Things I loved: >Possible Spoilers ahead<

1. The storybook look of it all. The Cinematography, for the most part, was pretty good.

2.The Acting, on the part of both Wendy and especially Peter (Jeremy Sumpter) was spectacular

3. The Music, of course... He was able to perfectly grasp and express the childlike aspect of Peter's character, but was also able to be playful,adventurous, and quite personal.

4. The Kiss, and the sequence that follows. at first I was afraid that introducing love into the story would make the movie too much like a soap opera, or an afterschool teen special, but the director was able to hem the "love story aspect" in to serve the story (As is evident in the last fight sequence).

5. The "I do believe in Fairies sequence"

6. The scene before AND the first flight.

When I first listened, it was what I expected... then I heard the main theme. To be honest, I was initially underwhelmed. I think that had to do with expectation. I had forgot: this isn't a sequel. This is the story that INSPIRED Hook and Return to Neverland, two scores I adore. It took me a couple days to really 'get' what JNH was doing, but once I 'got it', WOW - it's probably sacrilege to even think in my mind, but Peter Pan by James Newton Howard ranks right up there with Hook, in my humble opinion.

Peter Pan is an immensely beautiful score. It's full of warmth and emotion, probably JNH's best effort in a long while. Don't get me wrong, there's room in my heart for Treasure Planet, Signs, Atlantis, Dinosaur, and Snow Falling on Cedars. But Peter Pan takes the cake. The depth the score added to an already incredible film, makes Peter Pan the film to see in 2003. Return of the King is wonderful, no doubt, but for an entirely satisfying 2-hour escape into one of the most whimsical and fantastical stories of our time, Peter Pan is the way to go. It's my new favorite movie.

The score combines the adventurous aspects of Treasure Planet with the whimsy of My Best Friend's Wedding and the wonder of one of the composer's most overlooked beauties, Alive. With themes for Peter, Peter and Wendy, for Cap'n Hook and his crew, for Tink and the Fairies, you're bound to be humming or whistling one (or all) of them well after the film is over. Finding an appropriate balance between the use of full children's choirs and adult choirs, the shear power of JNH's score is gripping and bubbling over with excitement.

The performances were virtually flawless, and I couldn't have asked for better casting. Jeremy Sumpter as Peter Pan was ... words can't really express ... he just did a brilliant job. I hope he makes a name for himself beyond this film. Rachel Hurd-Wood played Wendy with all the enthusiasm I was hoping she would. Jason Issacs made the perfect Mr. Darling / Captain Hook. I'm not sure that anything will ever top Dustin Hoffman's role in Hook, but for the purposes of this classic retelling of the story, Issacs fit the bill and doesn't disappoint. Olivia Williams as Mrs. Darling, while only a supporting role, gave an elegant and touching performance.

For the rest, I'm afraid you're gonna have to check it out yourself. It's simply too spectacular to give it all away right here, and even if I were to, I don't feel like typing any more! See the film, buy the cd, and be transported into one of the most masterful, artful, and truest retellings of this beloved tale. There's not a chance you won't enjoy it.

Very sincerely
(and enthusiastically),
Jeron

Besides, JNH produced the album and you're lucky you've got what you've got -- considering the movie tanked at the box office and will lose money for all involved.

As for the album, there are probably 2 cues I would have enjoyed hearing in addition to what made it on to the disc, but overall, it's a strong album and one terrific score. I hope others will see the film and appreciate it for what it is.

It's just such a wonderful score.

This first big screen adaptation of the classic tale made so popular by numerous state plays and of course Disney is edition really hits the spot.

Newcomers Jeremy Sumpter (Peter) and Rachel Hurd-Wood (Wendy) bring these two characters to life as never before. Sumpter is a joy to watch as Pan. Wide-eyed and innocent to the ways of the world, his performance was great. Like wise for Wood. Jason Isaacs goes a spectacular job as Hook and Mr. Darling. Young editions of a Harry Potter and Ron Wesley come in the form of John and Michael Darling (or so me and my friend thought...they sure look like those two).

Behind the camera we have PJ Hogan. Teaming with brilliant DP, Donald McAlpine (Moulin Rouse) this film jumps off the silver screen literally. The colors within every frame are bright and vibrant...and with editing by Michael Kahn and team…you really can’t go wrong! I can't wait to see this thing on DVD!

Re-teaming once again with composer James Newton Howard from my Best Friends Wedding is defiantly a masterful stroke for this film. Howard's themes are absolutely a joy to hear. My friend keep commenting how he could not get the "Flying Theme" out of his head. Howard gives a nice and refreshing score to an amazing film. Defiantly worth a look!

Bottom line, this film is great. If you haven't seen it yet I urge you to see it. A real jewel of the holiday season.

Big thanks to my big buddy down in "The LA" for making sure I saw it before I went back to school (As to how me made me see it..well...I'll leave that up to your imaginations )

--Brian

NP: Peter Pan Suite

Sumpter was actually the most distracting thing about the film for me. He's a very capable young actor as Frailty more than proved, but retaining his American accent did the part no favours. Whether it was down to his own inability, a bad choice in direction or studio demand I can not say, but it made for a somewhat arrogant and frustrating decision. He almost stuck out like a sore thumb in Peter Pan in being surrounded by such a stellar ensemble of British supporting actors be it Jason Issacs, Rachel Hurd-Wood or the scene stealing band of Lost Boys (notably Theodore Chester). Even Nana was spot on. For the boy who never grew up however, written to have hailed from Kensington… Well, netives of Kensington do not sport such accents.

It remains a greatly overlooked film, and not far shy of being a generally brilliant adaptation. I remain sad to see it put on such a mediocre performance at the box office. One has to wonder just how much Peter Pan and other classic children’s literature remains in the hearts of minds of young readers these days …

quote:

---

Who really cares where he's from?

---

Well, were he alive, the author... to hazard a guess, and I dare say fans who are as much in love with Barrie's writings about the character in 'Peter Pan in Kensington Gardens' as they are the more typically referenced work of the ‘Peter Pan’ book itself. Sumpter as Pan in the film even made reference to his Kensington childhood.

It served as somewhat distracting, and curiously needless and unfaithful alteration to fans who know the written exploits of the character which postdate the play, but predate the book. It just made Sumpter standout for all the wrong reasons, and was especially conflicting given that, like I say, the film even acknowledges Pan’s childhood in the park with the fairies. One’s left begging the question of the filmmakers, “which is it to be?”

From J.M. Barrie's Peter Pan in Kensington Gardens:

quote:

---

I ought to mention here that the following is our way with a story: First, I tell it to him, and then he tells it to me, the understanding being that it is quite a different story; and then I retell it with his additions, and so we go on until no one could say whether it is more his story or mine. In this story of Peter Pan, for instance, the bald narrative and most of the moral reflections are mine, though not all, for this boy can be a stern moralist, but the interesting bits about the ways and customs of babies in the bird-stage are mostly reminiscences of David's, recalled by pressing his hands to his temples and thinking hard.

---

Seems like Barrie wrote the story with a bit of flexibility in mind, no?

The story is still intact - and hey, since when were books embued with accents? If it's a good story, it can transcend those details. Peter Pan sure is a good story, and so I think it does.

j

quote:

---

Originally posted by ESB:
I'm a huge admirer of James Newton Howard. I've now listened to Peter Pan many times and I hate to say it but I'm still somewhat disappointed. It's a good score but not *very* good. I think it's a bit unstructured and melodically not very strong. But maybe it will grow on me because it's a reasonable complex score. But my first thoughts about Dinosaur, Atlantis and Treasure Planet were more positive.

---

I agree with this entirely (though I wasn't all that keen on Treasure Planet either). I actually really liked the lighter stuff, especially with choir, but there was so little musical structure to most of it I found it mildly irritating rather than entertaining - it kept threatening to go somewhere good but then backed off.

Just reviewed it actually at Movie Wave - www.moviewave.net/titles/peter_pan.html - though everyone will probably disagree with what I said, as usual!

quote:

---

Seems like Barrie wrote the story with a bit of flexibility in mind, no?

---

Absolutely, especially given Pan himself is stooped in myth and the imagination of the children in the book and the play. For a character who technically doesn’t even exist on the page, pending one's view at the end of it all, he’s highly flexible indeed.

I'll try to explain my feeling toward the issue a little better, because as it stands it reads like I cry blasphemy at the slightest delivery of an inaccurate accent not befitting of that which was intended in source material, or at a time and location when a film may be taking place.

One side of the coin argues that it is toying with what is something of a distinctly British icon, certainly in literature, but take it more as a feeling of flaw due to inconstancy in the filmmakers decisions, not so much the fact he’s American thus inappropriate full stop. In my mind, he was an inappropriate casting choice, but only within the context of the rest of the film and how it was brought to the screen. More on that in a second.

Regarding inconsistencies. Take for instance a lot of the Roman epics of the past; you’d basically see everyone affecting a British accent. Do you have the entire cast put on accents, have all do a universal accent, or some cast members affect an accent and others not? Perhaps just not do accents at all? It normally boiled down to a matter of keeping things consistent to avoid distraction.

It’s like if you were going to direct Henry V, you would normally see the cast perform it with one uniform accent as you would most Shakespeare, especially if touring with a play overseas (it can only stand to make texts confusing enough for some, even more so). It would be rare to see, for example, an actor portraying Charles VI speaking the words with a French accent, but his entourage not. Branagh mixed accents in his interpretation of Henry V (film version), though curiously only with two of the female roles despite the fact Katherine and Alice were both being played by British performers, and it made for a rather jarring inconsistency since those playing Charles VI, Dauphin and so on, kept their native British accents. I digress.

My problem with this issue and Peter Pan is it raises this fault of inconsistency which extends to the extent of making little sense from a filmmaking standpoint, which is why I argue it should be just one thing, or the other.

Had there been more diversity of cultures in the film in dealing with its Neverland inhabitants, then I dare say Sumpter’s presence would have been a little more welcome. Hook was structured in such a way for example, yet as it stands in Hogan's film, everything but Pan himself remains firmly in touch with the play and the books. So, to anyone who values them well, the change to Pan makes for somewhat of a distraction since it is one lone (but important) inconstancy, against so much else that remained so very consistent with the source material. It simply became a distraction therefore.

I remain quite uncomfortable at the idea in the mind of Hollywood that American audiences perhaps need a blatant American presence on screen for them to have something to identify with. It was actually an appalling trend a lot of British films had in their heyday (these days we can have all British casts in our umpteenth rom-com, just American money ). America may be deemed a lot of things, but its people are not that naïve and it pains me to see films constantly question the patience and intelligence of their viewers, but that’s another rant against Hollywood altogether.

No, but really, you make some good points. I can understand now why it might be a bit distracting for some. Alas, it certainly didn't keep me from ultimately enjoying the picture.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Dan Brecher:
Hopefully it will find good life on DVD.

---

Hopefully!! A nice fully-featured 2-disc DVD set would be reallll nice. I'm sure there's plenty they could do with it. I just hope they don't spin it towards children, with games and cutsie crap like that on it.