PAN : Official Reviews

[jo]

A separate thread for official reviews, apart from the reactions to the movie from general audiences.

As the movie will hold its worldwide premiere in London on September 20 and will open to the general public in Australia on September 24, we may see some early reviews.


Jo

[mamaleh]

"CGI-choked"? "Joyless"? Oy, I hope Variety's is the only negative review:

variety.com/2015/film/reviews/film-review-pan-1201596436/

Ellen

[jo]

It is indeed written with an acidic pen smiley-rolleyes010

It is a joyless, cynical, and petulant review!

Stripping all whimsy and wonder from the Peter Pan story, Joe Wright's prequel is a busy, bungled bust.


Andrew Barker

Senior Features Writer

@barkerrant


Of all the recent big-budget studio films to re-imagine beloved children’s tales as garish, CGI-choked sensory overloads stripped of all whimsy or childlike wonder, Joe Wright’s “Pan” is certainly the most technically sophisticated. The director displays his typical formal virtuosity and keen eye for young talent here (Aussie newcomer Levi Miller is assured in the title role), but it’s not enough to enliven the depressing dourness of the film’s worldview. Positioned as a prequel to J.M. Barrie’s classic Peter Pan stories, “Pan” swaps puckish mischief and innocence for doses of Steampunk design, anachronistic music, a stock “chosen one” narrative and themes of child labor, warfare and unsustainable mineral mining. Worldwide box office will likely be strong, especially overseas, but the bubble for these joyless fairy-tale revisions cannot pop quickly enough.

There is perhaps no clearer illustration of “Pan’s” guiding principles than its treatment of pixie dust. In Walt Disney’s 1953 “Peter Pan,” the story’s best-known incarnation, pixie dust is a glowing substance that allows lucky children to fly high above the clouds. In “Pan,” pixie dust is the street name for Pixum, a rare, crystalline substance mined by slave labor from deep in the earth that, when smoked on an elaborate opium den-style apparatus, restores youthfulness to the user. (The film neglects to tell us its radioactive half-life or the side effects of recreational use, but perhaps those scenes are being saved for the director’s cut.)

Before we even get to the aforementioned scenes of enforced manual labor in Neverland, however, we have a cheerful prologue set in a Dickensian London orphanage during the worst of the Nazi bombing raids. Twelve-year-old Peter (Miller, perhaps Wright’s best child-actor discovery since Saoirse Ronan) has been here since infancy, when he was left by his apparently parkour-trained mother (Amanda Seyfried) along with a letter and a pan-pipes medallion. Noticing strange disappearances around the orphanage, Peter and buddy Nibs (Lewis MacDougal) break into the office of the gruesome head nun (Kathy Burke), discovering a cache of silver coins and hoarded rations. That night, she raises a black flag above the facility, and bungee-jumping pirates abscond with a host of children, Peter included.

Greeted by a pirate chorus of Nirvana’s “Smells Like Teen Spirit” (they also sing the Ramones’ “Blitzkreig Bop,” and neither song makes any kind of sense in the film’s universe) the orphans are transported into Neverland. Whereas Barrie’s creation was a sometimes dangerous yet fanciful world that melded all of the most universal boyhood daydreams into single setting, Wright’s is a dimly lit purgatory, where kidnapped orphans toil in the Pixum mines of diva-esque pirate leader Blackbeard (Hugh Jackman), who supervises from his floating airship. To maintain order, Blackbeard routinely makes troublemakers walk the plank into a bed of rocks.

This fate befalls Peter on his first day, yet he shocks the onlookers by taking flight just as he’s about to go splat. Recaptured, he soon finds himself in Blackbeard’s captain’s quarters, where he explains to Peter that an ancient prophecy foretold a chosen one with the ability to fly, the child of a fairy prince and human mother who would someday come to defeat him. Sent to prison, Peter is soon joined by a swashbuckling cowboy named James Hook (Garrett Hedlund, playing the role as an Indiana Jones type with eternally gritted teeth), who sees Peter and his flying abilities as his ticket back to the real world. Abetted by Hook’s middling middle-manager buddy, Sam “Smee” Smiegel (Adeel Akhtar), Peter and Hook hijack a pirate ship and escape into the woods.

After a fashion, they wind up captured by the Neverland natives, a band of guerrilla insurrectionists who have been sabotaging Blackbeard’s mining expeditions. Though this tribe is an ethnically diverse crew, the only member with much significant screentime is also the only Caucasian, Tiger Lily (Rooney Mara). Initially distrustful, Tiger Lily reveals more about Peter’s mythical parentage, engages in some go-nowhere flirtation with Hook, and tries to ferry them away to a mystical fairy archive of some sort. Blackbeard is of course in hot pursuit, desperate to procure more of his organic anti-wrinkle treatment.

Wright offers a number of solid action sequences along the way — one an airborne martial-arts routine on trampolines, another blatantly lifted from “Avatar” — and makes sure the narrative can accommodate cameos from some of Barrie’s greatest hits, including a humpback-sized crocodile and a school of mermaids (all played by Cara Delevingne with slightly different makeup). But at no point in the entire film is any character allowed to have any fun at all, which is a rather devastating flaw for a movie that’s supposed to be set in an eternal wonderland of play and arrested childhood innocence. (Though it tends to be remembered more fondly than it deserves, Steven Spielberg’s “Hook” at least understood the core appeal of the Peter Pan story.)

Ironically, Wright had previously proven intuitively capable of tackling a fractured fairy tale: In 2011’s “Hanna,” the director took a violent, adult-themed action film and cleverly invested it with enough Brothers Grimm elements to make an intoxicatingly strange brew. Here he takes an actual magical children’s tale and imbues it with the most hackneyed of contemporary fantasy-action tropes, and the inverse combination does not possess nearly the same thrill. It’s also odd how little fun screenwriter Jason Fuchs has reimagining this universe; even the pairing of future adversaries Hook and Peter fails to pan out in any memorable ways.

With a camera that is constantly, purposefully on the move, Wright’s gift for showily ostentatious filmmaking is as pronounced as ever, though the sheer unreality of so much of this lavishly designed, massively computer-enhanced world means that it’s harder to be impressed at the physicality of his choreography. (The screening attended was in 3D, which actually diminishes a number of Wright’s compositions; scenes of flying especially feel strangely non-transporting, with tiny stereoscopic figures hovering above flat, undifferentiated backgrounds.) Despite the film’s overall dimness, cinematographers Seamus McGarvey and John Mathieson offer a number of striking, oil-painterly canvasses, and Jacqueline Durran’s wild costumes are all flamboyantly eye-catching, even if Tiger Lily’s getup looks a bit like an explosion at the Etsy distribution center.

[jo]

Another negative review -- from THE WRAP.

www.thewrap.com/pan-review-hugh-jackman-rooney-mara-garrett-hedlund/

Pan’ Review: Peter Pan Prequel Never Grows Up – Or Gets Interesting

Movies | By Alonso Duralde on September 19, 2015 @ 8:00 pm Follow @aduralde






Overdone performances (including Hugh Jackman‘s), hideous visuals and half-baked ideas plagiarized from better movies make origin story an awfully awful adventure

The dreaded Blackbeard is the villain of “Pan,” but the real piracy comes from director Joe Wright (“Anna Karenina”) and screenwriter Jason Fuchs (“Ice Age: Continental Drift“) who plunder ideas and visuals from better filmmakers, including Terry Gilliam (the frigates reach Neverland by traveling through the void of space), Baz Luhrmann (characters en masse sing “Smells Like Teen Spirit” and “Blitzkrieg Bop” by the Ramones in an otherwise non-musical film set in the 1940s) and George Lucas (one of Han Solo’s best moments is so flagrantly plagiarized here that Disney should sue).

Imitation, however, is the least of this movie’s problems. “Pan” is, for the most part, ugly to look at, shrill to listen to, and performed by actors who have been encouraged to camp it up madly in the style usually favored by aging British sitcom stars playing storybook characters in Christmas pantomime productions. Even worse, it’s a prequel-slash-origin-story, which means that plot-wise, the compass can point in only one direction.


Not that we needed to know the backstory of J.M. Barrie’s legendary hero Peter Pan, but “Pan” is determined to give it to us whether we wanted it or not. We begin with a distraught woman played by Amanda Seyfried, leaving her son in a basket at a London orphanage with nothing but a pendant of a pan-flute around his neck. A dozen or so years later, it’s World War II, and the Luftwaffe are raining bombs down on London.

Peter (newcomer Levi Miller, who deserves no blame for this catastrophe), now 12, sets out to investigate why other boys in the orphanage go missing in the middle of the night, and whether or not those disappearances have anything to do with the gold coins being hoarded by the cruel nun (Kathy Burke) running the place. Sure enough, a bunch of Cirque du Soleil-ish pirates (some of them even made up in clownface) bungee-jump down from their floating boats to snatch away the boys. (The idea of pirate ships battling the RAF during the Blitz is admittedly intriguing, but the sequence winds up being the first of many in “Pan” to be reduced to digital cacophony.)


Peter and his friends (none of whom will be seen or heard from again until the final minutes) are put to work in a Neverland mine, where Blackbeard (Hugh Jackman) is forcing them to dig for the remaining traces of fairy dust that keeps him perpetually youthful. When made to walk the plank for a minor infraction, Peter discovers to his surprise that he can fly — which means he’s the half-fairy boy prophesied to take down Blackbeard.


So yes, for all its sound and fury, “Pan” winds up wallowing in two of the current cinema’s most tired storylines: the Chosen One/Reluctant Messiah and the Boy Who Must Learn To Believe in Himself. Ugh.

Peter escapes Blackbeard’s dungeon with the help of new best friend James Hook (Garrett Hedlund) and their forced-labor supervisor Smee (Adeel Akhtar, “Four Lions”), and while Hook just wants to escape, Peter makes him help search for his mother, whom the boy believes to be living among the fairies. There’s a lot more “and then,” none of it all that interesting, although they do meet up with Princess Tiger Lily (Rooney Mara, whose racial inappropriateness for the role is exacerbated by the fact that she’s apparently the only non-Asian in her entire tribe).

What works in “Pan”? Well, Miller is bright-eyed, engaging and empathetic, eschewing kid-actor cuteness for genuine camera presence; I was reminded more than once of Christian Bale‘s youthful debut in “Empire of the Sun.” Mara, although miscast, is one of the film’s few adult performers resisting the temptation to play to the third balcony, and there are a handful of interesting visuals, from giant flying crocodiles to a school of mermaids who all happen to look like Cara Delevingne.



But oh brother, what this movie gets wrong: Jackman never finds an appropriate balance between humor and menace; his villain is just annoying and creepy, while Hedlund seems to be channeling the most overbearing moments of James Coburn and Jack Nicholson. The film’s visual palette is also grotesque, operating in two modes: Sickly and Washed-Out (during which it resembles one of those grim period pieces where all the characters have syphilis) or Blindingly Prismatic (with rainbows shooting helter-skelter all over the screen).

Wrap all that up in a John Powell score that’s trying desperately to sound like John Williams’ Greatest Hits, and the result is a thoroughly unpleasant experience. If you’re really hungering for a new spin on “Peter Pan,” check out P.J. Hogan’s great, underappreciated 2003 version with Jason Isaacs. This new film turns the famous Lost Boy into a lost cause.

[jo]

The review from THE HOLLYWOOD REPORTER is also on the negative side, although a little more mixed than the ones from Variety and The Wrap...but has good words for Hugh's performance --

www.hollywoodreporter.com/review/pan-film-review-824864

'Pan': Film Review



8:00 PM PDT 9/19/2015 by Todd McCarthy  




Pan Still 3 - H 2015
Courtesy of Warner Bros. Pictures


The Bottom Line

Pan-worthy.


Opens

October 9 (Warner Bros.)

Cast

Hugh Jackman, Rooney Mara, Garrett Hedlund

Director

Joe Wright

Hugh Jackman and Rooney Mara star in director Joe Wright's adaptation of the classic novel.


In possession of a title that, for many critics, will undoubtedly seem like a self-fulfilling prophecy, Pan hatches an entirely unnecessary origins story for a wonderful tale that has already been held up to the light from many different angles. Oddly repositioning Peter Pan's emergence to the World War II era and employing a barrage of sophisticated special effects to produce no magic nearly as enchanting as Tinkerbell flickering back to life in the musical stage version, this strenuous undertaking was obviously made in the hope that the global audience has an unending appetite for anything set in Neverland. But just as P.J. Hogan's similarly grandiose and ambitious Peter Pan surprisingly flopped in 2003, this one may also be headed for a low-altitude flight.



Overweight and uninspired Peter Pan films have succeeded before, most notably the 1991 Hook, one of Steven Spielberg's worst efforts. But that had half of Hollywood's biggest stars at the time onboard, whereas here the roster of main characters is too winnowed down and the chemistry doesn't take; the actors all try hard to keep the energy up but never get convincingly in synch and, with the exception of Peter, the characters don't reasonably comport with one's pre-existing images of them.

Read more 'The Martian': TIFF Review

The idea driving Jason Fuchs' script, which, in the credits' delicate phrasing, is “based on characters introduced by J.M. Barrie,” is that of a young London orphan boy's discovery of his true identity and proper home at a location on no known map. The key elements are his abandonment at birth by his bereft mother and subsequent assistance rendered by one James Hook, a rambunctious young adventurer with two good hands, not one, and not a trace of malevolence about him.

First come hijnks of a mild sort at London's Lambeth Home for Boys, the scenes made tolerably amusing by the tyrannical methods (and ultimate comeuppance) of the fantastically hideous old overseer Mother Barnabas (an extensively made-up Kathy Burke). Peter (12-year-old Australian Levi Miller) and partner in crime Nibs (Lewis MacDougall) delight in laddish mischief. But the former gets more than he bargained for when pirates, led by the elegant and eloquent Blackbeard (Hugh Jackman, all but unrecognizable at first with his inky goatee, Village People mustache and shaved head, adorned sporadically with a swept-back bee-hive hairpiece), swoop in on an old sailing ship from a sky otherwise filled with Nazi bombers, kidnap the tykes and set a course for Neverland.

Blackbeard's nefarious dominion, which for a moment or two calls to mind a lite version of Joe's Citadel in Mad Max: Fury Road, appears threatened by the increasing scarcity of that most precious of natural resources, pixum, from which the power of flight, among other things, is obtained. Upon arrival at the tropical island, Peter is immediately put to work, along with countless other boys, digging for fairy dust, as it has also been called, in an enormous pit; anyone who has seen the extraordinary photographs by Sebastiao Salgado of Brazilian gold quarries teeming with poor workers will immediately recognize the inspiration for director Joe Wright and production designer Aline Bonetto in the look of this setting.

Also working in the mines is a fellow named James Hook (Garrett Hedlund), who rematerializes as an Indiana Jones clone, takes Peter under his wing and, along with another cohort, the relatively useless Smee (Adeel Akhtar), commandeers another flying ship, proceeding to outfox Blackbeard at nearly every turn.

From here on, the film becomes a seriously extended chase that possesses hefty CGI-propelled dynamics but absolutely no suspense and a very limited sense of fun. The shots of pirate-era sailing ships careening through the air like so many outer space vehicles become repetitive and are made worse for lack of defining purpose. Meanwhile, the invented threats to the heroes (assorted brigands, ferocious big birds, the inevitable crocodile) come and go like momentary distractions in a theme park ride. Equally arbitrary is the appearance of not one, not two but three mermaids impersonated by Cara Delevingne.

Then there's the problem of Tiger Lily, originally written by Barrie as a Native American princess, a role considered stereotypical and racist on the one hand and inviolate, for casting purposes, on the other. Because an actress of color was not selected, Rooney Mara's winning of the part was widely protested when announced and is bound to catch renewed flak again now. Wright has attempted to blur, if not erase, the issue by making the natives a thoroughly multi-cultural lot not dominated, as far as one can tell, by any one race. Be that as it may, Mara is made up and garbed in quasi-”Indian” fashion and, regardless of whatever rationalizations may be advanced, she was cast for just one reason: that she's a star name, and a very talented one at that. One could actually complain about her casting here from a different point of view, by arguing that she should have rejected the part because it's not a good one and is unworthy of the other films she's made since breaking through in The Social Network five years ago.

As for perennial star-of-the-future Hedlund, he definitely looks to be doing an Indy audition here, right down to the almost identical wardrobe, and he brings both an appealing rambunctiousness and a divertingly theatrical vocal approach to his adventurer character. Unfortunately, the part is written in one-note, can-do, nothing-can-stop-me mode, so his antics become wearisome, albeit no moreso than everything else in the film. Mystifyingly, there is no foreshadowing of the man Hook will one day become.

So what fun there is falls to Jackman, who gives the grand old man of pirate characters plenty of fresh and unusual wrinkles and emerges better than the others simply by virtue of playing a two-dimensional, rather than one-dimensional, figure. He makes Blackbeard into a contradictory Janus-like presence, a man of great humor and intelligence one moment and utter ruthlessness and brutality the next; he's certainly never to be underestimated or trifled with. This is perhaps Jackman's film role most suggestive of his less widely known skills as a legitimate theater star.

The effects and production values are high-end, and there's a bit of fun provided by Jackman incongruously breaking into song with the likes of “Smells Like Teen Spirit” and “Blitzkrieg Bop.” After a certain point, one is thankful for small favors in such a bloated affair.

Production: Berlanti

Cast: Hugh Jackman, Garrett Hedlund, Rooney Mara, Levi Miller, Adeel Akhtar, Kathy Burke, Nonso Anozie, Amanda Seyfried, Jack Charles, Lewis MacDougall, Bronson Webb, Taejoo Na, Cara Delevingne

Director: Joe Wright

Screenwriter: Jason Fuchs, based on characters introduced by J.M. Barrie

Producers: Greg Berlanti, Sarah Schechter, Paul Webster

Executive producers: Tim Lewis, Steve Mnuchin

Directors of photography: Seamus McGarvey, John Mathieson

Production designer: Aline Bonetto

Costume designer: Jacqueline Durran

Editors: Paul Tothill, William Hoy

Music: John Powell

Visual effects supervisor: Chas Jarrett

Casting: Jina Jay, Dixie Chassay

PG rating, 111 minutes


.




228




. .
























.

[jo]

This one looks better --

www.screendaily.com/reviews/pan-review/5094325.article

[jo]

No offense meant, but it probably takes a Brit ( not Brit colonials) to truly appreciate the joy, wit, touch of whimsy, and sense of adventure of this film adaptation via an origin story!

Maybe it is a cultural thing, but this review links the story and visual beauty to many English cultural icons and references -- the reviewer did his homework and then shared his reaction -- that the movie is truly " joyously uncool". It is appreciated in the light of English tales, not Disney creations!


FOUR STARS OUT OF FIVE!

www.telegraph.co.uk/film/pan/review/

Pan review: 'joyously uncool'



Telegraph

Actors: Hugh Jackman, Levi Miller, Jimmy Vee, Rooney Mara, Garrett Hedlund, Cara Delevingne

Director: Joe Wright

Genre: Family

Synopsis: In Neverland, an orphan who does not want to grow up must battle the pirate Blackbeard
Release Date 16-10-2015
Duration 111 mins
Rating PG
Country UK




Robbie Collin 20 September 2015 • 6:00pm



For all its eye-popping action scenes and stylish design, Joe Wright's Peter Pan prequel feels wonderfully old-fashioned





‘The Boy Who Wouldn’t Grow Up’ was how J.M. Barrie introduced his most famous creation in the title of his 1904 stage play – and in Joe Wright’s Pan, that guarantee has pretty much held firm.

Technically, this is a prequel to Barrie’s Peter Pan stories – although for the most part, the kind of revamping, reverse-engineering and postmodern horseplay that prequel-making normally entails is in short supply. In fact, aside from a couple of pirate sing-alongs to Nirvana and Ramones songs, Wright’s film is jubilantly uncool. Perhaps one of the best compliments you could pay it is that it could have been written 100 years ago.

The tone owes a little more to the adventure novels of Jules Verne than it does Barrie, while its opening scenes, which take place in a Blitz-battered London orphanage, are inescapably similar to early chapters of C.S. Lewis’s The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe, with their shared backdrops of hardship during wartime and tantalising rumours of magic behind locked doors.

It was on the doorstep of this forbidding establishment that Peter (played by the first-time actor Levi Miller) was left when he was a baby, and where he has since been under the care of Kathy Burke’s Mother Barnabas, the Miss Trunchbull-like gargoyle in charge.

Every morning when he wakes up, another few beds in the dormitory are empty, and Peter’s convinced that something funny is afoot. The boys assume evacuation is to blame, but it transpires that Mother Barnabas is selling them to a crew of Neverland pirates who need cheap labour for their mining operation.

They swoop by every night in their flying galleon, drop through the skylights on ropes and pull the children from their beds like hunting spiders – an image of almost Roald Dahl-like shiveriness that Wright stages as a kind of lunatic circus act. One such raid leads to what’s indisputably Pan’s finest sequence: a bombastic pitched battle between the flying ship and a squadron of Spitfires above the London rooftops. The cherry on this particular trifle is Mission Control, which is manned by a roomful of identical radio operators: think Kim Hunter in A Matter of Life and Death, except blonde, and multiplied by 20.


Though Jason Fuchs’s script isn’t particularly beholden to Barrie’s work, some of its big ideas have been spun off from throwaway lines in it. The biggest one is its villain. In Barrie’s 1911 novel Peter and Wendy, John Darling reveals that Captain James Hook was once “Blackbeard’s bo’sun” – and so here we meet Blackbeard himself, who’s played by a typically charismatic though not immediately recognisable Hugh Jackman, and is marshalling a search for life-sustaining fairy dust, or ‘pixum’, in Neverland’s mines.

With a certain thudding inevitability, it turns out that a prophesy foretold all this: briefly, Peter is destined to lead a revolt against Blackbeard and free the children, using a latent ability to fly which he possesses thanks to his parentage. This is all tied up perfectly neatly as the film progresses, but it seems unnecessary, particularly as part of the early charm of Peter’s character is his apparent lack of a pre-ordained advantage beyond his nose for adventure. (A lovely, thought-provoking detail I wish the film had made a little more of: he’s dyslexic.)



Far more intriguing is the new fedora-wearing friend he makes down the mines, James Hook himself – who is, ingeniously, nothing at all like the familiar Disney version of the character. He's not a captain, but a rakish adventurer, a genuinely nice guy, and still has the full complement of hands.

Hook played by Garrett Hedlund as a stack of matinee-idol tics: imagine Hedlund playing Armie Hammer playing Harrison Ford playing Indiana Jones, and that’s more or less his act. In league with Mr. Smee (Adeel Akhtar, enjoyably dopey), Hook and Peter hot-wire a flying galleon and scud across the sky towards the Neverwood, while Blackbeard plots his next move.

This is all refreshingly out of step with to the usual prequel MO, where the stage-setting for the original work can be so fussy, and the narrative so heavy with various omens and foreshadowings, that in and of itself, the new film can be as good as meaningless. (Which was what went wrong with Sam Raimi’s Oz the Great and Powerful – and, arguably, Star Wars Episodes I-III.)

Instead, Pan just tells a rollicking story of its own, without worrying too much about getting the pieces in place for Barrie’s own work, or the much-loved Disney animation it also inspired. (Though if this film is successful enough to prompt a sequel, expect that to do much more along those lines.)



The only significant detail from the books to be seriously reworked is Neverland’s “Piccaninny tribe”, led by the princess Tiger Lily (a commendably kick-ass Rooney Mara), who here are a rainbow nation of actors of every imaginable caste and creed. (When the pirates attack their treetop village – the soft furnishings in which, it should be said, put Anthropolgie’s homeware department to shame – the rainbow becomes literal, and they vanish in clouds of multi-coloured dust.) It’s a fudge, but a necessary one, and stylishly pulled off.

Occasionally things get a little overcrowded, particularly during a sticky final act, but Pan has a certain timeless buoyancy that keeps it bouncing back. It’s a tale full of trapdoors, hidden switches and secret passageways, where flashbacks are told through animated wood carvings, and fairy dust is buried in its bedrock. The phrase "an eight-year-old could have thought of it" sounds like it should be an insult. But it isn’t here.

[jo]

Another very positive review, from Brit reviwer Paul Heath

www.thehollywoodnews.com/2015/09/20/pan-review-180095/

Pan review: “A fun, fantastic fantasy adventure”

Pan review: Joe Wright heads back to the origins of one of the classic British tales and find out how Peter Pan first came to Neverland.


By Paul Heath -

Sep 20, 2015


Pan review: A fantastic fantasy adventure with the stand-out being Jackman’s glorious new villain, Blackbeard.



Joe Wright, the British director who, up until now has settled on bringing mainly period dramas like Pride and Prejudice and Atonement to the screen, focusses his talented sights on a retelling of the Peter Pan classic, which too can be wedged in that aforementioned genre, with the action taking place during World War II.

Pan is a brand new origin story written by Jason Fuchs, and was a screenplay that has appeared on the famous Blacklist, Hollywood’s list of the best of the best unmade screenplays. The action kicks off just before WWII, where Peter Pan’s mother Mary (Amanda Seyfried) is seen seemingly abandoning her newborn child at the gates of the Lambeth Home For Boys in south London. We very quickly skip forward 12 years to find Peter (newcomer Levi Miller) living amongst the rest of the orphans at the home, some of which are beginning to mysteriously disappear. One night Peter himself is kidnapped by pirates in a flying ship, who take him to Neverland which is ruled by the pirate Blackbeard (Hugh Jackman). There, Peter meets a young James Hook (Garrett Hedlund), Tiger Lily (Rooney Mara), and The Lost Boys, where a new adventure to find out what really happened to his beloved mother begins.

The existence of Pan is indeed in itself quite questionable. It seems a little early to be presented with yet another retelling of the classic story; after all, it is just 12 years since P.J. Hogan dropped the clunker that was Peter Pan, starring Jason Isaacs as Hook, into our laps. However, here we are treated to a very different Pan, and our story begins before Peter even becomes the boy who never grows up, or meets the darlings, or even steps into Neverland. Miller is exceptional in his first big feature as the title character (his casting was a result of a worldwide search for a new actor to play the iconic role), and the opening scenes set against the backdrop of the capital during the Blitz are visually gorgeous, complete with zeppelins and spitfire planes above a blazing London. The integration of a flying pirate ship within this environment is something to behold, and the first part of the opening reel, set up the magic and wonder of what’s to come.

We saw some footage from the film back in July, and we heard that Wright had chosen to use modern rock tracks in the film as the crew roll into Neverland for the first time. There was a worry as to how this would integrate and play in this kind of film, but the addition of Nirvana’s Smells Like Teen Spirit and various other well-known songs are not a problem, and in fact, work wonderfully. That soundtrack, set to the over-the-top, scenery chewing dialogue delivery from Jackman as the new villain Blackbeard, is pure cinematic gold, and perhaps his villain in this kind of fantasy movie is one of the best since Geoffrey Rush’s Barbossa in the Pirates Of The Caribbean films. In fact, the whole film could be up there in terms of quality, with the earlier movies in that franchise; the script, which, along with Wright’s masterful, inventive direction, is that good.


As for the other performances? Well, Garrett Hedlund is fine in his incarnation of a younger Hook – a kind of hybrid of Dustin Hoffman’s performance, mixed with the cheeky wit of Han Solo and the adventurer spirit of Indiana Jones. He’s superb. Then we have Rooney Mara, whose casting was a little frowned upon when it was announced (Tiger Lily is traditionally Native American), but she brings a humanity to the piece, and is perfectly fine. Also, there are some great extended cameos from the likes of Kathy Burke as an Irish nun, who really has things coming to her, and an almost unrecognisable Paul Kaye as Mutti Voosht, one of Blackbeard’s henchmen.

The visuals in Neverland are stunning, magical and colourful as you would imagine. From Tiger Lilly’s head-dress, to the blunderbuss explosions, to the glittering fairies; this production has been designed to dazzle, and does so… and them some. The visual effects are absolutely tip-top too; from flying pirate ships, to plunging mining quarries, leaping crocodiles and beautiful mermaids, who just bear a resemblance to three, identical Cara Delivignes. The CGI is difficult to fault.


With a PG rating in the UK, the film does have some pretty harrowing scenes for young children, but with so much fighting and violence going on, Wright manages to swerve what we see on-screen quite superbly. However, some moments involving big scary crocs, and various people falling from great heights, the minor peril felt more major in our eyes, so parental guidance is very much recommended.

If there was a downside to the film, then the very significant open-ended finale may not satisfy some viewers, with Warner Bros. possibly looking to extend this strong opener into a potential franchise, which may not be all that unwelcome.

Overall, this is a great family movie, and a great way to kick off the autumn season. A fantastic family adventure that dazzles and delights in equal measure. Go as soon as you can.

Pan review by Paul Heath, September 2015.

Pan is released in UK cinemas on 16th October, 2015, and in the US on 9th October

[jo]

A long review from Australia! Another

Four out of five stars!

PANTASTIC

September 22, 2015, Posted in Jason King, Reviews Comments: No comments

PAN BLACKBEARD IMAGE
I scored an invite for four to a screening of PAN on Sunday at the very comfortable Event Cinemas Bondi Junction. I am pretty sure it was a family screening with most people bringing two adults and two children but half my friends have the maturity of children and two of my guests were incredibly keen on seeing it so off we went, our motley crew of four adults. We viewed the movie in 3D, and 3/4 of our group worshiped the movie, I felt like a kid again, I was elated and caught up in the story and was blown away by the CGI heavy movie. In my puntastic words the screening and movie was PANTASTIC. PAN releases this coming Thursday 24th September in Australia from the folks at Warner Brothers and Roadshow Films, it runs for 111mins and is rated PG. It is suitable for the whole family but a few scenes will most definitely scare the youngest ankle-biters.



pan movie poster image
PAN | SALTY POPCORN MOVIE REVIEW | MOVIE POSTER IMAGE



BY JASON KING (and guests)

Sadly I keep reading a lot of negative reviews of this movie from jaded critics who really have forgotten the magic of movies, these uptight buffoons at some of the largest film and media places in the world go in reviewing every movie based on the same criteria and sometimes fail to see that different movies appeal to different ages, audiences, generations and tastes, it is a shame when they have this position of power that can ruin a movie because the sheep mentality of the majority of the public listens to them, on the Variety review posted on Facebook most of the comments are from sheep blindly throwing hate and shade to the film without basing any judgement on the film themselves, there is of course the one comment from me stating “Our group just came out of the movie and all of us loved it – your reviewer is a scrooge grumpy douche that needs to thaw his heart.” I stand by it, and hope some people in the world make up their own mind, take their kids, and let them enjoy the magic of this movie.



PAN MOVIE HOOK PETER IMAGE
PAN | SALTY POPCORN MOVIE REVIEW | PETER (LEVI MILLER) AND HOOK (GARRET HEDLUND) LOOK AT THE MAP OF NETHERLAND



This is a very different angle to the much told story of Peter Pan, as it is a prequel written by Jason Fuchs (upcoming Wonder Woman, Ice Age: Continental Drift) based on the original characters from legendary J.M. Barrie and directed by Joe Wright (Atonement, Hanna, The Soloist). It is the origin story of Peter Pan and how he came to Neverland. It holds true to the original elements of the Peter Pan story with some assumptions based on the tone as to the causes of wonder created in a dreadful time. It starts set in the orphanage/ boy’s home that Peter and his friends lived in during the bombing of London in war time. It could be alluded to that Neverland is a fantasy place created as a heaven for all the boys who died during the bombing of the orphanage, or is Neverland the escape for one very sad and troubled boy in the same period who creates it all in his mind? I prefer to think it is all very real and just a fortunate time that the evil Blackbeard and his child smugglers appeared. Either way it is still magical from every angle and gives Peter a future and past he dearly deserves.



levi-miller-in-pan-movie-image
PAN | SALTY POPCORN MOVIE REVIEW | PETER (LEVI MILLER) IS DISCOVERED TO BE THE PAN



Peter is kidnapped by Blackbeard and his pirates and forced to work in the mines on Neverland, here he must mine the rock sized equivalent of fairy dust, it is the rock that keeps Blackbeard eternally young and if enough of it is mined Blackbeard can remain immortal. But a prophecy exists about a boy who will arrive in Neverland who can fly and will unite the land to salvation from evil.

Peter came to his orphanage with no knowledge of his parents but has a pan flute medallion tied around his neck, this is the symbol of the tribes of Neverland and when Peter and his somewhat odd partner, Hook, end up with the tribes it is revealed he could be the chosen one. And so begins Peter’s journey where he must first believe in himself to save Neverland. It is all very Harry Potteresque.



pan movie peter blackbeard image
PAN | SALTY POPCORN MOVIE REVIEW | PETER (LEVI MILLER) TRYING TO HIDE FROM BLACKBEARD (HUGH JACKMAN)



I love the element of starting this movie during the war, it sets the film to start where J.M. Barrie would have been at the time and enters into the psyche of why Peter Pan is important and why he will “never grow up.” The film is not without faults though and the glaringly obvious stand out thing you will notice is this is not all about Peter being happy and never growing up, this is Peter fighting the need for him to act like a grown up and take on huge responsibilities, something that will lead to his ethos. The largest fault of the movie for me, which is what lost its one point, it completely fails to address how Hook and Peter became arch rivals, instead the nemesis is Blackbeard, and Hook, as opposed to being and looking exactly like Blackbeard does instead is Indiana Jones. And to top it off Hook is Peter’s greatest ally and Peter sees Hook as a father figure, someone he would literally die to protect. It is honorable but is never addressed. There is some funny comments about it over the start of the credits though and it is my belief they will see how this goes financially and we could see a bridging movie in the future, although this will never happen if the likes of Variety and Hollywood Reporter have anything to say about it.



PAN TIGER LILY IMAGE
PAN | SALTY POPCORN MOVIE REVIEW | TIGER LILY (ROONEY MARA)



The acting is superb and Levi Miller is perfect casting, he more than holds his own and steals the show from all the cast, he was also recently cast as the lead in the upcoming RED DOG sequel, BLUE DOG, I would also suggest you mark that name down, the kid is going places. Garret Hedlund is OK as Hook, he just puts on a somewhat annoying accent and channels every Indiana Jones movie he has ever seen, but you gotta love him, the character is a larrikin and the guy is awesome eye candy. Tiger Lily’s Rooney Mara is very colourful and a lot of flack was copped for her casting, the character is of Native American heritage and Mara is not, but the natives in this movie do come across as incredibly multicultural, even their leader is a true bogan Aussie Aboriginal that copped a laugh from the audience. It also reflects the nature of how the lost boys ended up, a mixed bunch, well in HOOK anyway. And to be honest, of course it was adults whining, do you really think your 8yr old child will give two hoots?

Speaking of HOOK, the colourfulness of the film and the tribe is very reminiscent of the HOOK styling and is contrasted well compared to everything being grey, black and drab when in the presence of the evil and dark Blackbeard, speaking of said Blackbeard; Hugh Jackman does have a lot of fun in the role, you can see his theatre background coming to the fore although while his theatricality and character are enjoyable I did find he never quite got to the greatness of Hoffman in the HOOK role.

Special mention to the Kathy Burke as Mother Barnabas, the evil fat matron of the orphanage, she was comically awesome and everyone will love to hate her all too brief appearance.



PAN LEVI MILLER IMAGE
PAN | SALTY POPCORN MOVIE REVIEW | PETER (LEVI MILLER) AT THE HELM OF THE JOLLY ROGER



PAN is one of a handful of films actually shot in 3D this year and the 3D is superb, the entire CGI visuals of the film really do lift it to a film of fantasy that will blow children’s (and the odd adult’s) minds. I highly recommend seeing this one on the largest screen you can find and to pay the extra few bob to see it in 3D, as the director intended. The climax of the film is well worth it, as is all the flying ships, the trip to Netherland and of course seeing a chicken lay an egg in zero gravity .

This is a family movie, and possibly one of the best of the year, I am appalled at the online comments but 1) haters gonna hate and 2) each to their own. Out of the four of us that saw the film together our scores were: James 5/5, Steph 4.5/5, Me 4/5 and Sebby T 3/5. Averaging our scores our total is…………………….



4 Pops

[jo]

Another review from an Aussie critic --

www.maketheswitch.com.au/switch/article.asp?id=1183

Review.PAN|A SURPRISINGLY ENJOYABLE FLIGHT OF FANCY


THEATRICAL REVIEW


RELEASE DATE: 24/09/2015

CAST: HUGH JACKMAN
GARRETT HUDLUND
ROONEY MARA
LEVI MILLER
GARRETT HEDLUND

DIRECTOR: JOE WRIGHT
WEBSITE: WWW.PANMOVIE.COM
FACEBOOK: PANOFFICIAL
TWITTER: @panmovie




By Daniel Lammin, 20th September 2015



It seems like every decade or so, we see a new attempt to tame J.M. Barrie’s timeless children story ‘Peter Pan and Wendy’ into a film adaptation. With the notable exception of Disney’s spectacular 1953 animated film, none have made a particularly strong impression or impact (even Spielberg’s wonderful 1991 misfire ‘Hook’ only satisfies as a piece of nostalgia). In this time of reboots, cinematic universes and mega-franchises though, every property must be mined to death, and with ‘Pan’, the story of Neverland and the flying boy who never grows up is thrown once again into the blockbuster machine. At first glance, it seems like another ill-conceived and unnecessary reboot like ‘Alice in Wonderland’ - but as it turns out, ‘Pan’ might have a bit more going for it than you’d expect.

The film acts as an origin story for how Peter (Levi Miller) came to Neverland. In this imagined version (Barrie never gave an actual origin story for his hero), screenwriter James Fuchs has Peter kidnapped from a home for orphaned boys during World War II (yes, the book was published in 1911, but they do explain this... kind of) and sold as slaves to Captain Blackbeard (Hugh Jackman), a flamboyant pirate digging up Neverland for any trace of fairy dust, a substance he has his orphan slaves mine for and keeps for himself for some unknown purpose. The arrival in Neverland awakens a hidden talent in Peter, who suddenly demonstrates an ability to fly, and he teams up with fellow orphan James Hook (Garrett Hedlund) and tribal princess Tiger Lilly (Rooney Mara) to stop Blackbeard from taking Neverland for himself and mining it out of existence.

As a concept, ‘Pan’ has a lot of problems, never quite transcending into something really engaging. The narrative lacks careful plotting (any story that relies on a "prophecy of a chosen one" is nothing but lazy), and the episodic set-pieces never quite gel together. What does work in Fuchs’ screenplay though are its ideas. There’s clearly a lot of respect for Barrie’s work here, and great care has gone into acknowledging it and building on it. Central to that is starting off Peter and Hook’s relationship as a friendship, an unexpected twist to the backstory that actually works. The tribes on the island are also wonderfully multicultural as opposed to Barrie’s Native American Indians, which gives the film a lovely extra flavour. The ever-present themes of death and searching for lost motherhood are also there and well-acknowledged, and the interpretation of Neverland as a hostile untamed wilderness comes as a breath of fresh air after the over-saturated fantasy worlds of the recent Disney live-action films.


The true success of the film really lies in the hands of director Joe Wright, ‘Pan’ marking his step into blockbuster filmmaking after his acclaimed dramas ‘Pride and Prejudice’, ‘Atonement’ and ‘Anna Karenina’. Though this is a much bigger canvas, Wright’s hand is very assured, and he finds many ways to demonstrate his terrific visual flair. The film moves with a cracking energy and wit, but even though it’s certainly aimed at children, it doesn’t shy away from moments of reflection and meditation. He also throws in a myriad of little visual gags and nods to Barrie’s original story, especially around Hook and his currently intact hand. The technical skill of the film can’t overcome the weaknesses in the narrative itself, and though the finale is visually impressive, it doesn’t quite pack the punch it should. If it weren’t for Wright and his dedicated collaborators (particularly the wonderfully flamboyant production design), ‘Pan’ would probably not be as enjoyable as it is.

The cast are also doing great work. Levi Miller is a real find as Peter, full of spunk and energy, but able to chart some of the more emotionally difficult material. He’s certainly the best Pan we’ve had in a while. Hugh Jackman came across in the trailers as a flamboyant joke as Blackbeard, and his performance is certainly over-the-top, but the great surprise is the seething menace that simmers underneath. There are moments where, combined with his bizarre costume and make-up, Jackman manages to be genuinely unnerving. Rooney Mara seems a tad lost as Tiger Lilly, never entirely comfortable in the scope of the film, but Garrett Hedlund is oozing with Southern charm and charisma as Hook, and looks to be having the time of his life. Adeel Akhtar also makes a surprisingly wonderful Mr Smee and even Uncle Jack Charles pops up as the tribal chief. Much like the work behind the camera, the performances go some way to making up for the flaws in the story.

It’s clear from the get-go that ‘Pan’ is intended to be the start of a series of films, with Peter not quite yet becoming the Pan we know and love. Whether there will be further instalments depends on the success of this first film. I’d be interested to see where they go with it, for even though this is a shaky start, there are some interesting ideas set sail in it. In particular, it would be great to see how Peter and Hook’s relationship develops, as they have such a care and affection for one another here, and we know this’ll end with Peter cutting off Hook’s hand and feeding it to the crocodile Tick-Tock. I’d love to see how they handle that dark little narrative point.

‘Pan’ is not an outright success, certainly not a scratch on the animated film and not even really an origin story that particularly needed to be told. That said, it’s a surprisingly enjoyable two hours, full of colour and laughs and excitement. It might not capture the magic of Barrie’s original story and occasionally overcomplicates it, but at least it respects its source material and doesn’t go out of its way to ignore it. Joe Wright and his team have done a fine job, and I for one would be interested to see where they take these characters next.

- See more at: www.maketheswitch.com.au/switch/article.asp?id=1183#sthash.sjpwIR0K.dpuf

[mamaleh]

I hope the public isn't turned off by the initial rash of negatives from, unfortunately, more powerful voices in the critical world. I keep hoping Hugh will be Oscar-nominated for Supporting Actor.

Ellen

[jo]

There's something distasteful and mean in the rush to bring out their overly negative reviews, on the day before the grand premiere in London was supposed to happen! They couldn't wait for the film to be first presented to the world...they had to release their vinegarish thoughts on the day before the premiere in London ( where the story rightfully belongs). Why the rush -- USA audiences were not going to see it until the NYC premiere on October 4 and the general release on October 9. Did they want to spoil it for the English audiences, whose link to Peter is even seen at parks and other public places? James Barrie was English and he inspired the many variations on the story of Peter.

I can take negative reactions, but I think it was a mean initiative to shove their reviews to people at Leicester Square who were just anticipating this new film adaptation. They could have waited for the day after the premiere to air their reviews, as did some critics from the UK and Australia who have seen it also ahead of others.


I am talking to you, Variety, The Wrap... and even The Hollywood Reporter


Jo

[jo]

Ellen,

If Hugh's name is above or before the title ( as advance publicity seems to indicate), can he still be considered for a supporting role?

The Oscar race is of course highly dependent on the campaigning and the politics that happen during the awards season. Since Les Miserables, I have become more cynical about the worth of the awards. Will Warner Bros campaign heavily for candidates for award consideration, apart from technical categories?


Jo

[hughmanity]

So agree with you, Jo   It just made me sad, and I was surprised to see those reviews out before the premiere. 

[jo]

From the Sydney Morning Herald --

Two out of three stars!


www.smh.com.au/entertainment/movies/pan-review-too-many-effects-not-enough-magic-20150923-gjszu4.html

Pan review: too many effects, not enough magic

DateSeptember 23, 2015 - 1:45PM

Philippa Hawker


111 minutes

★★☆

Pan – written by Jason Fuchs​ and directed by Joe Wright – is a prequel to J.M. Barrie's much-loved, still potent tale, and it's an origins story of how young Peter Pan came to Neverland and met Captain Hook. It's an ambitious, big-budget enterprise, but it falls sadly short, however: it fails to engage with all that is dark, comical, imaginative and unsettling about Barrie's world. It's primarily a prolonged special effects exercise that manages to explain too much and too little at the same time. It feels as if it is setting things up for a second film, a Pan 2 that will fill in some of the gaps created here.

It begins promisingly enough, with a sense of mystery and a feeling of energy. A baby is deposited on the steps of a London children's home; a few years later, the city is under attack from German bombers during the Blitz, and life is additionally grim for the inhabitants of this grim, Dickensian place, presided over by a punitive nun (Kathy Burke). The baby is now a boy, Peter, played with aplomb by a young Australian actor, Levi Miller, and he's a spirited, adventurous child.

With the connivance of those in charge, the pirate Blackbeard is in the process of kidnapping boys from the home and spiriting them away. Peter finds himself in the magical kingdom of Neverland, which when first glimpsed has curious echoes of the world of Mad Max: Fury Road, with a spectacle of mass exploitation, and the sounds of a choral version of Smells Like Teen Spirit. Blackbeard (Hugh Jackman), the pirate overlord, is mining Neverland for fairy dust, which has magical properties, and Peter is put to work digging.

Blackbeard – who exists only as a throwaway reference in Barrie – at least gives Jackman something to have fun with, a character whose presence is both menacing and comical. Armour-clad and primped, he's a mixture of Renaissance prince and Fury Road's Immortan Joe with a touch of Aunty Jack.

James Hook (Garrett Hedlund), is a different story, an oddly diminished presence. He toils in the mines, alongside Peter, and he's a brisk, terse character who looks a bit like Indiana Jones, but grumpier. How he will become Peter's arch-enemy the pirate Captain Hook, is anyone's guess – his damaging encounter with a crocodile is briefly foreshadowed, but that's about it. We also meet Tiger Lily (Rooney Mara) who was a Native American character in Barrie's tale, and here is a warrior princess with a Benetton knit wardrobe.

Peter turns out to be a Messiah figure, a chosen one destined to save Neverland, and that's a tedious Neo-plus-Harry Potter trope. Once we get to Neverland, the sense of anticipation and excitement that Wright has established is soon gone. Pan simply turns into a 3D thrill ride, with a lot of falling through space and flying pirate ships lurching here and there, for no obvious reason.

[jo]

A Brit (from THE ECONOMIST) watches the movie and is enchanted --

intelligentlifemagazine.com/culture/the-daily/film-critics-are-wrong-about-pan

Film critics are wrong about “Pan”



It’s actually enchanting, imaginative and sparky


Nicholas Barber | October 15th 2015




“Pan panned”. Well, which sub-editor could possibly resist that headline? Precious few, it seems, because you can find it countless times when you Google the reviews of Warner Bros’ new “Peter Pan” prequel, “Pan”. The film has taken a pasting from American critics (as I type, it has a paltry 24% on Rotten Tomatoes), and even before its release in Britain it was written off in newspapers as a calamitous flop which may cost the studio $150m. For British audiences, the boy who never grew up was dead on arrival. And, as someone who loathes sequels almost as much as I venerate J.M. Barrie’s novel, I can’t say I was too upset. When I sat down to watch it, I felt that if any film deserved that merciless two-word headline, it was “Pan”. A minute later, I was enchanted. A hundred minutes after that, I thought it was the greatest children’s fantasy film in years.

I wouldn’t claim that “Pan” is perfect. But I would claim that anyone who dismisses this awfully big adventure must have seen a lot of masterpieces that have passed me by. Are we really living in an age so rich in cinematic wonders that we can yawn at a flying pirate ship being chased by spitfires over London, skimming the surface of the Thames before soaring into the night sky? Are we really so jaded that we can tut at a jungle infested with Tyrannosaur-sized parrot skeletons, or a bay of mermaids who all have the face of Cara Delevingne? And are films really so over-populated with memorable villains these days that we can sneer at one with the strut of Tim Curry in “The Rocky Horror Picture Show” and the poesy of Dylan Thomas? (Death, he informs Peter, is “a slow dream drowning in the soft, dark sea”.) No. In an era of committee-approved corporate blockbusters, “Pan” stands out for its humanity, its sparky comedy, and its eccentric, unbounded imagination. It may be directed by Joe Wright (“Atonement”), but it’s as close as we’ll get to the “Harry Potter” film which Terry Gilliam was so keen to make.

The dizzyingly paced story of a boy in search of his mother, “Pan” is most enjoyable if you pretend that it isn’t a “Peter Pan” prequel at all. Despite the small detail that Barrie’s book was published in 1911, Peter (the likeable Levi Miller) starts “Pan” in a London orphanage during the Blitz. And when he is abducted by aerial pirates and whisked to the colourful floating island of Neverland, he meets a James Hook who could have been designed to annoy purists. Barrie’s Captain Hook reminisced about the playing fields of Eton; in “Pan”, Hook (Garret Hedlund) is an Indiana Jones/Han Solo hybrid. He is also a slave, forced to hack calcified deposits of fairy dust from a rocky cliffside. It’s a scene which has more in common with “Mad Max: Fury Road” than a Christmas pantomime.



Unlike most prequels, “Pan” has a cavalier attitude towards its source material—using what it wants, and discarding what it doesn’t. But it’s an attitude which is in keeping with Barrie’s own irreverence in the novel. True, when the slaves chant Nirvana’s “Smells Like Teen Spirit”, it may be a quirk too far, but this misstep is closely followed by the introduction of the foppish pirate king, Blackbeard (Hugh Jackman, above)—and he is a baddie for the ages. “Have you come to kill me, Peter?” he asks when he meets our ever-young hero. Jackman delivers the line with such curiosity and anguish that you realise, with a jolt, that Blackbeard is half-hoping for a positive answer. It’s Jackman’s best performance to date, although that could be down to the dialogue he’s been given. There are very few fantasy movies that prompt you to look up the screenwriter’s name, but Jason Fuchs’s screwball banter is too sharp to ignore. “I couldn’t bear to watch you die,” Hook tells Tiger Lily when he rescues her from Blackbeard. “You should have closed your eyes,” she replies.

Ah, yes: Tiger Lily. One of the brickbats hurled at “Pan” is that a character conceived as a native American (not that Barrie would have used that term) is played by Rooney Mara, and this casting is cited as a noxious example of Hollywood’s “whitewashing”. I’m not sure that the criticism holds water, given that Hook, as mentioned, has been switched from an upper-crust Englishman to a rootin’ tootin’ cowboy. But it’s worth pointing out that “Pan” is one of the most multi-racial blockbusters I’ve ever seen. Tiger Lily’s leader (Jack Charles) is an Aboriginal Australian, her acrobatic sidekick (Tae-joo Na) is South Korean, and Hook’s craven pal Smee is played, hilariously, by Adeel Akhtar, an Anglo-Asian actor best known for his roles in “Four Lions” and “The Dictator”. In “Pan”, you never know who Peter is going to bump into next. That’s why it’s so exhilarating.

The only thing that stops it being a classic is its confused and hurried finale. “Pan” was clearly intended to be the first part of a trilogy, hence, after the last frantic action sequence, you’re left with the suspicion that the film-makers were saving some of Neverland’s marvels for future episodes. Now, of course, those future episodes have no chance of being produced, which is sort of a shame, but which also seems sort of appropriate. “Pan” may be a prequel, and it may set up a sequel, but it definitely feels like a one-off.

Pan is out now in America, and released in Britain on October 16th

[jo]

THE ECONOMIST is a very respected publication.

www.economist.com/digital?cid1=ELOABill1

I do remember Hugh once saying that he reads THE ECONOMIST. I hope he gets to read this film review!

Jo

[mamaleh]

I don't have an account so couldn't read it. But it is nice to hear of what sounds like a positive review.

It's still playing in my New Jersey town, albeit in only one theater--the smallest in the complex, about 40 stretch-out seats.

I decided to give it another view today. Yes, the theater was small--but it was just about totally filled. Lots of families in attendance. I didn't notice any restlessness on the part of the kiddies around me; they really did seem into it. Most looked about 8-11 or 12.

By the way, I'd never experienced that kind of movie seating before; it's pretty comfy! I got an assigned seat.
Glad I got to see it again before it disappears from the big screen.

Ellen

[jo]

It is not just a positive review -- it actually points out how well-made and sophisticated the film is! It is a bit sophisticated -- and I do love how he appreciates Hugh's turn as a villain ( "the strut of Tim Curry in The Rocky Horror Picture Show and the poesy of Dylan Thomas" !) and his overall impression of the movie ( "In an era of committee-approved corporate blockbusters, “Pan” stands out for its humanity, its sparky comedy, and its eccentric, unbounded imagination.")

I also went to see it in a deluxe theatre -- and with the sound and visual clarity ( and really good couches/footrests to sit on!), it was an excellent experience.

The film is still showing here -- and by the weekend will be on a full-month release here. You can't say we did not appreciate the movie

Jo

[jo]

On an aside, I just discovered that Garrett Hedlund is a country music singer as well.

Here's a video of him singing Chances Are and a few others --

www.bing.com/videos/search?q=youtube+garrett+hedlund+singing&FORM=VIRE1#view=detail&mid=6FEA8F4F68FD58C15F136FEA8F4F68FD58C15F13

I am not surprised -- he did have a deep and expressive voice in PAN!


I wonder if Hugh knew about that


Jo

[alma]

Nov 1, 2015 18:01:42 GMT -5 jo said:

A Brit (from THE ECONOMIST) watches the movie and is enchanted --

intelligentlifemagazine.com/culture/the-daily/film-critics-are-wrong-about-pan

Film critics are wrong about “Pan”



It’s actually enchanting, imaginative and sparky


Nicholas Barber | October 15th 2015




“Pan panned”. Well, which sub-editor could possibly resist that headline? Precious few, it seems, because you can find it countless times when you Google the reviews of Warner Bros’ new “Peter Pan” prequel, “Pan”. The film has taken a pasting from American critics (as I type, it has a paltry 24% on Rotten Tomatoes), and even before its release in Britain it was written off in newspapers as a calamitous flop which may cost the studio $150m. For British audiences, the boy who never grew up was dead on arrival. And, as someone who loathes sequels almost as much as I venerate J.M. Barrie’s novel, I can’t say I was too upset. When I sat down to watch it, I felt that if any film deserved that merciless two-word headline, it was “Pan”. A minute later, I was enchanted. A hundred minutes after that, I thought it was the greatest children’s fantasy film in years.

I wouldn’t claim that “Pan” is perfect. But I would claim that anyone who dismisses this awfully big adventure must have seen a lot of masterpieces that have passed me by. Are we really living in an age so rich in cinematic wonders that we can yawn at a flying pirate ship being chased by spitfires over London, skimming the surface of the Thames before soaring into the night sky? Are we really so jaded that we can tut at a jungle infested with Tyrannosaur-sized parrot skeletons, or a bay of mermaids who all have the face of Cara Delevingne? And are films really so over-populated with memorable villains these days that we can sneer at one with the strut of Tim Curry in “The Rocky Horror Picture Show” and the poesy of Dylan Thomas? (Death, he informs Peter, is “a slow dream drowning in the soft, dark sea”.) No. In an era of committee-approved corporate blockbusters, “Pan” stands out for its humanity, its sparky comedy, and its eccentric, unbounded imagination. It may be directed by Joe Wright (“Atonement”), but it’s as close as we’ll get to the “Harry Potter” film which Terry Gilliam was so keen to make.

The dizzyingly paced story of a boy in search of his mother, “Pan” is most enjoyable if you pretend that it isn’t a “Peter Pan” prequel at all. Despite the small detail that Barrie’s book was published in 1911, Peter (the likeable Levi Miller) starts “Pan” in a London orphanage during the Blitz. And when he is abducted by aerial pirates and whisked to the colourful floating island of Neverland, he meets a James Hook who could have been designed to annoy purists. Barrie’s Captain Hook reminisced about the playing fields of Eton; in “Pan”, Hook (Garret Hedlund) is an Indiana Jones/Han Solo hybrid. He is also a slave, forced to hack calcified deposits of fairy dust from a rocky cliffside. It’s a scene which has more in common with “Mad Max: Fury Road” than a Christmas pantomime.



Unlike most prequels, “Pan” has a cavalier attitude towards its source material—using what it wants, and discarding what it doesn’t. But it’s an attitude which is in keeping with Barrie’s own irreverence in the novel. True, when the slaves chant Nirvana’s “Smells Like Teen Spirit”, it may be a quirk too far, but this misstep is closely followed by the introduction of the foppish pirate king, Blackbeard (Hugh Jackman, above)—and he is a baddie for the ages. “Have you come to kill me, Peter?” he asks when he meets our ever-young hero. Jackman delivers the line with such curiosity and anguish that you realise, with a jolt, that Blackbeard is half-hoping for a positive answer. It’s Jackman’s best performance to date, although that could be down to the dialogue he’s been given. There are very few fantasy movies that prompt you to look up the screenwriter’s name, but Jason Fuchs’s screwball banter is too sharp to ignore. “I couldn’t bear to watch you die,” Hook tells Tiger Lily when he rescues her from Blackbeard. “You should have closed your eyes,” she replies.

Ah, yes: Tiger Lily. One of the brickbats hurled at “Pan” is that a character conceived as a native American (not that Barrie would have used that term) is played by Rooney Mara, and this casting is cited as a noxious example of Hollywood’s “whitewashing”. I’m not sure that the criticism holds water, given that Hook, as mentioned, has been switched from an upper-crust Englishman to a rootin’ tootin’ cowboy. But it’s worth pointing out that “Pan” is one of the most multi-racial blockbusters I’ve ever seen. Tiger Lily’s leader (Jack Charles) is an Aboriginal Australian, her acrobatic sidekick (Tae-joo Na) is South Korean, and Hook’s craven pal Smee is played, hilariously, by Adeel Akhtar, an Anglo-Asian actor best known for his roles in “Four Lions” and “The Dictator”. In “Pan”, you never know who Peter is going to bump into next. That’s why it’s so exhilarating.

The only thing that stops it being a classic is its confused and hurried finale. “Pan” was clearly intended to be the first part of a trilogy, hence, after the last frantic action sequence, you’re left with the suspicion that the film-makers were saving some of Neverland’s marvels for future episodes. Now, of course, those future episodes have no chance of being produced, which is sort of a shame, but which also seems sort of appropriate. “Pan” may be a prequel, and it may set up a sequel, but it definitely feels like a one-off.

Pan is out now in America, and released in Britain on October 16th

EXACTLY. I KNEW THAT ALREADY!

Glad you had a chance to watch it again on the big screen, Ellen. I've watched it three times. Best villain ever.

Alma