December 18, 2003

Peter Pan

When I heard that someone was making a live-action, non-musical version of Peter Pan, I envisioned giving the old story a Harry Potter treatment. Special effects are so advanced today that even lower-budget production can achieve fairly credible results. Making a boy fly and visualizing a fairy character shouldn't be too tough, and the story is timeless enough that it would be tough to go horribly wrong. But Australian director P.J. Hogan (MY BEST FRIEND'S WEDDING; MURIEL'S WEDDING) has defied me and done just that. He mucked up Peter Pan.

I won't bother going over the story. That hasn't changed. And I won't blame the faults of this PETER PAN on the casting. Jeremy Sumpter is fairly convincing as the adventurous boy who refuses to grow up. Much like a real teenager, he's fickle and possesses unstable emotions that make him unpredictable. Rachel Hurd-Wood is Wendy Darling, our narrator and focal point of the story. She and her brothers, John and Michael, are lured by Peter to Neverland with the promise of never growing up and having nothing but fun with other boys. French sex kitten Ludivine Sagnier (SWIMMING POOL, FLOWER OF EVIL) has fun playing Tink, the mime-like fairy whose protectiveness and jealousy regarding Peter puts Wendy in great danger. Her look and performance reminded me a lot of what Kylie Minogue did in her brief appearance as the Green Fairy in MOULIN ROUGE, but Sagnier has a slightly wider range of expressions and seems to be having a lot of fun being a pest.

Probably the place where PETER PAN most succeeds is in the casting of Jason Isaacs (Lucius Malfoy in the 2nd Harry Potter film; THE PATRIOT; BLACK HAWK DOWN) in the duel roles of the Darling patriarch and as the nasty Captain Hook. His hook is pretty solid and offers a more three-dimensional look at the character. Sure he wants to kill Peter, but he also wants to be loved. Digital technology gives us a gigantic ticking crocodile to chase Hook and his crew around. He looks alright, but as I've said before, special effects aren't scary. Also on hand are Olivia Williams as Mrs. Darling and Lynn Redgrave as the Darling children's Aunt Millicent.

So far, I don't sound all that bothered by this production, but I'll confess to you why I didn't like it. It's creepy. In animated form, Peter and Wendy come across as pals. Here, there's an uncomfortable (for me) flirtation that borders on sexual tension between them that just feels...wrong. These are 13-14 year olds not Antonio Banderas and Angelina Jolie. What the hell were they thinking? And when Hook kidnaps Wendy to convince her to be a pirate, he seems like he's trying to seduce her or at least pose for some dirty pictures. The whole movie is like that, and I could tell the kids (as well as a few of the critics) in the audience I saw this with were squirming with a combination of unease and boredom. Add to this veiled perversity the fact that this story takes place in a location called "Neverland." I know it's not the film's fault, but talk about bad timing. Michael Jackson will be first in line for this kiddie porn. Look, I know that I don't have the cleanest mind in Chicago, but come on, this stuff just jumps out at you. I dare you to watch this film and not feel like it was made for and by people who never let their NAMBLA memberships expire. Yuck, I need a shower.

Posted by sprokopy at December 18, 2003 02:35 PM