An Awesome Flight of Fancy

Movie Review:
Peter Pan

PG / 1 hr., 54 min. / 2003

J.M. Barrie’s Peter Pan is the classic tale of Wendy Darling (Rachel Hurd-Wood) and her brothers John (Harry Newell) and Michael (Freddie Popplewell), who share a room and bedtime stories. Wendy is at a delicate age: She is a child on the verge of adulthood, and she is about to be forced to make the change by her father (Jason Isaacs). But she is offered an escape from this fate by Peter Pan (Jeremy Sumpter), a lively young sprite who invites her back to Neverland, a magical place where no one ever grows up.

But Neverland is not a perfect paradise: It is also home to Peter’s nemesis, Captain James Hook (Jason Isaacs again), who bears a hook instead of a hand, which he lost in a fight with Peter. The hand and a clock were swallowed by a crocodile that has stalked Hook ever since, hoping for dessert. And Hook has stalked Pan ever since, hoping for revenge.

Raise your hand if you did not know any of that. Everyone with a hand raised needs to report to Childhood Classics 101.

I grew up on the Disney animated version of Peter Pan, which delivers a fine presentation of a fantasy adventure for the whole family, despite the derogatory comparison it is receiving in the wake of this new adaptation. I am also familiar with the stage script, having played Mr. Darling in college. What is interesting about most of the adaptations of the story is that our focus is on a simple children’s adventure – possibly even a dream – that comes across as a piece of literary fluff. Then I saw what P.J. Hogan (My Best Friend’s Wedding) had drawn out of it, and I was completely floored.

Having recently perused Barrie’s novelization of his play, I am a little surprised at the number of critics who praise this new film for “staying so close to the book.” In terms of a scene-by-scene comparison, the Disney version is far more accurate than what Hogan and writer Michael Goldenberg (Contact) have come up with. This new film tosses out whole chapters, adds entirely new scenes and characters, and otherwise tampers on a wholesale level with the structure of the tale. Hogan has done away with clapping as the cure for dying fairies, and Peter never crows. The film also jettisons the traditional ending (“I’m old now, ever so much more than twenty”) in favor of an ending that is slightly smarmy, but which provides a shorter denouement if not necessarily a better one. I am willing to overlook these changes because of what the film does right. What this version absolutely nails, without compromise and with an excellence that blows away its predecessors, is the real message of the book.

Humor me while I theorize on this subject: In this new screenplay, Peter is more than a rogue; he is, as the book suggests, Childhood personified. Wendy is no longer merely escaping the world of adults; she is flying off hand in hand with her very youth and immaturity, which she initially believes she wants to maintain forever. And Childhood must eventually face its fear: Adulthood, personified in Captain Hook.

Contrary to my impressions of earlier “Pan” adaptations, this film does not say that growing up is bad; in fact, maturity is to be commended. It is not Adulthood itself that Wendy is fighting on the pirate ship, but her irrational beliefs about growing up; and that is an important distinction, even if she doesn’t notice at the time. Indeed, Wendy must grow up, for to remain a child forever is the height of selfishness. At the beginning of the film, Mrs. Darling (Olivia Williams) points out that “there is the bravery of thinking of others before oneself,” and by the end, Wendy realizes this and comes home to fill her rightful place in the world, both now as a young girl and later as a grown-up. At the end of the story, Childhood finds it has no permanent home in the Darling household, and returns to Neverland until Wendy’s children come along. Such is the message that I believe has been there all along, but which previous films presented so muted as to be lost entirely on the typical audience, including myself.

The film is stellar in more ways than one. First, we finally have an actual male playing Peter! I have never been able to fully accept Pans played by females – I am constantly distracted and unable to abandon myself wholly to the story. Jeremy Sumpter, who debuted in Bill Paxton’s Frailty, is a wonderful blend of impish prankster, show-off, and heart-breaking rogue. He has a great face for the role, and pulls some wonderful expressions – watch his face when he agrees, without saying a word, to let John and Michael come along to Neverland. A line or two felt stilted or under-enthused, and his lack of a solid English accent in the midst of the other characters is a deterrent; but overall, I think he’s an excellent choice. I hope someone also casts him as Puck in A Midsummer Night’s Dream before he gets much older.

Jason Isaacs continues the tradition of having the same actor portray Mr. Darling and Captain Hook, thus enhancing Wendy’s fearful association of Adulthood with her vision of her angry father. Isaacs has played nothing but malice since I first saw him (The Patriot, Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets), but here he is far more timid than even in Barrie’s play, where Mr. Darling was all bluster to hide his shortcomings. Isaacs lets us see a reserved Mr. Darling grow more blustery as he is pressured into being “powerful” by Aunt Millicent (Lynn Redgrave).

Other noteworthy performances include Rachel Hurd-Wood’s debut. She is positively charming, with a lovely smile and giddy girlie energy throughout the film. Ludivine Sagnier is a deliciously wicked Tinkerbell, with some of the best laughs in the whole movie. Equally excellent are Harry Newell and Freddie Popplewell and Carsen Gray and the lovable Richard Briers (Much Ado About Nothing, Love’s Labour’s Lost) and, well, everyone else in the film. Casting was a strong point in an already strong production.

This is a film I regret having missed in the theater. The art departments have so pumped up the visuals that I wanted to sit as close as possible to my TV screen. The film opens with a gorgeous blue night sky, swoops through tufts of pink clouds over a storybook London, to the Darling home. Neverland is green and red and blue and ice-cold and summer-warm and bright and dark and every other imaginative extreme. Add to this that the colors change with Peter’s mood, from a fierce red during his sword fight to a chilling blue when Hook shatters his joy to a shocking pink when Wendy kisses him. And yes, Peter’s reaction is very much what happens when a young man is first kissed. I know from experience.

Speaking of kisses, a plethora of published critics have commented on the “sexual tension” in the film, but I must say I have no idea what they are talking about. There is a difference between longing for something (like permanent childhood) and getting turned on. I see nothing to indicate Peter and Wendy are erotically aroused, and parents who avoided the film because they heard of its sexual overtones from critics should rest assured that there is nothing to be wary of here.

The production department based many of their designs on the way a child would imagine things. Who among us has not seen a junior high student’s model of the universe, with brightly colored planets all within inches of each other? As Peter leaves Earth’s atmosphere, we are treated to just such a universe, as the children go careening past dozens of flourescent heavenly bodies.

Cinematographer Donald McAlpine and the effects team have provided us with some gorgeous images. I love the sequence in which Michael leaps off his bed attempting to fly. In one single shot, we see Michael spinning out of control, and Peter Pan above him sprinkling fairy dust on him. It’s beautifully composed and is as magical as the story itself. I also enjoy the image of Peter flying through what appears to be the night sky, until he puts out a hand and runs it through an ocean of water and we realize we are looking down upon him, not up at him. These are just two of the many visual high points.

Special effects are strong and excessively creative. I particularly enjoyed the early scenes involving Peter’s shadow. It has an entire personality all its own, sometimes swatting at Peter, sometimes cowering behind him. Once you’ve seen the whole film, watch the nursery sequences again and focus on just the shadow. Your viewing experience will be enriched.

Complementing all of it is James Newton Howard’s gorgeous orchestral score. I disagree with the addition of a pop rhythm to certain cues – I feel it wrenches us out of Edwardian London gracelessly – but the overall impression is of a fun and fantastical musical adventure.

I could go on, but you should probably just see the film for yourself at this point and revel in one of the best fantasy-adventures of its decade. It is visually lavish, emotionally stirring, and intellectually assertive, in addition to being a whole lot of gee-whiz swashbuckling high-flying fun. It is never lazy about its creativity, but fills the whole screen with life and joy from start to finish. It may be true that all children grow up (except one), but this is two hours of your life where you can slow the process considerably.

My Score: 9