Pan (2015) Review!!!

Synopsis – 12-year-old orphan Peter is spirited away to the magical world of Neverland, where he finds both fun and dangers, and ultimately discovers his destiny — to become the hero who will be forever known as Peter Pan.

My Take – Everyone knows who Peter Pan is. There have so many adaptions of this legendary tale from J.M. Barrie about Wendy, Tinkerbell, Captain Hook, Neverland and the boy who could fly, its nearly hard to keep a count! Other than the early Disney animated adaption & Steven Spielberg‘s star-studded but rather ghastly Hook, which pitched Peter as a grown-up, its hard to think of any other adaption which are close to watchable. Well of course their is Marc Forster‘s J.M. Barrie biography Finding Neverland (*ing Johnny Depp & Kate Winslet) took a completely different approach to examining the story by introducing us to the family that inspired author J.M. Barrie‘s original play, and the struggle he went through to write it. I must admit, I am always intrigued with beginnings, as a result, I was always begging to know answers to the questions of where did Peter Pan come from and how did he get introduced to all of these iconic characters on this magical island? And what is this magical land?. Well we don’t get all the answers obviously, but sure do get some. Unfortunately, this latest take on J.M. Barrie‘s tale of Peter Pan, which originally debuted on the London stage in 1904, is bright, overly busy and in a rush to grow up. Here, director Joe Wright creates his own interpretation of Barrie‘s story by taking the source material and imagining what came before, in the form of live-action remake/reboot/prequel, telling the story of how Peter found Neverland, and became Peter Pan. The story is placed against a visually stunning backdrop of childhood dreams. Wright provides the magical land that would be expected of the J.M. Barrie story, but like Peter and James Hook in the film, the director seems to get lost along the way. There are so many elements and characters to take in and retrofit into the familiar children’s fairy tale it becomes muddled in the delivery. The main issue I had with this film is that it seemed like it couldn’t make up it’s mind on whether it wanted to cater to children with goofy and antic like behavior from the characters, or offer up serious and gritty story telling for the adults. It flip flops from one to the other from scene to scene and it’s very noticeable.

The incredibly cringe-worthy use of Smells Like Teen Spirit song from Nirvana in the Neverland introduction scene represents my point the best. This 3D film exists on vertical lines: pirates descend on ropes, ships fly up, and that adds to the dislocated feeling that lingers behind the overloaded compositions. The movie needed a little gravity. Wright is no stranger to excess – he staged the Dunkirk evacuation for a single long take in 2007’s Atonement – but it can be a distraction. Ultimately, there’s not a great deal of emotional sustenance behind all the reasonings. I guess they were trying to go along the same line as the movie Hook (1991), which like I mentioned before was ghastly. Its pretty obvious, their is nothing original about this story, in the sense its obvious where they pulled the source material from. There is no masking of who Peter Pan represents in Neverland. See if any of this story-line sounds familiar, a prophecy says that the son of Mary will one day come and be the messiah for the people of this land. Once Peter is fully aware of his role, he will have three days to rise to the challenge and save Neverland. Even though the overall story is a bit confusing & slow at times, this film production paves the way for many discussions on who Peter is meant to represent and who the true Saviour of the world is for all of us. Its not a bad film, just a gorgeous mess. Visually beautiful with a superb music score, this mish mash of the writer and director’s favorite movie scenes, all shoved together and pelted at the audience, ends up being infuriating and tedious. The story follows Peter (Levi Miller), an orphan during World War II, who lives with the hope that his mother will come back to retrieve him. While living in the confines of the nightmarish orphanage, Peter and a multitude of other boys are inexplicably kidnapped by pirates and taken to a mysterious island that is controlled by the dreaded Blackbeard (Hugh Jackman). Peter must come to terms with a prophecy that has him at the heart of the deliverance of Neverland from this tyrannical pirate. He must partner with the local inhabitants and a strange ally named James T. Hook (Garrett Hedlund) to determine if Peter is really the savior of this magical land. What follows is an adventure in the famous Neverland, re-imagined for modern audiences with CGI creatures, pirates singing covers of Nirvana and the Ramones. There are tribesmen and mermaids too, among other fantastical things. The actors convey confusion of what type of film they are participating in and their performances do not capitalize on the talent that they represent. Also, with all that Wright is attempting to do with the film, the pacing of the film struggles under the weight of expectation and causes it to drag for the first half. Then he seems to attempt to make up for lost time in the second half and the journey comes in a rapid fire delivery that leads to confusion. Joe Wright knows how to make a beautiful looking movie, each scene comes alive with his distinct touch. The film is a fantastical journey into Neverland from the CGI point of view. It was beautiful & spectacular to watch as it’s probably one of the most colorful movies of the year. The special effects were great and looked glorious in 3D. This is they type of movie that is really worth the extra price of admission to see it on a big screen in 3D.

My screening was in 3D and it was completely stunning to see objects like pirate ships, arrows, and cannonballs fly off the screen. Like Avatar, this is a movie that you’re doing yourself an injustice by only seeing it in 2D. Scenes of aerial combat gave you the feeling that you are actually participating in the dogfights. There are a couple scenes where Peter is told stories of the past in elements of wood and water that was so beautifully animated. This is probably the one thing that everyone would agree with is that the film has some remarkable visuals. Director Joe Wright, whose previous films include Anna Karenina, Atonement, and Pride & Prejudice, also adds a certain Elizabethan flourish to the origins of Peter Pan. The music really tries to brainwash the audience into liking the movie. Which it probably did succeed to some extent. Even though I still found the film boring and empty. I eventually managed to isolate the music to the film so I could enjoy the movie without worrying about the music brainwashing me. Levi Miller‘s character was alright. He didn’t know how to use his powers and he didn’t want to have the responsibility of being Peter Pan after knowing his mother is not alive. The acting wasn’t perfect from this character but it passes for a kids film. Hugh Jackman is the highlight of the film as the villainous Blackbeard, especially in a scene early on where he confronts Peter about his flying powers, and the legend that a boy will come to rise up against him “Have you come to kill me, Peter?” he says in a somber tone. He has a charm and menace about him that suits the role well, and makes his unique looking character all the more memorable. Hook’s character was very likable! As the future villain, Garrett Hedlund does his best with what is offered to him. Hedlund presents us with a hardly recognizable Hook, channeling Harrison Ford‘s Indiana Jones down to the costume and humorous one liners. The love story between him and Princess Tiger Lily (Rooney Mara) seemed forced and underdeveloped; put in as an afterthought to break up all the action set pieces. Rooney Maara played herself, being the weird, out of place & untrustworthy character she is so accustomed to playing. Though Rooney may not fit the ethnic bill, she’s the one character who quietly brings some heart to proceedings. Amanda Seyfried is wasted in a small role. On the whole, ‘Pan’ is a pretty watchable movie, let down by its major flaws in writing. Pan had all the foundation to make a fantastic prequel for the Peter Pan story, sadly the foundation doesn’t have much to stay and what’s there, is on shaky ground. Even though Pan is a glossy special effects-driven, humorous adventure flick, you can see the influence of these genres, as well as other adventure flicks from over the years, on Wright‘s film. If your family likes fantasy movies like The Chronicles of Narnia, Maleficent, and Pirates of the Caribbean, then Pan is definitely worth checking out once or else skip it. Sorry Peter Pan you are no Harry Potter!