treasure. While that might sound tantalizing, ambitious, and refreshing for this series, it’s also somewhat perfunctory and only elevated by the reliable Paddington charm. Even the Brown family (played by Hugh Bonneville and Emily Mortimer stepping into the Sally Hawkins role, now with adult children played by Samuel Joslin and Madeleine Harris) don’t have much to do. The latter two are noticeably silent at times; basically, they are out of obligation for the thread about family the film tries to emotionally tie everything back to.

Advertisement

Technically, Paddington in Peru is something new for the series and does retain the signature delight of the characters, comes with more likability wacky villains, and the wonderful voiceover work from Ben Whishaw also still delivers a moving touch, even if there isn’t much of an emotional pull here this time. It’s solid but no treasure like the previous two films.

Flickering Myth Rating – Film: ★ ★ ★ / Movie: ★ ★ ★

Robert Kojder is a member of the Chicago Film Critics Association, Critics Choice Association, and Online Film Critics Society. He is also the Flickering Myth Reviews Editor. Check here for new reviews and follow my BlueSky or Letterboxd 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=embed/playlist

 

Advertisement

Movie Reviews

Mortal Kombat 2 Movie Review: Simon McQuoid’s Latest Is A Breezy, Bloody, Sometimes Baffling Time

Published

on

Mortal Kombat 2 Movie Review: Simon McQuoid’s Latest Is A Breezy, Bloody, Sometimes Baffling Time

Warner Bros. has a new movie to put in the ring. Mortal Kombat II, the sequel to the action-filled 2021 video game adaptation that at the very least got the gore right, is here. It’s a breezy, bloody entry that leans heavily on video game characters and logic, a move that should satisfy franchise fans, even if the actual narrative is too weak to win over new converts.

We’re in an era of regular, variably solid video game adaptations. Series like The Last of Us and Fallout, and films such as Sonic the Hedgehog and Werewolves Within, are exemplary, with stories that capture much of what works about the games. On the other hand, adaptations like Borderlands show that it’s still possible to get one wrong. The stakes remain high.

When director Simon McQuoid’s Mortal Kombat graced the screens and HBO Max, it was received with a sizable difference between fans (currently 85% on Rotten Tomatoes with over 5,000 verified ratings) and critics (55% with 299 factored in). It was refreshing to have fights that didn’t skimp on the game series’ violence, but some muddled plotting, a failure to fully capture the game’s feel, and centering the film on an original character (rather than a fan-favorite from the games) were ill-received.

Mortal Kombat II is a bigger and more faithful adaptation in many ways. The tournament actually feels deadly, and many of the fight sequences are sufficiently bloody to accurately reflect the games. The actual narrative falls apart somewhat when you think too hard about it, but it largely works, and certain characters (Kano, Johnny Cage) steal every scene they’re in. If you like your movies bloody with a side of silly, you’re in luck.

Mortal Kombat 2 Has Stellar New Additions

Warner Bros.

Mortal Kombat II doesn’t waste time in setting the stakes, with an opening fight between Eternia’s King Jerrod and Shao Kahn (Martyn Ford). The helmeted tyrant Kahn’s violent victory allows him to raise Jerrod’s daughter, Kitana, as he comes to rule Eternia thanks to his tournament victories. That backstory sets up the complex journey of adult Kitana (Adeline Rudolph), who fights for Kahn alongside longtime friend Jade (Tati Gabrielle), but has understandable reservations.

Advertisement

Another major element of this iteration is the addition of washed-up action star Johnny Cage (Karl Urban), who is recruited to fight for Earthrealm despite lacking powers. Cage has to fight under the tutelage of Lord Raiden (Tadanobu Asano), alongside mainstays including Sonya Blade (Jessica McNamee), Jax (Mehcad Brooks), Cole Young (Lewis Tan), and Liu Kang (Ludi Lin). Our heroes have to defeat Shao Khan’s warriors to save Earth, all the while preventing him from acquiring an amulet that would render him immortal. 

Urban is a stellar addition to the series, with a huge and charismatic personality that fits Johnny Cage and is fun to watch onscreen. Josh Lawson’s dirtbag mercenary Kano gets some fantastic scenes here, and the two add a lot of charm that some other characters may lack. Adeline Rudolph is empathetic and believably tactical as Kitana. Gabrielle’s Jade isn’t given enough key scenes to shine, but there’s clear potential for the character in future iterations. 

Baraka (CJ Bloomfield) isn’t the deepest character, but Bloomfield makes him memorable, and his relationship with Johnny Cage is always a fun watch. While Tan’s Cole Young has something to do in Mortal Kombat II, he’s much less of a focus here, as are returning favorites like Hiroyuki Sanada and Joe Taslim’s Bi-Han. 

There are new characters, many moving parts, and a narrative that’s more a string of battles than a traditional Hollywood tale, leaving some favorites underutilized. Because of the need to introduce new characters, most of the existing ones are relatively one-note. Kitana and Johnny Cage get ample screen time, even character arcs, and Kano, Baraka, and some others do get standout moments. Most characters, however, remain one-note figures.

Mortal Kombat II Doesn’t Fully Make Sense, but It Mostly Hits Hard

Lewis Tan as Cole Young in Mortal Kombat 2.
Warner Bros.

While Mortal Kombat 2 doesn’t have the biggest fights you’ll see this year (that would be The Furious), it does have quite a few memorable ones with great finishers. The final fight with Shao Kahn has a solid ending, and many get standout moments as the movie proceeds. Kitana, Baraka, Liu Kang, Hanzo Hasashi/Scorpion, and Kung Lao all get particularly unforgettable moments.  

A more faithful structure also makes this round’s fights feel a bit more like one is playing an actual Mortal Kombat game, which is welcome. Most are well-paced, though a few could use tighter editing. Unfortunately, the story is more than a little muddled. Shao Kahn wants a Maguffin to be unkillable, sure, but if the tournament rules allow an invasion of Earthrealm if and only if Earth’s champions defeat Outworld’s five times, isn’t an immortality-granting amulet the equivalent of steroid use? Where are the referees? 

Advertisement

Some characters (like Jade) change allegiances almost at random, with no consistency. There are several moments when characters make choices that don’t make sense, or at least we don’t have enough information to understand them.

Altogether, Mortal Kombat II learned from quite a few of the issues the first film had. It swapped out protagonists for one with a flashier personality, better replicated the game’s elements and structure, and had kills to boot. That’s largely enough to succeed for the kind of film it is, but it still has issues. 

There are too many characters to develop in any interesting way, the tournament rules and character plans don’t make total sense, and the pacing is quick in some moments and slow in others. Nonetheless, it’s a delightful outing and feels just like a big ol’ violent video game (complimentary). 

Final Rating: 7/10

Mortal Kombat 2 is playing in theaters.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

1986 Movie Reviews – Dangerously Close, Fire with Fire, Last Resort, and Short Circuit | The Nerdy

Published

on

1986 Movie Reviews – Dangerously Close, Fire with Fire, Last Resort, and Short Circuit | The Nerdy
by Sean P. Aune | May 9, 2026May 9, 2026 10:30 am EDT

Welcome to an exciting year-long project here at The Nerdy. 1986 was an exciting year for films giving us a lot of films that would go on to be beloved favorites and cult classics. It was also the start to a major shift in cultural and societal norms, and some of those still reverberate to this day.

We’re going to pick and choose which movies we hit, but right now the list stands at nearly four dozen.

Yes, we’re insane, but 1986 was that great of a year for film.

The articles will come out – in most cases – on the same day the films hit theaters in 1986 so that it is their true 40th anniversary. All films are also watched again for the purposes of these reviews and are not being done from memory. In some cases, it truly will be the first time we’ve seen them.

Advertisement

This time around, it’s May 9, 1986, and we’re off to see Dangerously Close, Fire with Fire, Last Resort, and Short Circuit.

 

Dangerously Close

I would love to tell you what the point of this film was, but I’m not sure it knew.

Advertisement

An elite school has turned into a magnet school, attracting some “undesirables,” so a group of students known as The Sentinels take up policing their school, but will they go too far?

The basic plot of the film is simple enough, but there is an oddball “twist” toward the end tht served no real purpose and somehow turns the whole thing into a murder-mystery. Mysteries only work when you know you’re supposed to be solving them, and not when you’re alerted to one existing with 15 minutes left.

Decent 80s music, some stylistic shots, absolutely no substance.

 

Fire with Fire

Advertisement

Oh wait… I may want to go back and watch Dangerously Close again over this one.

Joe Fisk (Craig Sheffer) is being held at a juvenile delinquent facility close a high-end all-girls Catholic school. One day while running through the forest as part of an exercise he spots Catholic schoolgirl Lisa Taylor (Virginia Madsen) and the two fall immediately in love because… reasons.

This film is just so incredibly lazy. The ‘love story’ really can just be chalked up to ‘hormones.’

 

Last Resort

Advertisement

Once again I am baffled how Charles Grodin kept getting work so much through out the 1980s.

George Lollar (Grodin) is a salesman in Chicago in need of a vacation. He loads up the family and takes them to Club Sand, which turns out to be a swingers resort as well as surrounded by barbed wire to keep rebels out.

There are a lot of talented people in this movie such as Phil Hartman and Megan Mullally, but the film lets them down at every turn with half-baked ideas of jokes. Supposedly, Grodin rewrote nearly the entire script and I think that explains a lot about how this film feels like unfinished ideas. It’s a Frankenstein monster of a script with half-complete ideas that feel like they are from completely different movies.

 

Short Circuit

Advertisement

Lets just get this out of the way: What in the world was Fisher Stevens doing?

NOVA Laboratory has come up with a new series of military robots called S.A.I.N.T. (Strategic Artificially Intelligent Nuclear Transport). Following a successful demonstration for the military, Five is struck by an electrical surge and finds itself needing ‘input.’ After inadvertently escaping the lab, it wands into the life of Stephanie Speck (Ally Sheedy), who cares for animals and takes Five in. Dr. Newton Crosby (Steve Guttenberg) is trying to get five back, while the security team wants to destroy it.

Overall, the film is thin, but harmless. The 80s did seem to love a ‘technology being used for the wrong reasons’ theme, and this falls into that camp. What is mind-blowing, however, is Stevens as Ben Jabituya, Crosby’s assistant. Not only is he wearing brown face, but he’s doing a horrible Indian accent and later reveals he was born and raised in the U.S.

His whole character is mystifying.

Honestly, a couple of decades ago I may have recommended this movie, but it’s a definite pass now just for being offensive.

Advertisement

1986 Movie Reviews will continue on May 16, 2026, with Sweet Liberty and Top Gun.


Continue Reading

Movie Reviews

Movie Review: AFFECTION – Assignment X

Published

on

Movie Review: AFFECTION – Assignment X


By ABBIE BERNSTEIN / Staff Writer


Posted: May 8th, 2026 / 08:34 PM

AFFECTION movie poster | ©2026 Brainstorm Media

Rating: Not Rated
Stars: Jessica Rothe, Joseph Cross, Julianna Layne
Writer: BT Meza
Director: BT Meza
Distributor: Brainstorm Media
Release Date: May 8, 2026

 AFFECTION is an odd title for this tale. While it is about a number of topics and emotions, fondness isn’t one of them. Obsession, definitely. Love, possibly. The kind of general warm fellow feelings associated with “affection”? No.

Advertisement

There have been a lot of movies lately in which characters – mostly women – are grappling with false identities and/or false memories imposed upon them, mostly by men.

Let us stipulate that the protagonist (Jessica Rothe) in AFFECTION is not an android or in an artificial reality. However, we can tell something is way off from the opening sequence. A car is stalled on a tree-bordered highway. Rothe’s character is lying face down on the asphalt beside it, possibly dead.

But then the young woman rises, dragging a broken ankle. She experiences a full-body seizure. Fighting to recover, she sees oncoming headlights and tries to run, only to be hit by a car.

The woman wakes up in a bed she doesn’t recognize, next to a man (Joseph Cross) she likewise is sure she’s never seen before. One big confrontation later, the man says his name is Bruce – and that the woman is his wife, Ellie.

Ellie insists that her name is Sarah Thompson, and she is married to someone else, with a son. When she sees her reflection in a mirror, she doesn’t relate to the face looking back at her.

Advertisement

Bruce counters that Ellie has a rare neurological condition that causes her to block out her waking life and believe her dreams are real. This is why they agreed, together, to move to this isolated house, without the kinds of interruptions that can hinder Ellie’s recovery.

The set-up is presented in a way where we share Ellie’s skepticism. But Ellie and Bruce’s little daughter Alice (Julianna Layne) immediately identifies Ellie as “Mommy!” Alice appears to be too young to be in on any kind of deception, so what is going on here?

AFFECTION eventually explains this via a helpful videotape, though it’s so convoluted that viewers watching on streaming may want to replay the sequence to make sure they understand the exposition.

Writer/director BT Meza musters a sense of menace and lurking weirdness, as well as making great use of his location.

We still have a lot of questions, many of which are still unanswered by the film’s end. It may not matter to the points AFFECTION is trying to make, but a better sense of exactly how all this started might help our investment.

Advertisement

As it is, despite a heroically versatile performance by Rothe, a credible and anguished turn by Cross and appealing work from Layne, we’re so busy trying to piece together what’s important and what’s not and how we’re supposed to feel about all of it that it can be hard to keep track of the action as it unfolds.

Agree or not, Meza’s arguments are lucid and illustrated clearly by AFFECTION’s events. However, the movie is structured in a way that becomes more frustrating as it goes. We comprehend it intellectually but can’t engage viscerally.

Related: Movie  Review: ITCH!
Related: Movie  Review: HOKUM
Related: Movie  Review: ANIMAL FARM
Related: Movie  Review: OVER  YOUR DEAD BODY
Related: Movie  Review: THE WOLF AND THE LAMB
Related: Movie  Review: BASIC PYSCH
Related: Movie  Review: SCREAMS FROM THE TOWER
Related: Movie  Review: FUZE
Related: Movie  Review: LEE CRONIN’S THE MUMMY
Related: Movie  Review: HAPPY HALLOWEEN
Related: Movie  Review: NORMAL
Related:
Movie  Review: MOTHER MARY
Related: Movie  Review: FACES OF DEATH
Related: Movie  Review: EXIT 8
Related: Movie  Review: HAMLET
Related: Movie  Review: THE YETI
Related: Movie  Review: OUR HERO, BALTHAZAR
Related: Movie  Review: THE SERPENT”S SKIN
Related: Movie  Review: PRETTY LETHAL
Related: Movie  Review: READY OR NOT 2:  HERE I COME

Follow us on Twitter at ASSIGNMENT X
Like us on Facebook at ASSIGNMENT X

Article Source: Assignment X
Article: Movie  Review: AFFECTION

 

Advertisement

 

Related Posts:

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending