I agree. The biggest problem I had with this is that, in the original source material, Peter Pan is not a hero. Not even close. He's a chaotic neutral, if anything. He clearly only cares about himself, and doesn't show a drop of remorse for anyone. He's not even particularly nice.
I understand that toning down his borderline sociopathy a bit was okay for the Disney movie meant for young children. But even there, he was mischievous, and definitely didn't fit into the "Hero" archetype.
Did anyone working on this movie even pick up the book? Or did they just completely change his character in order to make him the "brave child hero" that would sell movie tickets?
It's actually a prequel, not a straight retelling. That's why hooks not a Pirate yet, Peter starts off in the orphanage and he has to learn how to fly. It's also why it's not an adventure with Wendy.
But that just makes some changes stranger (Tiger Lilly's age) and they failed the job of a prequel which is to react and comment on the spirit of the original.
It's another potentially interesting idea(hook and Peter) sacrificed to the alter of franchise and shared universe dreams.
Even if it's a prequel, so much is changed that it really shouldn't be called a prequel, but an alternate universe. It's clearly doing its own thing.
There's no way the events of this movie could possibly lead to any of the versions of Peter Pan that we know. The changes just can't possibly connect to them. Tiger Lily is an adult, Peter isn't a borderline sociopathic ass (that's why I disliked him so much in Peter Pan & the Pirates), and I see no way Hook could become Captain Hook - and he doesn't have a hook for a hand. It wouldn't make sense for him to be named "Hook", and then only later have an actual reason for the name.
So, think of it as an alternate universe, not a prequel. I enjoyed it, knowing it wouldn't be really related to Peter Pan. But I was still taken aback by the sheer amount of changes, and what some of them were!
I'm up for joining Discord servers! PM me if you know any good ones!Leave a Comment:
Works best if you pretend it has nothing to do with Peter Pan
This movie is a "retelling" of the classic story of Peter Pan. By which I mean they just made a bunch of stuff up and created their own thing. Here's a list of changes:
This is not a story about the Boy Who Never Grew Up leading the Lost Boys and Wendy on grand adventures through Neverland. It's a story about a regular boy in an orphanage who is kidnapped by pirates riding a flying pirate ship, who is taken, along with other boys, to a mine to become slaves mining for fairy dust so that Captain Blackbeard can live forever. Hook? He's just an adult prisoner who happens to have that name, and helps Peter escape. Wendy, John and Michael are nowhere to be seen.
The story, setting and characters are so utterly different that the movie works best if you throw away any expectations whatsoever of getting a Peter Pan story. Instead, you're getting an adventure of a regular boy who, rather than being the champion of this world, is just a newcomer who has to learn its odd rules. While he is an active character and does some heroic things, most of the heroics are being done by whoever he allies himself with: mainly James Hook and Tiger Lily. Ever want to see Tiger Lily perform a lot of well-choreographed ninja moves (my 7-year-old nephew said "She's a really good fighter!") against a bunch of pirates? As for Hook, he outsmarts and outwits everyone. Peter? Well, he's just an outsider navigating this mad world.
For what it is, I found it well done and rather enjoyable. It doesn't mess around - the stakes are high, there's some blood, and there's death - including of kids! Just don't expect anything remotely like the Peter Pan you're familiar with.