MovieChat Forums > Paddington (2015) Discussion > The only change that has me scratching m...

The only change that has me scratching my head a bit...

posted 10 years ago by jschillig
2 replies | jump to latest

I haven't yet seen the movie (and won't until January), but I'm aware of many of its plot points and some of its details. It seems to me that most of the tweaks and changes to the books serve the story (and its updated time period) quite well (as critics and audiences seem to agree). But there's one change that baffles me a bit as to its motivation:

In the books, Mrs. Bird was the Browns' live-in housekeeper. But from what I understand in this movie, Mrs. Bird is described as a "distant relative" who's their "unofficial housekeeper." (Apparently they see fit to call their own relative "Mrs. Bird" and not "Auntie Emma" or something?...Okay, I know Bond never gave Mrs. Bird a first name but "Emma" seems to fit for me.)

So why this change? Is it because upper-middle-class families these days don't often have live-in housekeepers, or maybe because they didn't want the Browns looking like the 1%? It's just a matter of curiosity for me...did the makers of this ever clarify this point?

[–] L0GAN5 10 years ago

I think it's a conscious effort to make them "class less" and relatable to modern Britons. If they had a servant then basically Paddington would be living with "toffs".

[–] lougarry33 10 years ago

I agree, although it's pretty hard to make the Browns seem like an ordinary family when they can afford to live in a townhouse in central London ;) Since Paddington calls the Browns Mr and Mrs Brown it seems reasonable for him to call Mrs Bird by her surname too even if she is a member of the family.