Post by javierocker on Dec 6, 2011 7:27:40 GMT 2
Well I just finished watching part two of Neverland and all in all its not bad, but its certainly not great. To review the mini- series and make my points, I will be giving away spoilers so be warned.
Part 2 actually started out pretty strong with Hook taking on his iconic wardrobe and Peter learning how to fly. I even like how they seem to take a page from the 2003 movie and have unhappy thoughts make you lose the ability to fly. The movie also got points for almost turning Peter into Peter Pan, the problem was that it didn't last long.
Essentially the fairies who decide to punish Peter for allowing himself to be tricked by Hook by erasing his memories. When they do this they decree that Peter will only have his innocence left over, making him innocent and heartless. When this happens for a brief period anyway Peter actually does start acting like Peter Pan. And then with a little help from the lost boys it ends up not sticking and Peter returns to acting nothing like Peter Pan, but acting like a mature 15 year old who just happens to be slightly cocky and impulsive. Good job missing the whole point of the character who's prequel story your suppose to be telling. I kept waiting for his memory loss to return but alias it never happens.
The final battle was also something that dragged on and on at the end. I do like that we got to see Peter cut off Hook's hand, and the croc. eating it. We also see that its Hook pocket watch is the watch that croc. eats hence where the ticking comes from. But other then that it doesn't do a good job sinking up with anything else from the story, in fact it creates a massive plot hole with the original story. It makes me wonder did the writers of this movie ever bother to even look at any Peter Pan related material, even the Disney movie had more common with Barrie's work then this did.
There were also a lot of characters that had potential but ended up being really underused. Smee really being one of them, Bob Hoskins actually wasn't bad in the role actually making Smee in the beginning more his version from the novel. Unfortunately Smee barely even shows up in part 2, you think since Hook and Smee are such good friends, Smee would have a bigger role in this movie.
The lost boys are really underused in this movie and don't do much of anything. In fact Peter mostly tells them to sit around and wait for him. And that's pretty much what they do, they do finally get involved in the final battle, but then all they do is throw rocks at the other pirates while Peter and Hook sword fight. I would've expected the boys to pick up swords themselves and join Peter in facing off against the pirates.
Ironically it actually would've been more logical then in the 2003 movie as Hook had a small group of six men and himself. And there are six lost boys with Peter making seven, the one place where you could do a straight up fight and it gets reduced to throwing rocks? Geez.
And now we get to this prequel biggest plot hole in regards it to being a prequel, that of course being the issue of Wendy. With Peter still having the maturity of a teenage boy and along with that having a full understanding of love and romance. He even refers to Captain Bonny as being Hook's girlfriend, where is the conflict with Wendy? Why does Peter reject any notions of a real romantic relationship with her?
This is the problem, there is no reason for Peter to do this, at all. This version of Peter doesn't even have a fear of adulthood or a hatred of adults. He chooses to stay in Neverland because he likes adventures and has a whole world of adventures he and the boys can go on. And given a choice bet. that and being street rats in dirty turn of the century London, I don't really blame them. They also want to continue to protect Neverland from Hook. So where exactly is there going to be a conflict with Wendy over feelings? That's the problem, there isn't one at all, Peter doesn't have an issue with feelings, with grown ups and has no reason to reject any romantic feelings from Wendy at all.
In fact I would think this version of Peter would rather welcome a romantic relationship with a pretty girl. This version of Peter Pan would see it as with no adults to repress them they could pretty much take their feelings all the way. Not to mention this version of Peter is genuinely a nice guy, he thinks of others, he's loyal to his friends and allies, he wants to help, he clearly understands his feelings, so what is Wendy not suppose to like about him?
But this isn't the only plot hole made by this movie, there's still the issue of the time period. This movie did go out of its way to kinda fix that, but by doing that, it kinda created another big plot hole. Basically Peter takes a trip back to London, and during the trip the movie ends with the lost boys noticing he's lost his shadow. It also has Peter coming back with a new suit, looking even less like Peter Pan. Peter even says all the places he went and none of them included going to a girls house to hear stories or is their mention of him being jumped by a huge dog.
Now this does fix the time period problem as now Peter has to go back to London to get his shadow back. The problem is if Peter never visited The Darling house and never got jumped by Nena then how does Wendy get the shadow? Did her and brothers just happen to come across a random person's shadow on the street and decide to keep it. Did Nena pick it up when they were all coming home from school? Also how did Peter even know to go to the Darling House to get his shadow back? See what I mean by massive plot holes. Maybe Wendy comes across Peter in the street trying to stick his shadow back on with soap and invites him to her house to sew it back on. Who knows since none of this will likely never be explained.
But I did like Rhys Ifans as Hook, I think he def. turned in the best performance in the film. He very much acts like Hook being all about good form in combat. He also very manipulative and cunning and uses his friendship with Peter to try and take Neverland's power for himself and the pirates. He even invites Peter to kill him after Peter chops off his hand, Peter refuses since he's nothing like Hook (once again what is there for Wendy to dislike?). He also has more of a reason to hate Peter since Peter crushed his plans to take Neverland's power and will cont. to be in Hook's way, presumably till Peter sends him to the croc. after he kidnaps Wendy. But essentially Peter and Hook in this version are the classic hero and villain.
Charlie Rowe was also pretty good as Peter, but like I said beyond a few moments he doesn't act anything like Peter Pan. But he does a very good job with the material he's given but he's a completely different take on the character. But in the few moments he does get to actually act like Peter Pan (when he loses his memory) he actually does act very much like Peter Pan.
So all in all, not terrible, but def. not great. I would like this a lot more if they would just call this a re-imagining and cont. the story with him meeting Wendy. But they call it a prequel and as a prequel it has more holes then Swiss cheese. It doesn't line up with any version of the character, aside from the character being older he's way to mature ruining the whole point of the character in the 1st place. While still adventurous and impulsive he's a completely different character all together.
Part 2 actually started out pretty strong with Hook taking on his iconic wardrobe and Peter learning how to fly. I even like how they seem to take a page from the 2003 movie and have unhappy thoughts make you lose the ability to fly. The movie also got points for almost turning Peter into Peter Pan, the problem was that it didn't last long.
Essentially the fairies who decide to punish Peter for allowing himself to be tricked by Hook by erasing his memories. When they do this they decree that Peter will only have his innocence left over, making him innocent and heartless. When this happens for a brief period anyway Peter actually does start acting like Peter Pan. And then with a little help from the lost boys it ends up not sticking and Peter returns to acting nothing like Peter Pan, but acting like a mature 15 year old who just happens to be slightly cocky and impulsive. Good job missing the whole point of the character who's prequel story your suppose to be telling. I kept waiting for his memory loss to return but alias it never happens.
The final battle was also something that dragged on and on at the end. I do like that we got to see Peter cut off Hook's hand, and the croc. eating it. We also see that its Hook pocket watch is the watch that croc. eats hence where the ticking comes from. But other then that it doesn't do a good job sinking up with anything else from the story, in fact it creates a massive plot hole with the original story. It makes me wonder did the writers of this movie ever bother to even look at any Peter Pan related material, even the Disney movie had more common with Barrie's work then this did.
There were also a lot of characters that had potential but ended up being really underused. Smee really being one of them, Bob Hoskins actually wasn't bad in the role actually making Smee in the beginning more his version from the novel. Unfortunately Smee barely even shows up in part 2, you think since Hook and Smee are such good friends, Smee would have a bigger role in this movie.
The lost boys are really underused in this movie and don't do much of anything. In fact Peter mostly tells them to sit around and wait for him. And that's pretty much what they do, they do finally get involved in the final battle, but then all they do is throw rocks at the other pirates while Peter and Hook sword fight. I would've expected the boys to pick up swords themselves and join Peter in facing off against the pirates.
Ironically it actually would've been more logical then in the 2003 movie as Hook had a small group of six men and himself. And there are six lost boys with Peter making seven, the one place where you could do a straight up fight and it gets reduced to throwing rocks? Geez.
And now we get to this prequel biggest plot hole in regards it to being a prequel, that of course being the issue of Wendy. With Peter still having the maturity of a teenage boy and along with that having a full understanding of love and romance. He even refers to Captain Bonny as being Hook's girlfriend, where is the conflict with Wendy? Why does Peter reject any notions of a real romantic relationship with her?
This is the problem, there is no reason for Peter to do this, at all. This version of Peter doesn't even have a fear of adulthood or a hatred of adults. He chooses to stay in Neverland because he likes adventures and has a whole world of adventures he and the boys can go on. And given a choice bet. that and being street rats in dirty turn of the century London, I don't really blame them. They also want to continue to protect Neverland from Hook. So where exactly is there going to be a conflict with Wendy over feelings? That's the problem, there isn't one at all, Peter doesn't have an issue with feelings, with grown ups and has no reason to reject any romantic feelings from Wendy at all.
In fact I would think this version of Peter would rather welcome a romantic relationship with a pretty girl. This version of Peter Pan would see it as with no adults to repress them they could pretty much take their feelings all the way. Not to mention this version of Peter is genuinely a nice guy, he thinks of others, he's loyal to his friends and allies, he wants to help, he clearly understands his feelings, so what is Wendy not suppose to like about him?
But this isn't the only plot hole made by this movie, there's still the issue of the time period. This movie did go out of its way to kinda fix that, but by doing that, it kinda created another big plot hole. Basically Peter takes a trip back to London, and during the trip the movie ends with the lost boys noticing he's lost his shadow. It also has Peter coming back with a new suit, looking even less like Peter Pan. Peter even says all the places he went and none of them included going to a girls house to hear stories or is their mention of him being jumped by a huge dog.
Now this does fix the time period problem as now Peter has to go back to London to get his shadow back. The problem is if Peter never visited The Darling house and never got jumped by Nena then how does Wendy get the shadow? Did her and brothers just happen to come across a random person's shadow on the street and decide to keep it. Did Nena pick it up when they were all coming home from school? Also how did Peter even know to go to the Darling House to get his shadow back? See what I mean by massive plot holes. Maybe Wendy comes across Peter in the street trying to stick his shadow back on with soap and invites him to her house to sew it back on. Who knows since none of this will likely never be explained.
But I did like Rhys Ifans as Hook, I think he def. turned in the best performance in the film. He very much acts like Hook being all about good form in combat. He also very manipulative and cunning and uses his friendship with Peter to try and take Neverland's power for himself and the pirates. He even invites Peter to kill him after Peter chops off his hand, Peter refuses since he's nothing like Hook (once again what is there for Wendy to dislike?). He also has more of a reason to hate Peter since Peter crushed his plans to take Neverland's power and will cont. to be in Hook's way, presumably till Peter sends him to the croc. after he kidnaps Wendy. But essentially Peter and Hook in this version are the classic hero and villain.
Charlie Rowe was also pretty good as Peter, but like I said beyond a few moments he doesn't act anything like Peter Pan. But he does a very good job with the material he's given but he's a completely different take on the character. But in the few moments he does get to actually act like Peter Pan (when he loses his memory) he actually does act very much like Peter Pan.
So all in all, not terrible, but def. not great. I would like this a lot more if they would just call this a re-imagining and cont. the story with him meeting Wendy. But they call it a prequel and as a prequel it has more holes then Swiss cheese. It doesn't line up with any version of the character, aside from the character being older he's way to mature ruining the whole point of the character in the 1st place. While still adventurous and impulsive he's a completely different character all together.
