I do not think that most kids can appreciate how great of a movie P.J. Hogan has made with this new version of "Peter Pan." However you really have to be familiar with not only all of the various versions of the story from Disney to Steven Spielberg but also J. M. Barrie's original plays and books to really appreciate everything that is in this movie. Hogan's purpose was to go back to that original material, but it is impossible not to touch upon everything that has come since then. My generation cannot hear the words "I do believe in fairies" without thinking of Mary Martin beckoning out from our television sets beseeching us to clap (or when Smee turns and gives an aside to the viewer).
On the one hand there are the fantastic elements as Peter Pan (Jeremy Sumpter) and the Darling children Wendy (Rachel Hurd-Wood), John (Harry Newell), and Michael (Freddie Popplewell) fly off to Never-Land. But this is a more realistic Never-Land than every before for all the wonderful computer generated images. More importantly, these are more realistic children than ever before. Peter Pan is the boy who will never grow up, but he is also on the cusp of puberty, as is Wendy. Into the Darling household comes Aunt Millicent (Lynn Redgrave), who insists that Wendy is not a girl anymore and while her father should start looking for marital prospects at the bank where he works, the more immediate goal is to move her out of the bedroom she shares with her brothers. When Peter Pan appears on the windowsill and requires his shadow to be sewn back onto this feet, Wendy not only does the sewing but accepts his offer to come to Never-Land because she too desperately wants to avoid growing up.
In this "Peter Pan" a kiss is more than just a thimble. This is not to suggest that there is a sexual element to these children or this film that parents need to worry about, but there is the potential for sexuality in Peter and Wendy. It is around the corner and that is important because there is a price to pay for never growing up, and never before has the tragic flip side of Peter Pan's joyful and magical existence been so obvious in telling this tale. Adults will recognize that period of their life it all it's metaphoric splendor in this film.
We also have the most realistic Captain Hook (Jason Issacs) of our acquaintance as well. Hogan continues the long-standing tradition of having the actor who plays Hook do double duty as Mr. Darling as well, but in this richer vision of the story they are as opposite as night and day. When this Hook crosses swords with Peter we know that they it might look like great fun, but these two are deadly serious about the final, fatal outcome. More importantly, when this Hook blusters and bellows he manages to do it without falling into parody. This is Hook as Barrie intended him to be, larger than life, but still a real figure.
Ultimately the power running throughout this story is the power of the story. The Lost Boys are despearate for a mother and to them Wendy can fulfill the role because she has what they consider to be the single requirement: she can tell stories. But there is another, more important requirement for a mother, and this film remembers that as well in the end when the Darling children return to their mother (Olivia Williams). I especially liked the way the film plays the beginning of the reunion of the scene, a nice underscoring of the idea that you can wish for something so hard that you do not notice when you have it.
This is a stunning visual film, but it is also a film of substance that mines Barrie's idea of the boy who would not grow up for everything it is worth. This "Peter Pan" has a depth greater than every all the other versions we have seen on the silver screen to date. This is a glorious film and even if few will really appreciate it the way it truly deserves, there is still the fact that just coming into contact with it will open the minds of its viewers to the greater realm of meaning and significance. Besides, there is always the possibility that somewhere down the road as they enjoy this beautiful film again and again, that eventually they will appreciate what it is all about.
The last time J. M. Barrie's infamous creation hit the big screen was in the lacklustre "Return to Neverland", the latest in a long line of pitiful animated sequels that the Disney Company have been mechanically churning out. The time before that was in Steven Spielberg's critically ill-received "Hook". With these two movies as a somewhat stale background for writer/director P. J. Hogan's attempt to recreate the fairytale, it was not surprising if audiences at large were somewhat cynical.
But children's literature translated onto the big screen is always successful when it is done faithfully and respectfully, and that is precisely what Hogan and his team have done. For the first time ever (if you can believe it) a young boy plays the part of the Boy Who Never Grew Up: Jeremy Sumpter, complete with bare feet, pan pipes and captivating smile. Following in the pantomime tradition, Jason Issacs plays both George Darling and Captain Hook, meek and clumsy in one role, charismatic and brutal in the next. Ultimately a figure to be pitied, Hook is more aware of his dependence on Pan than he lets on, and the two are more similar than either would like to admit.
Olivia Williams plays the beautiful and graceful Mrs Darling, whilst Richard Briers makes a humorous Smee, often making side-comments directly to the audience. John, Michael and the Lost Boys are played by some wonderful child actors, in particular Slightly (Theodore Chester) who creates most of the laughs for the movie: "Okay boys, look lovable." Ludivine Sagnier takes on the rather difficult role of Tinkerbell. The role means she has to rely solely on exaggerated facial expressions to present Tink's "one emotion at a time", though I was disappointed in the failure of creating the bond between Peter and Tinkerbell, which somewhat lessens the impact of her later sacrifice.
The real star of the story however belongs to Wendy, and new-comer Rachel Hurd-Wood breaths her to life. Gone is the prissy Wendy of the Disney productions, thankfully replaced by a young woman who is both mischievous and wise, playful and sensual, with a hidden kiss in the corner of her mouth. She is a remarkable find, and shows considerable talent for one who has no previous experience.
There are a few changes to the original story (mostly surrounding the considerably heightened romantic inclinations between Wendy and Peter), but they are sparse. The inclusion of Aunt Millicent was something that intially didn't appeal to me, but luckily she is not portrayed as a grumpy, aristocratic matriarch, but a somewhat befuddled, though loving aunt. And let's face it, Lynn Redgrave never fails to deliver a performance. The changes are slight and understandable, but those kept true are breathtaking. My main concern was that of Tinkerbell's cure, would could come across as cringe-worthy if done badly, but just try to refrain from smiling when Peter, then Wendy, then the Lost Boys, then the children of London begin to chant: "I do believe in fairies! I do! I do!" (and I was especially glad to see adults included in this declaration I'm certainly one of them!)
The visual creation of Neverland is something I can't really comment on, as it is entirely a matter of opinion let's just say it's bright, vibrant and doesn't hesitate to bend the rules of reality. I thought it was beautiful, but only wish I had more time to enjoy it, as sequences of potential awe (such as flying through London and the fairy-covered pirate ship) flashed by too quickly to really soak in.
There is one fault (if you can even call it that) in the telling of the story, and as it's playing on my mind, you'll have to bear with me in sorting it out. By creating a mutual attraction between Peter and Wendy (whereas in the book he called her "Mother" like the Lost Boys), the screenwriters begin a personal development in Peter that is not brought to a conclusion that makes sense. Throughout the story, Peter shows signs of perhaps wanting to leave Neverland: he is horrified at the thought Wendy might marry someone else, it is discovered he loves Wendy's stories because they all end in love, her "thimble" saves his very life, and he even admits to himself at the conclusion "to live would be an awfully big adventure". And yet, he still returns to Neverland. It would seem all that Wendy has shown him, all that he has discovered about himself comes to nothing, and there is no doubt in audience's minds that the choice he made was the wrong one.
But of course the alternative was that Peter actually *does* grow up, and that defeats the very purpose of Barrie's book. It was a no-win situation for the screenwriters: they could either stay true to the novel, or continue with their own creation and complete Peter's self-awareness. They choose the former, making the conclusion not just bittersweet, but truly heartbreaking.
There is no real right or wrong answer to my comments, its just something I wanted to bring up for people to think about. Ultimately, the story of Peter Pan is as Hook says: a tragedy a boy is trapped in youth without any experiences of love or marriage or fatherhood. Whilst Wendy will one day embark on what her Aunt Millicent called "the greatest adventure of all", Peter remains a boy that cannot give her what she seeks. Only a hidden kiss connects these two soulmates as a testimony to what might have been.
Buy Peter Pan (2003) Now
This live-action version of Peter Pan stars Jason Isaacs as Captain Hook and Jeremy Sumpter as Peter. The story begins in London, where motherless Peter has come to listen to stories told by young Wendy (Rachel Hurd-Wood). He takes her and her brothers to Neverland to live the wild pirate life, until it is time for them to return home and grow up.
All the characters you remember from your childhood are here: The ticking crocodile (computer-animated and scary), the fiesty Indian Princess, funny Pirate Smee, spunky Tinkerbelle, and even Nana, the dog-nanny. The film is photographed almost entirely in dark, moody lighting to heighten the feeling of magic and danger. Jason Isaacs hams it up just right as the dashing and outrageous Captain Hook and he is good as the timid clerk, Mr. Darling. Jeremy Sumpter looks just like Peter should look beautiful, cocky, and fun-loving.
Definitely darker and more sinister than the old Disney version, this film has a lot to offer adults: It is visually stunning and reminds us about the innocence and fun of childhood. It's an interesting movie that will put a smile on your face and perhaps a few wistful tears in your eye.
Read Best Reviews of Peter Pan (2003) Here
I'd never understood the story of Peter Pan. The Disney version is still probably my least favorite fairy tale adaptation of all of the Disney animated films. And every play or televised version featured a Peter Pan who was played by a tiny, female actress or gymnast, doing very little to bring the story to life for me. So last year, when I took my children to see the movie, I figured I'd settle in for a little nap while they enjoyed the kiddie flick. Boy, was I ever surprised when I walked out of the theatre completely bedazzled.
Never before has this story been presented with the very important angle of the innocent romance between Wendy and Peter, an angle that goes a long way in explaining both the reluctance and the desire to grow up. Finally, with this adaptation, I understood why Wendy might decide to grow up despite the allure of Neverland, and why Peter might regret his eventual decision to remain a forever-boy.
Adding to this the wonderful chemistry between Jeremy Sumpter and Rachel Hurd-Wood and you have a movie that appeals to kids on an adventure level and to adults on an emotional level. The vulnerability and grief in Peter's eyes during the final scene were enough to bring tears to my own. And I have to say that this movie contained one of the sweetest on-screen kisses I've seen in a long time. Using actors that are (or are very near) the actual ages of Wendy and Peter was a spot-on decision, because their very natural fascination with each other and awkwardness about these new and amazing feelings showed in every one of their scenes together.
The film itself is beautiful and lush. Only complaint I have is in the final battle scene between Peter and Captain Hook when the red lighting is used to an extreme, making it difficult to see properly and distracting from rather than adding to the feel of the moment.
Finally, I simply loved the casting of this film. Jason Isaacs showed the perfect balance between cartoon evil and human realism with his Captain Hook. Rachel Hurd-Wood was amazing as the fearless girl who could hold her own against pirates and Lost Boys, yet still showed that special romantic, dreamy quality of all young girls. And Jeremy Sumpter perfectly nailed Peter Pan confident and cocky with a grin that is going to turn into a wicked lady-killer someday, yet still he showed Peter's ultimate sadness so very well.
Wonderful movie. I'd pick this one over the Disney version any day of the year.
Want Peter Pan (2003) Discount?
Neverland has never looked so lush and treacherous, nor has the subtext of incipient sexual longing ever been so prominent as in P. J. Hogan's Freudian take on the J. M. Barrie childhood classic. Hogan skillfully revives Barrie's original concept of the story as a coming-of-age tale about a girl facing the terror and allure of womanhood -and the fantasy boy who temporarily seduces her back to the world of make-believe.
Hogan dares to cast authentic boy Jeremy Sumpter as Peter. Androgynous and feral, with his tousled hair and unsettling coquette's smile, this Peter combines irritating boyish bravado with hormonal confusion; he doesn't know what he really wants when he brings Wendy to Neverland as a surrogate mother. Rachel Hurd-Wood is a ripe and trembling Wendy, who fears the grown-up world, yet expects something more than childhood games from Peter. When Peter can't or won't comply, Wendy dallies with an even more ambivalent and unstable romantic object-Captain Hook (Jason Isaacs). Wendy is "not afraid, but entranced" by "the dark figure that had haunted her dreams."
Isaacs' superb Hook is no comic buffoon. Psychopathic enough to gut his own crewmen with his hook, he's also a raging wit, vain of his own erudition, amusing himself with jokes no one else can grasp. ("Split my infinitives," he exclaims, mid-battle.) Isaacs revitalizes Hook with dark comedy and menacing brio. Yet there's a poignant underpinning: the poison he concocts from his own tear is a toxic brew of "malice, jealousy, and disappointment." Isaacs' textured performance invites us to ponder the tragedy of a grown-up Hook trapped forever in Peter's eternal childhood. (...)
Save 40% Off
The Courier is similar to "Transporter" with maybe a touch of "The Usual Suspects." The Courier(Jeffrey Dean Morgan) lives and works in New Orleans and appears to live well below his means. He does have a magic Hollywood watch that makes countdown noises only when a camera is on it.
