Joe Wright to Helm 'Pan'

Trailer looks interesting.Not fan of whitewashing Tiger lily but Hollywood benevolent racism is what its is.

It looks campy but the end scene with blackbeard and peter was suprisingly emotional

I still prefer the Peter pan movie from 2003 and am so sad that it never really got a following.It was awesome!

Agreed. That film was the most accurate film I've seen to the original story.
 
How can anyone know they prefer the 2003 version, when this film hasn't even been released yet? :funny:

I like that version was well by the way. Isaacs' Hook is awesome.
 
^^I think they're just talking about it being their "definitive" version of Peter Pan, since this one clearly isn't even a direct adaptation of that book.

And yes, that 2003 version is underrated. I really LOVED James Newton Howard's score for it especially.


That's just gorgeous, imo.
 
^^I think they're just talking about it being their "definitive" version of Peter Pan, since this one clearly isn't even a direct adaptation of that book.

And yes, that 2003 version is underrated. I really LOVED James Newton Howard's score for it especially.


That's just gorgeous, imo.


I remember I was out of town when the movie opened. I was too young to pay attention to the movie news but is there a reason why the movie never caught on? I think it bombed.
 
I remember I was out of town when the movie opened. I was too young to pay attention to the movie news but is there a reason why the movie never caught on? I think it bombed.

It was relesed i think the same weekend of one of the LOTR movies or harry potter movies, i dont remember which one, so yeah good luck with that
 
I remember I was out of town when the movie opened. I was too young to pay attention to the movie news but is there a reason why the movie never caught on? I think it bombed.
I don't think there's a legitimate notable or scandalous reason it bombed. It simply didn't appeal to audiences. I did hear the production ended up coming in dramatically over budget, so that didn't help, but even if it hadn't, its box office numbers still would have been found lacking. You could blame the lackluster marketing, the aesthetic of the movie, the lack of "name" actors or any number of factors. I remember not expecting it to be very good going in for whatever reason, maybe because it looked kinda cheesy or low-budget. But I was pleasantly surprised as it turned out to be a very strong adaptation, even if Jeremy Sumpter was kinda weak in the lead role, imo.

EDIT: Oh yeah, and it was the week after Return of the King, lol. Other openers that Christmas weekend were Cheaper By the Dozen and Cold Mountain, all of which outperformed it significantly. Christmas releases can be brutal. We've got another fairly crowded one coming up, I believe, and something's probably gonna bomb there.
 
Last edited:
Hard to get love for a more literal interpretation of a Disney classic. The Disney version obscures everything.
 
I don't think there's a legitimate notable or scandalous reason it bombed. It simply didn't appeal to audiences. I did hear the production ended up coming in dramatically over budget, so that didn't help, but even if it hadn't, its box office numbers still would have been found lacking. You could blame the lackluster marketing, the aesthetic of the movie, the lack of "name" actors or any number of factors. I remember not expecting it to be very good going in for whatever reason, maybe because it looked kinda cheesy or low-budget. But I was pleasantly surprised as it turned out to be a very strong adaptation, even if Jeremy Sumpter was kinda weak in the lead role, imo.

EDIT: Oh yeah, and it was the week after Return of the King, lol. Other openers that Christmas weekend were Cheaper By the Dozen and Cold Mountain, all of which outperformed it significantly. Christmas releases can be brutal. We've got another fairly crowded one coming up, I believe, and something's probably gonna bomb there.

This Christmas is ****ing insane is what it is!

December 25, 2014 Theatrical releases:

Unbroken (wide release)
Selma (limited release)
American Sniper (limited release)
Big Eyes (limited release)
The interview (wide release)
Into the Woods (wide release)

I can't believe the studios didn't spread those out more.
 
Selma, American Sniper and Big Eyes are getting nationwide expansions in January. Those of us who don't live in the L.A. or NY areas will be able to see Unbroken, Into the Woods and The Interview.
 
Selma, American Sniper and Big Eyes are getting nationwide expansions in January. Those of us who don't live in the L.A. or NY areas will be able to see Unbroken, Into the Woods and The Interview.

My plan was to see American Sniper with the family on Christmas. Since its limited Ill probably be skipping the movies on Christmas this year.
 
I am totally watching Into the Woods on Christmas day.
 
I am totally watching Into the Woods on Christmas day.
Ditto. Those others I'll get around to eventually, maybe, depending on reviews. But Into the Woods is a must see for me no matter what. I LOVE that musical.
 
This looks great. I love Joe Wright's Atonement and the vision of this looks amazing.

And I don't give a rat's ass that Tiger Lily is white. Who gives a ****?

I will be just enjoying the movie.

PS: Hedlund as Hook is hilarious. Who knew Hook was such a funny dude in his youth!
 
See, I think Hedlund's Hook illustrates very well in what makes prequels worth making. A character who looks so far removed from Captain Hook. A sexy looking Garret Hedlund who considers himself a miner creates incentive to really wonder what the hell happened that made him into the Captain Hook that we know so well. That's a great approach for prequels. Have an established character we all know and showing the character in a radical new light to tell the story of how he came to be. Otherwise, what's the point in showing how Hook became Captain Hook? Or this story for that matter.

Even Peter's, "I don't believe in bedtime stories," quote is very interesting. The trailer succeeded because I'm actually interested in seeing where these characters start. It's not about what we know they end up being, but about the journey of getting there.

Abrams and co. achieved this very well in Star Trek with its characters. Hopefully the same is applied here.
 
Anyone watching Pan live tonight? Christopher Walken singing? Should be an automatic Oscar.
 
See, I think Hedlund's Hook illustrates very well in what makes prequels worth making. A character who looks so far removed from Captain Hook. A sexy looking Garret Hedlund who considers himself a miner creates incentive to really wonder what the hell happened that made him into the Captain Hook that we know so well. That's a great approach for prequels. Have an established character we all know and showing the character in a radical new light to tell the story of how he came to be. Otherwise, what's the point in showing how Hook became Captain Hook? Or this story for that matter.

Even Peter's, "I don't believe in bedtime stories," quote is very interesting. The trailer succeeded because I'm actually interested in seeing where these characters start. It's not about what we know they end up being, but about the journey of getting there.

Abrams and co. achieved this very well in Star Trek with its characters. Hopefully the same is applied here.

Spot on. Too many prequels don't have anything interesting to say or do. We all know the outcome... so make the starting point different and the journey to what we already know interesting.
 
I agree Doctor Jones.

I think prequels can be abused because we shouldn't know everything, but if the journey is worthwhile, maybe it's worth it.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"