Pan (2015) review

In 1904, author J.M. Barrie wrote the play ‘Peter Pan, or the Boy Who Wouldn’t Grow Up’, which was later published as a novel in 1911. The play/novel centered on the titular Peter Pan, a young boy who, as indicated by the title of the story, ‘never grew up’ and can fly as he has numerous adventures in the fantastical world of Neverland. Numerous stage productions of Barrie’s play have been put on over the years and the character of Peter Pan has also been brought to the big-screen multiple times. Most of you are probably familiar with the 1953 animated film from Disney but there were some other adaptations after that, including a 1991 sequel in director Steven Spielberg’s ‘Hook’ and a 2003 adaptation of the original story that many consider to be highly underrated as it was an underperformer at the box office when it was first released in theaters. This year sees the release of another take on the character of Peter Pan in the form of ‘Pan’, directed by Joe Wright, a director known for classical romance films like ‘Pride and Prejudice’ and ‘Anna Karenina’. As for ‘Pan’, it takes a different route from previous adaptations by serving as a prequel to the original story, showcasing how a young Peter first came to Neverland and how he first met the man who would later become his most notable adversary, Captain James Hook. But ultimately this new take on Peter Pan ends up majorly suffering from the curse of ‘prequelitis’ despite having a genuinely creative vision of this world.

The film begins as a young Peter is left at a London orphanage by his mother Mary (Amanda Seyfried). 12 years later, in the midst of World War II and the Blitz, Peter (Levi Miller) lives his average life in the orphanage, frequently getting into trouble with his caretakers while also yearning for the day when his mother will finally return for him. But then everything starts to change when, one night, Peter and some of the other orphans are taken from their beds by pirates in a flying pirate ship, which then takes them to the world of Neverland. There they are forced into being slaves for the ruthless pirate Blackbeard (Hugh Jackman), who has them mining all-day for the substance known as fairy dust so that he can stay young forever. Peter soon learns that he may just be the boy talked about in an ancient prophecy established by the natives of Neverland; the offspring of a human mother and a fairy father who can fly that will one day lead the native people of Neverland in an uprising against Blackbeard. This leads to him teaming up with fellow miner James Hook (Garrett Hedlund), and later warrior princess Tiger Lily (Rooney Mara), in order to stop Blackbeard before he ends up finding the secret fairy kingdom of Neverland.

There’s no denying that Joe Wright definitely put a lot of effort into bringing his vision of Peter Pan and the world of Neverland to life. This film’s biggest strength is easily its art/production design, which produces quite a lot of interesting visuals as well as some pretty fun action sequences, from a scene early on where a pirate ship flies through London while being chased by fighter pilots to a scene in which Hook and one of the natives fight on a bunch of trampolines. With that said, yes there is quite a lot of CGI in this film but unlike a lot of other critics, that is not my biggest issue with it. Ultimately the main issue comes with the writing. From a prequel standpoint, this film suffers from the same issue that plagued the ‘Star Wars’ prequels in that the references made to the original story, from the alligator that would go on to chase Hook to, of course, Tinker Bell, generally lack subtlety. Not only that, but the plot also feels a bit rushed, getting through key scenes quickly at the expense of character development. Obviously a key part to this story is the relationship between Peter and Hook but the film never once explores how the two end up becoming rivals, basically leaving that door open for a sequel that will probably never happen.

As far as the cast is concerned, Wright definitely selected a nice ensemble to fill out the main roles. As Peter Pan, Levi Miller brings the right amount of childlike innocence and charisma to the role. The same, save for the childlike innocence part, can be said for Garrett Hedlund as Hook. Clearly modeled after Han Solo (in fact, the main trio of Peter, Hook, and Tiger Lily are basically just Luke, Han, and Leia), Hedlund is very charismatic and energetic in the role and provides some of the film’s best comedic relief. The casting of Rooney Mara as Tiger Lily attracted quite a bit of controversy due to the fact that a Caucasian actress was cast in the role of a Native-American character. Not paying that any mind due to the fact that I never like to talk about race here, I will say that Mara is actually the biggest standout of the film, as she provides a much more serious and down-to-earth performance that actually contrasts pretty well with all of the chaos that goes on in this film. And then we come to Hugh Jackman as the main villain, Blackbeard… and as much as I hate to say it he’s the weakest link of the film. For the record, Jackman does bring the same level of enthusiasm and energy that he brings to a lot of his other roles and it’s clear that he’s really having fun in what is a rare villainous turn for him. I get that the character of Blackbeard was meant to be a fairly exaggerated villain and Jackman’s over-the-top performance matches up pretty well with the overall tone of the film but sometimes it’s just a bit too much, like when he and his lackeys start singing Nirvana’s ‘Smells Like Teen Spirit’ and Ramones’ ‘Blitzkrieg Bop’.

I really wanted to love ‘Pan’, I really did. I do remember watching the Disney film growing up and recently I’ve been really big on there being more PG-rated family films in an industry that’s lately been dominated with films that are rated PG-13 and up. But ultimately ‘Pan’ just ended up giving off a vibe similar to that of the ‘Star Wars’ prequels… and keep in mind that I don’t ‘hate’ those films like the majority of the internet does. Now I can’t fault this film for its creative vision because it is there. The film does carry the right spirit of adventure that’s necessary for this kind of story and the film’s unique production/art design does result in some fun moments from time to time. But at the end of the day ‘Pan’ is a prime case of a prequel that legitimately suffers from the curse of ‘prequelitis’, mostly due to a story that is rushed and references to the original source material that aren’t at all subtle. No it’s not the worst film that I’ve seen this year, heck it’s not even as bad as the 22% rating on RT currently suggests. But at the same time it wasn’t really a film that I was a big fan of either. It genuinely had good intentions to be a fun family film so for families, I actually do sort of recommend it even after all that I’ve just said about it. I have the feeling kids may like it. Ultimately though for me, it ended up being a rather muddled and misguided take on the classic story of Peter Pan even though its heart was in the right place. Dare I ask… why couldn’t this just be done by Disney?

Rating: 2/5