
Rating: 




(Mike’s review re-posted as Paul is released in the U.K. today – Valentine’s Day!)
Just when you thought that Simon Pegg and Nick Frost had exhausted all of the bromance tales they could possibly milk from their relationship, they ruddy well pop up with another. The good news is that this time, they return to the level of geekery that best suits their strengths.
Paul is the story of Graeme Willy (Simon Pegg) and Clive Gollings (Nick Frost), two ordinary British nerds who have made their first pilgrimage over to Comic Con in San Diego. They aren’t just there to soak up the cape clad heroes and sci-fi stars they’ve idolised for so long, however, the pair have also planned a road trip taking in the most infamous alien contact sites in the US.
What they pair don’t bank on is the sudden appearance or archetypal alien Paul (voiced by Seth Rogen), who is fleeing from the government who have decided that he has fulfilled any possible uses since his crash in Roswell and that it is therefore high time that the USA gain the benefits a brain dissection would offer. So begins a madcap flight across the country to get Paul to a secure site from which he can be picked up by his intergalactic brethren.
Essentially the film is a road movie/sci-fi/love triangle crossover, and each element has its pros and cons.
The direction by Greg Mottola is tame and illustrates two things quite clearly: firstly, Pegg and Frost are pedestrian without the visual flair of Edgar Wright to provide the punch to their lines, secondly, Mottola’s work in Adventureland and Superbad have been vastly overrated. The two films were average at best, and the best parts were carried by some quality acting and clever scripting.
The bulk of the comedy comes in the road trip shenanigans of Graeme, Clive and Paul. The trailer reveals a few of the big laughs, but the pleasure of the film is more in the generally fertile atmosphere of dense sci-fi references. From the obvious music of the Mos Eisley cantina accompanying a bar brawl to cannier lines from various films creeping into the dialogue, there are a huge number of nods to the genre that fans will welcome.

The best and the worst, however, comes with the introduction of Bible belt babe Ruth Buggs (Kristen Wiig), who the trio liberate from her devout and overbearing father in a trailer park somewhere in the deep south. What she brings in the comedy stakes is a risque series of attacks on Christianity that will be as unpopular among some sector of American audiences (Paul: “My existence doesn’t necessarily disprove religion: just all Judaeo-Christian denominations”) as it is popular among sci-fi fans and atheists (I challenge anyone not to laugh at the ‘Evolve this’ t-shirt). It also injects some edge and controversy into what could otherwise have been a by-the-numbers effort.
For her part, Wiig is excellent. She delivers the laughs with the kind of timing and energy that many better established comedy actresses would kill for, and does her best not to go overkill on the religious gags.

The only problem is that she almost overbalances the bromance side of the story. The bizarre menage-a-trois of Paul, Clive and Graeme made for a welcome fresh take on this well-trodden path, and the jealousy that made the two humans resent one another for ‘hogging the alien experience’ whilst simultaneously, and somewhat paradoxically, resenting Paul for putting strain on their friendship produced some excellent scenes. But when Ruth is introduced the tension is diluted somewhat, flabby scenes are introduced to try and produce some more sexual (and non-sexual) energy into the proceedings, but all this serves to do is slow things down.
Nonetheless, the story finds its footing again in the final act: where a grand showdown not only amps up the geek-o-meter to full throttle but blasts a few surprises into the mix. The best being the introduction of Sigourney Weaver, who is on top form as the evil government official trying to prevent Paul’s escape. Her face-off with Jason Bateman, who has played a pursuing FBI agent to a tee throughout the film, pulls together the road movie/chase elements brilliantly, just as the referencing and general geekery hit fever pitch.
Thanks in no small part to this satisfying conclusion, Paul turns out to be a satisfying piece of entertainment that, though it never quite reaches the Pegg/Frost laugh levels of classics like Shaun of the Dead, has some character of its own to enjoy.

Paul is released in the U.K. on Valentine’s Day – February 14th but not until March 18th in the U.S.
Want to write about the stuff you're passionate about and have your work read by an audience of over 10 million a month? Click here to become a contributor.








14 Comments
My worry all along has been that it would become a smug and self-indulgent slew of geek references and not much else. Seeing it tomorrow so I’ll let you know my opinion.
Keen to hear your thoughts Shaun. If that’s your biggest worry you might be pleasantly surprised, I had way more concerns than that going in!
Your review is way off the mark, I saw it recently and I can tell you that whilst it is without doubt a ‘geek-fest’, there are no flabby scenes that I saw and why oh why do you have to compare it with ‘classic’ Shaun of the Dead is beyond me. SOTD was a great film but only became a classic on DVD as it did nothing in UK cinemas.
Yes it misses Edgar Writes creative nods and winks but this is not a 3 star film you complete ball-bag.
Colin actually works for Universal Pictures. He’s been spouting abuse at anyone who has spoken negatively of PAUL on Twitter all afternoon. How professional.
I would have probably given it an extra star. To me it felt a lot more focused than Hot Fuzz and not as keen to exlude with its humour; this was more broad, sure, but I loved the cast (Hader and Rogen especially), and it felt like a more genuine love letter to what it was spoofing, IMO.
Surprised it isn’t getting more raves really; it’s RT score is fairly average.
I went along on Valentines days to see Paul and found a pretty enjoyable film. The missing “charm” of SOTD and Hot Fuzz could be on account of it being an American film?
Either way its packed with geek references, references to past Simon and Nick films and will likely as not become a cult classic on the DVD market.
As for the Christian bashing and reference to Southerner’s as homophobic numpties. It suits the intended market oh so well, I doubt very much Simon or Nick are worrying about the American Family Association! Their members wouldn’t buy this film anyway nor allow it refuge in their home (-:
It deserves a 4 in reality, you’ll only end up changing the score when it reaches a few million DVD sales and notches up “cult” status.
I think the reviews spot on, I agree with the 3 stars and the fact Edgar Wright would have visually improved this. Yet I think Mottola deserves some credit for both Superbad and Adventureland, two great films.
I saw this film recently and i have to say i disagree with the comments made above. I cant understand why people cant just appreciate a film for what it is anymore! Everyone is so over critical of every aspect…..
I thought so too!! I thought it would be a show filled with non-stop scenes of lame jokes with a bad story line; but seeing it i find that the story had funny jokes as well as brilliant scenes… 4 stars from me !! :)
I’m surprised anyone could this 3 out of 5 nevermind a 4 that others have mentioned. I liked Shaun of the Dead and I thought Hot Fuzz was pretty good too but this was utter garbage. I hardly mustered a laugh for the whole film. The jokes were shallow and poor. I appreciated the references… but that hardly makes a good film. I also agree with the points about religion bashing and homophobia – an easy target for who the film will undoubtedly be loved by… it just felt so very tired and cliched… I’d give it a very generous 2 out of 5…
Ever seen John Carpenters 1984 film STARMAN? The alien ‘Scott’ is on the run from the men in black suits. He is aided in his escape by a needy female. On the journey he revives a dead deer. He discovers the delights of earth food, (in 1984 they weren’t allowed to promote drugs of any kind for fear of encouraging irresponsibility!) The woman gets shot and dies….Scott revives her but it really drains his energy. In the end the two make it to a predetermined rendezvous in the Arizona desert. The mother ship returns for him, he goes home, end of story.
Thats the original film. I know Peggs version is supposed to be hilarious but the obvious attack on christians made me feel uncomfortable and I stopped laughing half way through. I found the experience disappointing and prefer the original film much more. If Simon Pegg is claiming that this film was his own idea, I don;t believe him. He’s simply nicked somebody elses idea and made a few prejudicial additions. Boring, boring, boring.
The film is tripe.
Its concept is, an Alien, that acts like a chav, swears a bit, smokes a bit, bears its backside – oh hilarity.
Distint lack of content and few laughs, poor, very poor. Avoid it, 3/10 (on a good day)
the movie “Paul” had the propensity of being really good if they had left out the foul language and the portrayal of evangelical Christians as complete idiots who stoop to the fact that if aliens were indeed a reality than their religion was in vain, when in fact it is entirely possible that God has created more than just one “earth” there may be many “earths” and planets that God has created with a variety of beings who were made in his image which means his spirit, Gods’ “image” doesn’t mean literally that beings look like him, it merely means that the spirit of God is within their souls, personally I was offended by this film and I didn’t appreciate the message that was intended in it, just because I believe in God doesn’t make me an imbecile nor does NOT believing in God make someone an imbecile, this movie upset me, in that it had a negative view of Christian beliefs and it didn’t portray Christians in a positive way. The message from the writers and producers of this film was mean spirited and unnecessary. I could have enjoyed the cute little fellow in the film had he not been so prejudiced against God.
Thank you for your review.