Page 1 of 1 pages
The main 2 reasons Peter Pan didn’t do well box office-wise in the US was:
1) Universal’s pathetic and practically non-existent promotion. So in essence they got what they deserved.
2) The film got buried underneath the Return of the King hype, among all the other “big” films. If Hollywood could show some ovum and release their Oscar contenders like Cold Mountain, Big Fish, and Master&Commander; BEFORE the end of the year, the movie-going audience would have more time to see movies like Peter Pan.
“What cannot be categorized will die a sure death at the box office?”
What’s so hard about categorizing a children’s classic, Mr. Parker? For that is what this movie is, pure and simple. I hope American taste hasn’t become so derivitive that even children’s films require car chases and women with glandular problems.
I see you saved your praise for Rachel Hurd-Wood for last. So like a man, tut, tut. Without Wendy, there is no story, and Rachel Hurd-Wood’s performance is nothing short of perfect. Hurd-Wood’s Wendy is the soul of the film and it’s true protagonist, just as it is in the original story. You should be aware that after making film’s like Muriel’s Wedding, PJ Hogan is known for deftly crafting films showing the woman’s perspective, and he does no less to Peter Pan. Whereas past versions like Hook almost make Wendy disappear, P.J. Hogan’s Peter Pan puts Wendy in her rightful place as the story’s central character. If you watch the film again, you’ll see that the movie begins and ends with Wendy, as it should. Thank you for reviewing this film.
Posted by Morosan on Feb 13, 2004 at 10:36 AM
Thank you for this piece - I’m sure that like The Wizard of Oz, much maligned on its release, this Peter Pan will become a favorite classic.
Posted by Christine on Feb 17, 2004 at 5:52 AM
“a sorry symptom of something.”
A children’s movie that you, an adult, happened to enjoy, failed to be successful.
I’ll bite, what is it a sorry symptom of?
Could it be simply that your personal tastes are not representative of the family movie buying generation?
How about maybe children have watched Peter pan as an animated video at home hundreds of times and saw no need to come watch it not as a cartoon?
Personally, I saw a fair amount of promotion for this move. I just didn’t want to see it.
Posted by Nus on Feb 18, 2004 at 4:17 PM
There should be a distinction between children and adult type movies. For young and old to enjoy same movie is queer.
There was plenty enough adverstisement, unfortunately so…
In the devolution state this culture is in, such movies as Peter Pan may go away. A young boy that never wants to grow up, and would like to marry a girl to be his mother and read him stories for ever is unhealthy, sick and should not be instilled into childrens souls unconsciously.
Posted by lisa-marie on Feb 18, 2004 at 4:46 PM
i share your dismay that so many will miss this wonderful movie. i took 2 teens to see it on christmas and we all loved it.
Posted by dianne bridges on Feb 21, 2004 at 4:36 PM
Page 1 of 1 pages
SAVE 53% OFFTHE NEWSSTAND PRICE!
Reader Comments
The main 2 reasons Peter Pan didn’t do well box office-wise in the US was:
1) Universal’s pathetic and practically non-existent promotion. So in essence they got what they deserved.
2) The film got buried underneath the Return of the King hype, among all the other “big” films. If Hollywood could show some ovum and release their Oscar contenders like Cold Mountain, Big Fish, and Master&Commander; BEFORE the end of the year, the movie-going audience would have more time to see movies like Peter Pan.
“What cannot be categorized will die a sure death at the box office?”
What’s so hard about categorizing a children’s classic, Mr. Parker? For that is what this movie is, pure and simple. I hope American taste hasn’t become so derivitive that even children’s films require car chases and women with glandular problems.
I see you saved your praise for Rachel Hurd-Wood for last. So like a man, tut, tut. Without Wendy, there is no story, and Rachel Hurd-Wood’s performance is nothing short of perfect. Hurd-Wood’s Wendy is the soul of the film and it’s true protagonist, just as it is in the original story. You should be aware that after making film’s like Muriel’s Wedding, PJ Hogan is known for deftly crafting films showing the woman’s perspective, and he does no less to Peter Pan. Whereas past versions like Hook almost make Wendy disappear, P.J. Hogan’s Peter Pan puts Wendy in her rightful place as the story’s central character. If you watch the film again, you’ll see that the movie begins and ends with Wendy, as it should. Thank you for reviewing this film.
Thank you for this piece - I’m sure that like The Wizard of Oz, much maligned on its release, this Peter Pan will become a favorite classic.
“a sorry symptom of something.”
A children’s movie that you, an adult, happened to enjoy, failed to be successful.
I’ll bite, what is it a sorry symptom of?
Could it be simply that your personal tastes are not representative of the family movie buying generation?
How about maybe children have watched Peter pan as an animated video at home hundreds of times and saw no need to come watch it not as a cartoon?
Personally, I saw a fair amount of promotion for this move. I just didn’t want to see it.
There should be a distinction between children and adult type movies. For young and old to enjoy same movie is queer.
There was plenty enough adverstisement, unfortunately so…
In the devolution state this culture is in, such movies as Peter Pan may go away. A young boy that never wants to grow up, and would like to marry a girl to be his mother and read him stories for ever is unhealthy, sick and should not be instilled into childrens souls unconsciously.
i share your dismay that so many will miss this wonderful movie. i took 2 teens to see it on christmas and we all loved it.
register a new account »Posting Security