Peter Pan

Peter Pan (1953)

Peter Pan was a film that Walt Disney had wanted to make for quite some time – in fact, it was originally planned to be the second Disney animated feature, after Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs – and you can certainly see why. The spirit of adventure in the story and, more importantly, the idea of keeping one’s youth and never growing up, is right in line with Disney’s traditional style and attitude. Unfortunately, despite the film’s childlike energy and sense of adventure, it never really explores the issues of childhood or motherhood in an interesting way, nor does it deliver a particularly fun adventure, meaning the finished product is a little disappointing.

The animation hasn’t got much better than Alice in Wonderland, there’s nothing wrong with it, but there’s nothing special about it either. There are some pretty impressive uses of it for physical humour (even if it’s not really very funny), particularly in characters such as Captain Hook or Smee, who are constantly moving and doing multiple things at once, but it’s nothing we haven’t seen Disney do better before. The art style of the movie is nice, but basic and a bit unoriginal, you can definitely see the style of Alice in Wonderland and to a lesser extent, Cinderella in some of these character designs, particularly Wendy, who has the exact same wide-eyes and facial expressions as Alice. There isn’t much attention to detail and though there is an attempt to give some characters a sense of unique personality in their design and animation style – again, Hook and Smee in particular, as well as Tinker Bell – many of the other characters have pretty flat designs and end up just blending together: the Darlings are a group of generic looking children, the Lost Boys are another group of generic looking children that just happen to be wearing animal skins, the pirates are a group of generic looking pirate clichés and the Indians are a group of stereotypically generic looking depictions of Native Americans in the 50’s. It’s certainly not as lifeless or derivative as in Cinderella, but the art design and animation here still leaves something to be desired.

Peter Pan, about to enter the bedroom of some young children. No wonder Michael Jackson liked this film so much

The basic premise of Peter Pan seems like a pretty interesting one, a strange boy named Peter Pan shows up to collect his shadow from the Darlings’ house, then takes them on an adventure in Neverland, a place where children never grow up, where they meet Mermaids, Indians, fairies and pirates; this sounds like a pretty exciting adventure! There are a lot of creative ideas here too, my favourite of which is the idea that Wendy has to sew Peter’s shadow back onto the soles of his feet, there’s just something so fascinating about that strange image. However, I don’t think the film ever really gets a grasp on how to use these ideas well – instead of being amazed or surprised by the idea that she has caught Peter’s shadow, or suddenly being struck by the surreal idea of sewing it back onto him, Wendy seems casually nonchalant about the whole situation and appears to just inherently understand that she has to sew it back on, as if that is an immediately obvious solution. I confess to not being that familiar with the original J.M. Barrie play or novel, so I’m not sure exactly how he approached this idea, but in my opinion Disney take an interesting situation and fumble it and continue to do so throughout the film.

Neverland should be an outlandish and amazing place filled with wonder and enchantment, like Wonderland or Willy Wonka’s Chocolate Factory, instead, it mostly comes across as an island you could find in the real world with few fantastical elements. Indians, pirates, crocodiles, jungles, beaches, lagoons, these are all things that exist or have existed in our world; though there are a few magical elements such as Tinker Bell and her pixie dust and the mermaids, Tinker Bell is more like a magical creature who just happens to follow Peter around, rather than some being who is intrinsically linked to Neverland and the mermaids appear in only one scene. Even in the moments with fantastical elements or at least, real-life elements that should be exciting such as the pirates, Peter Pan doesn’t have much of a sense of wonder, as said before, the children seem pretty nonchalant about all the strange things happening to them and since we mostly see the film through their eyes, that means that so we are we; there is no sense of awe or gravity to Neverland or its inhabitants, we do not marvel in childlike wonder at the discovery of mermaids, for example, but rather, are merely expected to laugh at their childish bullying of Wendy. I found only a couple of scenes to have this feeling of awe, the first being the wonderful final image of the pirate ship sailing across the moon at the end of the film and the second being the scene when the children first arrive in Neverland and must dodge Hook’s cannonballs from atop the clouds. The world above the clouds looks beautiful and Peter’s playful toying with Hook, as the cannonballs sail past him and right through the clouds, fills the audience with a sense of awe and excitement that is sorely lacking in the rest of the film.

Oh, hello there Ariel...?

It is here that we find the film’s biggest problem, namely, its awkward tone; like Alice in Wonderland, Peter Pan is more light-hearted and silly than some of the other Disney films we’ve seen so far and seems to be intended to primarily be a slapstick comedy. The difference is, while Alice in Wonderland commits to purely being a fantastical comedy,Peter Pan also fancies itself an adventure flick, but ultimately finds itself unable to reconcile these two different genres into one cohesive product. The film tries so hard to be funny and cute, that it completely undermines any sense of action or adventure it tries to create, Captain Hook is such an over-the-top character who engages in frequent slapstick and is consistently embarrassed by Peter, that how can we take him seriously as a villain? Peter is clearly superior to Hook mentally and physically and effortlessly defeats him at every encounter, so it is pretty clear that neither he nor the Darlings are ever in any danger; the film has no stakes and little sense of conflict, so it fails as an exciting adventure. There is nothing wrong with an adventure story being light-hearted and funny, in fact, the best ones often are, but if you want to have an exciting and meaningful adventure that actually has a sense of purpose and threat, you need to be willing to take the story seriously, or how can you expect your audience to do the same? Even the more action packed moments fall a little flat, in particular Peter and Hook’s sword fights, which are animated in a slow and clunky manner, making them a little dull to watch, the only entertaining element is the slapstick as Peter continues to ridicule Hook, which once again, completely eradicates any sense of threat or danger in the scene. Where’s the fun in watching a climactic sword fight between a hero and a villain where the hero is so much better he doesn’t even need to try? On top of that, the comedy is – in my opinion – not very funny anyway, save for a couple of times, so Peter Pan ultimately fails as both a fantastical comedy and an adventure flick, its few shining moments notwithstanding.

You’re a crook, Captain Hook

The characters aren’t particularly interesting either, though some do have pretty strong personalities, they have so little to do in the story that it usually just feels like they’re going through the motions. Peter Pan is a pretty decent protagonist, at least by Disney’s standards, if only because he is a little different from what we’re used to from them; rather than being a squeaky-clean, eternally kind and patient, mild-mannered person who falls into adventure, Peter is a cocky, carefree trickster who wants to have things his own way and isn’t afraid to play rough. It’s a refreshing change of pace to have a hero who’s more active and a bit of a troublemaker, you actually feel kind of sorry for the pathetic and hard-working Hook, who constantly falls prey to the lazy and overconfident Peter, who seems to genuinely enjoy screwing with his nemesis. I actually would have liked to see a bit more of Peter - who, despite being the title character, ironically steps out of the action quite often - because he is usually pretty fun, if still a little bland.

Wendy is okay, I’m not entirely sure how I feel about her; on the one hand, she’s voiced by Kathryn Beaumont, who also voiced Alice in Alice in Wonderland and once again, she does a great job and has a very sweet and charming voice and a great, natural sense of delivery. Unfortunately, unlike Alice, who had a sense of independence and backbone, Wendy is a bit of airhead who just kind of follows Peter around and is pretty useless, constantly (and annoyingly) calling out ‘Peter!!!’ for him to swoop in and save her. She returns to the tired Disney model of an ineffectual and passive girl who is only allowed to be good at “girly” things such as sewing and mothering, allowing the male characters to take care of anything important. If the film had actually explored the idea of motherhood in a mature way, this might have actually been an interesting and complex aspect to Wendy’s character; unfortunately, it doesn’t have the time for these kind of complex issues and simply associates motherhood with a perfect, kind, loving, angelic figure who is always right, while completely ignoring any of the realistic stresses or difficulties that come with the role, as well as any importance that fatherhood plays. As a result, Wendy is far too defined by her femininity; her lack of energy or excitement even in the face of the fantastical creatures of Neverland also mean she comes off as kind of dull, wooden and disinterested.

Bang, zoom, straight to the moon

The other Darlings are as boring as can be, you know when all you can say about them is that one is younger and one has a hat and umbrella that something is wrong. They lack any sense of personality and the younger boy, Michael, is basically just there to be cute, emphasised by the fact that he has an American accent despite being from London – they just couldn’t be bothered. The Lost Boys are an entire group of this same kind of character type, even if they are a little older and less overtly cutesy, they clearly exist just to be cute little kids, but they only come off as irritating. I must also admit that I don’t really care for Captain Hook, I know he’s really popular and beloved and everything, but I just don’t really enjoy him that much; to me, Hook is just too goofy and ineffectual to take seriously as a villain, I know he’s supposed to be silly and funny, but there are much better examples of villains being ineffectual and stupid, while still posing a credible threat and quite frankly, I don’t really think Hook is funny anyway. I see why he’s supposed to be funny, all the over-the-top slapstick with him and Peter, his extreme fear of the Crocodile and his double act with Smee, but it just didn’t make me laugh; I dunno, I don’t dislike him, he’s harmless, but that’s the problem really, he just has no edge. Almost all of the characters of the movie, even the villain, are just too goofy and cutesy for my tastes and it gives the whole movie an overly silly tone that makes it very hard to really care about the story or characters.

The only character I particularly like is Tinker Bell, who seems as exasperated as I was having to deal with all these stupid characters, getting understandably annoyed with the dull and irritating Wendy and her stupid brothers. A silent character, Tinker Bell is approached in a better way than say, Dumbo for example, whose lack of voice meant that he expressed very little sense of personality; in contrast, Tinker Bell arguably has the biggest personality of the cast – except for Hook and Smee – because her use of mime is so good, as well as legitimately funny. Her animation is so strong and energised that she expresses so much personality just through her exaggerated movements and facial expressions, some of the looks Tinker Bell gives in the film are priceless, such as a moment where she looks down on a mirror and realises she has big hips, to which she gives a look of mortified realisation and attempts to measure them out; even though she doesn’t say a word, just from those actions you understand her motivation and thoughts of ‘Is my butt really that big?’ showing how effective a vehicle she is for silent comedy. Though Tinker Bell’s character has been kind of over saturated these days by the constant merchandising and... let’s just say “simplistic” looking movie spin-offs where they make her talk, she’s very enjoyable to watch here and it’s understandable why she became such a huge mascot for Disney.

Hips don’t lie, Tink

The songs are boooooooooring, it’s starting to look like Disney just didn’t want to do musicals anymore, cos the songs are becoming less and less like musical numbers and more and more like brief songs shoehorned in to pad out the films. “What Makes the Red Man Red” is one of the better songs and has a memorable chorus and good sense of rhythm, but the lyrics are silly, poorly thought out and bordering on racist, the very premise is at least blindly ignorant of any sense of good taste, being about how all the Indians used to be white men before they met women and are now constantly blushing; what a stupid concept, even for a joke. The other songs are really lacking in any merit; “You Can Fly!” is pretty well remembered and I guess it’s not too bad but the lyrics are just the most generic, sugary platitudes of ‘Believe in yourself! You can do it! Follow your heart! Think happy thoughts!’ It just comes off as tired and phony. “Following the Leader” has some of the most basic lyrics you’ll ever hear in any musical, and is effectively a rhythmic chant that grows more and more annoying, especially because it is sung in the shrill and irritating voices of the younger characters, it sucks; these songs are just no good.

Peter Pan is a movie that’s difficult to dislike but even harder to really enjoy; it has a great sense of joy and youthful exuberance and has a lot of interesting ideas, but it struggles to tie them all together into an interesting or exciting narrative. It’s much easier to like this film than some of Disney’s other weak efforts, because unlike Cinderella for example,Peter Pan is not lazy and in fact exudes a sense of passion – you can tell that Disney really worked hard on this one and wanted it to turn out great and that definitely shines through. Sadly, I don’t think they achieved in making an especially good film, just an average one, but the love and thought put into this movie makes it difficult to completely dismiss; despite its faults, Peter Pan has its heart in the right place and that is something I can definitely appreciate.

Other Thoughts

I feel so bad for the Darling’s Dad, he’s a bit stuffy and pompous but they really treat this guy like shit for no real reason and very obviously favour their mother and even THE DOG over him, what a bunch of brats.

‘I tell ya I get no respect’

Yeah okay, I don’t think the crows in Dumbo are really that bad but the Indians here are pretty racially insensitive. Not hateful or anything just, uh, yeah. Not okay.