Peter Pan

[thunder]

Let's rewatch this and see where the talk takes us this time.

[Anniemouse]

Many things have struck my about this movie. Boy is it handsome. Lucious tones and stunning costumes are just a start. I watched this on TV one Christmas many years ago and was surprised that I had never heard of this version. P.J.Hogan did a great jopb sticking closely to the original text and it is sometimes knockabout fun and sometimes really creapy.

Jason is magnificent. Sinister, sexy, cowardly, brave, camp and menacing it brings a difficult character to life. I think he is the best screen Hook and I do not say that lightly. Hoffman is one of the best actors of the late 20th century yet his version felt flat for me and considering that cast had Robin Williams and Bob Hoskins with Speilburg at the helm I could never get over what a misfire that was.

Yet this version shone. I think Jason just got the text and strangly added enough darkness while keeping it fun. I can only speculate that maybe the budget over running meant that the financiers were reluctant to cough up for marketing or simply did not like it. (they were wrong by the way) This fits into the pile of films finding their audience despite the studio.

The performaces are great and seeing Richard Briers and Lynne Redgrave (bless them) is such a treat and Olivia Williams is just mother love and would love her and Jason to appear again in a project.

I liked the young actress who played Wendy. The actor who played Peter seemed a little nervous to me. I suspect that he had a lot to bare as the young lead with Wendy. I wonder if that stemmed from the pressures of a film set that was apparently at times struggling.

Hearing that Jason kept watch and showed such kindness to the kids shows, what a great man he is.

And to top it all off Jason formed an unbreakable bond with GOSH that continues to this day.

By the way I still cannot see Brad Pit as Hook. A 10/10 for me.

[thunder]

It was wonderful to see this again, I can't remember when I watched the whole movie, and I think this is only the second time I watched it all the way through. I have seen Jason's scenes a lot of times, and made fanvids from it, but not the whole movie. I think the first time was on TV before I "discovered" Jason, because I remember when I started to gather his movies that I remembered that I had seen Peter Pan. But I definitely didn't watch it in the cinema.

I don't have the answer to why it didn't do well. It was a bit noisy around 2003, when it came out. The Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter came out around that time, and I think they took a lot of the attention. I also think that people think they know what Peter Pan is, and that they have already seen it, in a way. So they didn't bother to go and watch it. Also, and I hate to say this... The movie didn't have any big names to drag in the big crowds. Jason is absolutely brilliant, and I can't imagine anyone else in his roles. But he isn't an A-lister. Maybe that is why he was blamed for for flop as well. (I don't think that was fair, though)

It's like watching a beautiful poem. The look of it, the music, the performances, everything is just in harmony. Whenever someone makes a new Peter Pan movie now, they always get compared to this one, and this one always hold up against the new adaptations. The reason, I think, is that it is quite dark, but at the same time very playful. It takes the audience very seriously, and don't just fall into fancy effects and other dressing. Loike a lot of other movies made for children. It's all about the core story. It's also a story that children will enjoy, and that adults can watch and enjoy. When I watched it again now, it was a slightly different movie thatn what I expected to see. I thought I knew it quite well, but even if it was familiar, I discovered some new things.

It's a true classic, and I think people will watch this for a very long time. I think I will see it again too.

[Antoni Bandzior]

I don't even know where to start.
I absolutely love this movie since forever. It was one of really not many movies with Jason that were available in Poland. I have old DVD with cut scenes and such, and watch it every time I'm feeling down or sick. It's my ultimate comfort movie that always improves my mood, and helps with a flu.

I haven't seen the newest version from this year, so can't compare. I watched Hook version with Hoffman and it rather scared me away from the story, it was cringe for me, even when I was 12 at the time when it was released. So I'm really glad I gave this version(our Peter Pan) a chance, because I like music, and costumes, scenogrraphy and the way the whole story is put together.

In some scenes you can see that the kid actors are stiff, unpolished, but I kinda never pick on kid actors, because they're just kids. We can see very good scenes, and some weaker ones with them, so I think it was probably the order of filming and further into the story, they seem more used to the camera, set and characters. Adults are all amazing... Absolute gem to watch. And the fact Jason plays both Mr.Darling and Hook is the best option, really. He perfectly balances on the verge between being nasty and sweet and sexy, without beig obnoxious or overdrawn. And you can see perfectly well his comedic skills, that should be explored more often. I'd really like to see the spin-off with the same cast - 20 years later.
So, ladies, since Peter Pan is right now in public domain... we can use book characters, and create next part

I like how it's done, you can see Hook as a villain, empatize with him to some degree, but then you are not really sorry he gets (spoiler alert) eaten. The has this perfect fairy-tale structure that you know the vilain needs to lose and the main character needs to move on with her story... And even if you have percieved the father as a covard in the beginning you can see his caring attitude and you end up on his side in the end. I would say perfect story for all girls with daddy issues. Generally brilliantly done tale, that makes you believe in fairies.

I love the whole extra material - with Jaosn filming people and set... and I wonder how often he does that, and if there's somewhere the whole disc of materials of off-set reports and hidden cameras with him doing pranks on the cast...

And I am understanding it correctly, right? The whole Lost Girls group name is an alternate version of Hook's Lost Boys?

[thunder]

Jason manages to be theatrical and perfectly believable at the same time- I think it's a difficult movie for children to act in, since it's so stylished in a way. It may have been easier if it were more gritty and realistic (but that wouldn't fit this movie).

I think they do a very good job, though.

[Helen8]

Sorry that I only discovered this section today. I would have loved rewatching Peter Pan and adding my thoughts. I'll be around for the next movie choice.

[thunder]

It's not too late, Helen. Join in if you still want to watch it and share your thoughts

[thunder]

Do you know any other movies like Peter Pan, that covers coming of age in the same way? I asked an AI robot, and got Lion King.

[Anniemouse]

The Railway Children

The Boy with Green Hair

Spirited Away (All Studio Ghibli)

The Princess Diaries

Frozen

There are probably more.

[thunder]

Coming of age movies with girls in the lead, yes... there are plenty.

I was thinking that maybe Alice in Wonderland was in some of the same genre.

There's The Brothers Lionheart from the Swedish writer Astrid Lindgren. But that's more about a dying boy, who finds the courage to face death, even if he is scared. He goes to the land of Nangijala, which his brother told him stories about, before he died. It was my favourite book growing up, but I didn't realize what it was really about until I became an adult. When I was a kid, I just read it like a fairytale. I still think it's one of my favourite books.

The Neverending story too, maybe?

[servalan]

I haven't rewatched this recently, although I often catch it on TV here (where it's shown regularly around Easter & Christmas when children are off school). I think it's a great film for Jason, as he has so much screen time, and gets to play so many emotions as both Hook & Mr Darling. Jason is one of the best actors at emotions, it's all in the eyes.

The book has a special meaning for me too because I read it as a child - my mother's copy, which she had had since she was young herself. It had black & white illustrations, some of which she had painted in expertly in bright colours.

The film does not stick absolutely to the book or the play (which are different in places - the play came first), but the story adaptation never jars - except Aunt Millicent does not exist in either. I love Lynne Redgrave (I especially loved her in Georgy Girl), but even so the addition seemed unnecessary to me. I liked the fact they had a real Native American girl playing Tiger Lily, because "injuns" was a real trope in the story, and very much of its time, when they would have always been baddies.

The film is great in that it makes Hook into a three dimensional character, which he really isn't in the book or play. We can see in some ways why he has turned out the way he is, and in some scenes we even sympathise with him - such as when he watches Peter and Wendy together while he is alone.

I just love the way Hook was played. Amongst my favourite scenes are:

1. When we first see Hook, bed-head hair and severed arm with its hook not yet attached. Smee as played by the inestimable late Richards Briers, makes a great twosome with Jason in all their scenes, as they both have wonderful comic timing - and Smee gets asides to the camera too

2. When Hook meets Wendy and tries too woo her: "Wendy Darling" even though she's just a child. He is so sexy even when he changes tune and becomes really nasty later on.

As Mr Darling he is equally attractive in a totally different way, always worried about something.

Rachel Hurd-Wood who played Wendy went on to be in Perfume with Alan Rickman, which brings in another Harry Potter star, who is greatly missed.

[thunder]

I've never read the book, what are the main differences?

[servalan]

Without rereading the book, I would summarise the difference is that the story is about Peter, Wendy and the Lost Boys (which include Wendy's brothers). Tinker Bell is a main character too. She is in love with Peter so she hates Wendy, so that bit is the same.

However although Hook is not in the story as much as in the film, his character portrayal is pretty accurate - although Jason's Hook is much more appealing and attractive than book Hook. Some of the dialogue is straight from the book, although scenes have been changed about.

Wendy wanting to be a pirate called Red-Handed Jill is very much playing to a modern audience - in the book, brother John tells Hook if he were a pirate he would be called Red-Handed Jack. Film Wendy updates the story so she is not just seen as a mother figure.

Hook and the pirates also massacred most of the Indians, which is not in the film at all - as I said the book and its attitudes are of its time. Tiger Lily survived though, along with a very few of the others.

Also, as I said, Aunt Millicent isn't in the book.

There is another book called Peter Pan in Kensington Gardens (1906) with beautiful illustrations by Arthur Rackham. This was published in between the play (1904) and book (1911) of Peter Pan. This shows Peter living there as a baby before Neverland. It's why there is a statue of Peter Pan in Kensington Gardens in London.

[thunder]

Thank you, Servalan.
It's interesting how they adapted to the contemporary audience.