PETER PAN (2003) review

A NOTE

On the Acting of a Fairy Play

The difference between a Fairy
Play and a realistic one is that in the
former all the characters are really
children with a child’s outlook on life.
This applies to the so-called adults of
the story as well as the young people.
Pull the beard off the fairy king, and
you would find the face of a child.

This, then is the spirit of the play.
And it is necessary that all of you –
No matter what age you may have
individually attained – should be
children. PETER PAN will laughingly
blow the fairy dust in your eyes and
presto! You’ll all be back in the nursery,
and once more you’ll believe in fairies,
and the play moves on.

- J. M. Barrie

That’s the opening text on screen for the magical 1924 Herbert Brenon silent film telling of PETER PAN. An adaptation of the J. M. Barrie play of the same name and brought to life with enough visual magic to take one’s breath away. The photographic magic of James Wong Howe is every bit as beautiful in it’s own stylized manner as the candy colored cinematography of Donald McAlpine. However, perhaps the film would have been served well to have had Barrie’s note in front of this telling as well.

This 21st Century prudery that festers to the surface of some of the reviews I’ve seen on this title had me thinking that I was walking into a possible work of Child Pornography, and what I found was simple, elegant and breath-taking magic and sorcery. PETER PAN (2003) by P.J. Hogan is a masterful telling of the Peter Pan story. Personally, as it stands at the moment, it comes in as my second favorite telling of the story, my first being the amazing silent film version… which is a moving art noveau masterpiece. Tinkerbelle, Nana, all the woodland creatures… All of it has a magic level of endearment found only in silent film and particularly blessed with James Wong Howe’s cinematography.

First off, let me deal with this whole “sub-text” of alleged pedophilic tones in the film. These are absolutely ludicrous. Anyone that would look upon this film and see those things must indeed be the worst of codfish. The story of PETER PAN, at its heart has always been a tale about that point in life of a child where one is on the cusp of not being a child anymore. It’s really Wendy’s tale. A young girl that loves the tom-foolery of being a child… that devil may care swash-buckling and goody goofy pretend of dress-up and make-believe. At the same time, she’s at that precarious age where other feelings begin to creep in. The beginnings of puppy-love, first crushes and the dreams of what ultimately “love” is. That beginning of the path to becoming what we all fear… being a grown up.

Peter Pan has always represented that staunch refusal to grow up. To address all those issues that you must in order to GROW UP. No where is this more obvious than when Wendy tells Peter that she’s going to give him a kiss, and he holds out his hand as if expecting a piece of candy. It is pure innocence. That hidden first kiss. Ultimately over the course of the story, Wendy must come to realize that though she loves Peter Pan, he can never truly love her. He will always play and pretend and crow, but never ever give her his heart, because he just doesn’t know what that means. THIS HAS ALWAYS BEEN WHAT PETER PAN IS ABOUT!

If you go back to that Silent film version of PETER PAN, you can project all sorts of sub-text upon it. Hell, in addition to everything else you could claim that it’s some Lesbian Youth Fantasy, but ultimately that is YOU, not the film. To me, Never Never Land will always be about Pirates, Mermaids, Indians, Faeries, Lost Boys, Flying Galleons, Tiger Lily, Crocodiles and of course… Peter and Wendy and Captain Hook. A tale of whimsy and youth.

Watching this version of the timeless tale, I loved the beauty of the film, but also the innocence of it all. A group of wild lost boys without homes… out in the magic forests of Never Never Land, wanting a pretend mother to give them pretend punishments, pretend medicine and pretend stories of whimsy. Rachel Hurd-Wood’s Wendy Darling is a precocious little girl, one with a very definite crush on her Peter Pan. Jeremy Sumpter’s Peter Pan is magic.

Forever, Peter Pan has always been played by a flat chested actress. I’m sure this comes from tradition more than anything else, but the effect has always, for me, resulted in a Peter Pan that didn’t quite have that bit of devil in him that little boys get. You can always tell when a little boy is about to go a bit crazy, cuz there’s this look… this little boy eye-arch that occurs and a sly little boy grin… the look of a boy about to get into mischief that never is quite the same when played by a girl. Little girls have their own particular look of mischief, but boys wear it differently on their faces. Jeremy Sumpter’s Peter Pan just reeks mischief and I love it. There’s also that look that hits a little boy’s face when a girl suggests something too girly for them. It all feels more genuine. All of a sudden, PETER PAN finally came to life in a way I’d never quite seen before. His character felt more honest than when I’ve seen an actress play him.

NOW – the aspect that really makes this version of PETER PAN so worthy of praise is the work of Jason Isaacs as both Mr. Darling and Captain Hook. The keynote scene of the entire film is when both Tinkerbelle and Captain Hook see Wendy and Peter reenacting the faerie dance, Hook becomes enthralled. There is both sadness and opportunity that he sees. Sadness because he never had the love of a “Wendy” before. He recognizes it as something altogether missing in his life. At the same time he sees in this an opportunity to hurt Peter in a way he never dreamt of before. He could corrupt Wendy, by giving her a chance to be a pirate, something Peter could never do. It would be a most dastardly thing to do. Turn the one person Peter cares most for into the thing he hates most. A pirate. What could be worse? I mean, where would all his happy thoughts go if his Wendy be pirate?

I suppose the greatest compliment that I can give Jason Isaacs turn as Captain Hook is that not once over the entirety of his performance did I wish Disney’s animated Captain Hook was on screen. I love that Captain Hook, but there’s a keen cunning in this Captain Hook that I’d never seen captured in ANY telling before. He wasn’t just some coward of a pirate, he was a damn good pirate. This is Captain Hook through the Gregory Peck / Captain Ahab filter. In the last act of conflict, if you don’t think a bit about that showdown between Luke Skywalker and Darth Vader in RETURN OF THE JEDI… then well, I don’t know what to say… I found it quite thrilling. To me, this is the first Captain Hook that could truly challenge and possibly defeat Peter Pan…. I’ve never really thought that before. I’ve never thought that Captain Hook could defeat Peter, but in this telling, I did.

This telling of PETER PAN is magic… just like the Silent version and the Disney version. Each of them have their reasons to be heralded. Without a doubt though, this is the most lush and vibrant telling of the story. It is a shame that it isn’t being greeted more warmly, as of the new releases that opened on Christmas Day, this is the finest in my opinion. However, I have no doubt that over time, this film will grow a place of warmth in the hearts of all that give it a chance.