Movie Review: “Peter Pan” (2003)

Title:Peter Pan (2003) IMDb
Director: P.J. Hogan (based on the play by J.M. Barrie)
Lead Actors: Jeremy Sumter (Peter Pan), Rachel Hurd-Wood (Wendy), Jason Isaacs (Mr. Darling/Hook), Richard Briers (Smee), Ludivine Sagnier (Tinkerbell)
Score Composer: James Newton Howard
Length: 113 minutes
MPAA Rating: “Rated PG for adventure action sequences and peril.”
Spoiler-free Synopsis: Fun and emotional adaptation of J.M. Barrie’s famous play, wherein the three Darling children get whisked off to Neverland to have adventures with Peter Pan, the magical boy who never grows up.
Reason for Beginning:Peter Pan has been one of my favorite stories since childhood, on a level with Robin Hood and King Arthur.
Reason for Finishing: It engaged me exactly the way the story is supposed to. It’s also a surprisingly effective tearjerker.
Movie Rewatchability: Higher than I initially thought. A day after watching it for this review, I found myself bored and decided to watch the movie again. I enjoyed it every bit as much as before, and would eagerly watch it again.
Director Rewatchability: Hard to say, since no story is quite like Peter Pan, but I like his directing style. He doesn’t try to impose upon this very traditional British fairy tale an inappropriately modern sensibility, in theme or in style.
Recommendation: If you like the story of Peter Pan or have any interest in modern fairy tales, you will find this movie interesting and highly enjoyable. If you are a romantic at heart, this movie will satisfy. In fact, I think it may be the best screen adaptation of Barrie’s story yet, at the very least on par with Disney’s excellent version. I say this having seen the original stage play, though without having read Barrie’s book based on it.

Key Thoughts

The difficulty with any adaptation of this story is simply how well-known it is. There are no surprises in the plot or characters. The story was old when Disney animated it, and many generations have now grown up with that one as the definitive version. (Some people have expressed a strange fondness for the 1960 TV movie starring Mary Martin, a fondness which I do not share.) And then came Steven Spielberg’s Hook (1991), which tried to be both a sequel and a reimagining of the classic story. Despite the number of faults and miscalculations in Hook, we must credit Spielberg with really trying something new and original with the old story. It has its own charm, its own magic, and has claimed a special place in my heart. But to the point: did we really need another version of Peter Pan for the modern era, especially one that plays the story so straightforward and traditionally?

This beautiful picture needs no caption.

I think we did. For one thing, the wonderful boy is finally played by, of all things, a young boy! While Disney’s Pan was voiced by 16 year-old Bobby Driscoll, I think this is the first live-action movie to feature him played by an actor of the correct age and sex. Without this, the story’s themes of youth and not wanting to grow up wouldn’t work nearly as well. Also, while I certainly don’t think a fantasy movie needs great special effects to be successful, this one really benefits from art direction that takes good advantage of the technical wizardry available in 2003. And lastly, what really makes this version unique is how it addresses some of the more sophisticated and serious themes inherent in Barrie’s story. This movie is actually about something.

Smee: Captain, the ice is melting, the sun is out, and the flowers are all in bloom…
Captain Hook: He’s back.

What sort of boy is Peter Pan? The kind whose coming causes winter to flee and flowers to spring into bloom, whose sorrow causes the clouds to curl and the seas to wail, and whose sheer joy causes the sun to rise after a long night. I found it interesting that, in this very English story, Pan is played by an American, Jeremy Sumter. Some British viewers might not like this, perhaps, but I think it serves to subtly set him apart from the other children. Sumter’s more American acting style helps with this as well, being sharper, wilder, and maybe a little more tempestuous than the more gentler British style of his costars. Now, I’m using the terms “American” and “British” very loosely here, and very subjectively – I’m not a student of acting styles and can only go off my gut instinct here. But I like Sumter’s portrayal. He can crow in joy (so that verb really feels apt), wail in despair, and steel himself in heartbreak, and we believe it. He’s easily offended, but quickly forgives. Death holds no horrors for him, but loneliness is unbearable. He knows endless ways to fight and escape the pirates, but can’t acknowledge his own emotions, which are begging him to let them grow into maturity, to usher him into adulthood.

Peter: [forcefully] I want always to be a boy, and have fun.
Wendy: You say so, but I think it is your biggest pretend.

When speaking of bright and pretty actresses the term “luminous” is probably far overused to the point of cliché, and yet I find it really does describe Rachel Hurd-Wood’s performance as Wendy. She simply lights up the screen whenever she’s on it. Another reviewer’s cliché, I know, I’m sorry. But how else to say it? Her smile makes you smile. Her disappointment makes you want to immediately stand up and fix whatever is wrong. Peter Pan is the blood racing through this story’s veins, and Wendy is the pounding heart. She is entranced by Pan, but we also see her realizing his immaturity and longing for him to be able to grow up, even a little bit, so they can be on the same level. While Wendy doesn’t initially want to grow up, she realizes that it’s the healthy thing to do, and that there are other, different joys to be had as an adult, even if she doesn’t fully understand what those are.

Their innocent romance is the center of this movie, as it hasn’t truly been in others. I like how the movie manages the theme of growing up through romance without letting the subject devolve into a discussion of sex. There’s a brief scene near the beginning which lightly acknowledges that some people might interpret the story with sex as a theme, but I think the point of that scene is to highlight how sex is actually irrelevant and inappropriate to the story at hand. It’s about the beginnings of romantic love, which is a completely different thing. The kiss is simply the most visible and intimate method by which that love is communicated innocently and chastely.

Kisses in this story possess great power, as Slightly says below, even when it is the thought of one more than the actuality that counts. Near the beginning, Mrs. Darling says that Mr. Darling will need her special kiss to have courage to face the bigwigs of the bank in light of his recent humiliation. Peter’s “kiss” (actually an acorn) on Wendy’s necklace saves her from Tootles’ arrow. Tigerlily’s long kiss of victory inspires John with superhuman strength to pull the lever and save the whole group. And finally, of course, Wendy’s kiss brings Peter back from despair and defeat, and makes him impervious to Hook’s threats and insults. Despite his denials, Peter really does have a “crush” on Wendy – it’s even revealed that of the stories she tells, the ones he likes best are the romances ending with a kiss. Because of the movie’s gentle treatment of all this, it ends up being quite romantic, while maintaining its innocence.

Hook: Come on, fly to the rescue! Then I’ll shoot you right through your noble intentions.

*sneer, smirk, gnash gnash*

But where would this story be without Captain Hook? One of the best villains in all children’s literature, he is played here by Jason Isaacs, who brings a similar teeth-gnashing menace and snobbery as he does in the Harry Potter movies, but with considerably more dark comedy. He’s really fantastic in the role, taking it seriously while playing it with gleefully psychotic villainy. He is truly fearsome, but also convinces as the essentially lonely and depressed character that Hook is. It’s a delicate balance, but one that Isaacs nails perfectly. When Hook finally douses himself in Tinkerbell’s fairy dust and begins to float into the air, he exults, “It’s Hook, he flies! And…he…likes it!” And later, thinking he has the victory, he gloats that Pan will die alone and unloved, and then pauses with a sad glint in his eye, whispering, “Just like me.” He’s younger and more physically aggressive than many other Hooks we’ve seen, which only serves to increase his menace. You know he can easily overpower Peter in a contest of simple brute force, and thus their duels are tense as Peter flies and flips impishly just out of reach of the pirate captain’s slashing blades.

Slightly: [examining the thimble Peter gave Wendy, thinking it was a “kiss.”] I remember kisses, let me see. Aye, that is a kiss. A powerful thing.

Mr. and Mrs. Darling face the bankers together.

Other side characters are well-represented here. Isaacs, as per tradition, plays Mr. Darling as well, and is awkwardly warm (rightly so) in the role of the timid banker who has sacrificed so much for his family. Olivia Williams glows as Mrs. Darling, who sympathizes with her children while trying to gently explain to them the depth and nature of their father’s love and courage. Smee is played by the twinkly-eyed Richard Briers, who in my mind will always be Tom Goode, and is appropriately cheerful and goofy, while viewing his evil captain with a simple-minded, but wry optimism. John and Michael are the little gentleman and cute kid respectively and effectively, and Tigerlily is a fun, wild creature with a charming crush on John. The Lost Boys are also well-cast. I admit, part of me has always wanted to be Peter Pan and live with the Lost Boys, flying over forests, living in a tree house, and fighting pirates. I like the innocence and open-heartedness of their brotherhood, and how in many ways they do display maturity that many adults lack. In an honorable and manly action, Tootles accepts responsibility for shooting Wendy out of the sky. Slightly is sort of Peter’s lieutenant, and has some of the best lines (as above). Importantly, they are believably innocent, rather than hip and cynical as in the movie Hook.

...and straight on 'til morning.

The art direction is quite beautiful, combining the effect of a lavish pop-up book with modern techniques. The children fly to Neverland through a space filled with planets that hang large and colorful like otherworldly balloons to the “second star to the right,” all setting a perfect fairy tale tone. London looks magnificent, as if taken from Dickens, cleaned up and polished to a warm glow, while Neverland itself blooms and boils with life. Action scenes have some cartoony physics in places that seem appropriate, and the camera maintains an appropriate distance from its subjects, without going too far for the epic look. Action is comprehensible and immediate both, as it should be!

All this is aided by James Newton Howard’s score, which practically leaps from the screen and throws you into flight with the characters. It is full of equal parts joy and magic, gentility and robustness. Dancing and fairy-like, if you will. You can listen to some of it here.

On a more academic level, I think the story of Peter Pan is a true fairy story, in the Tolkien and George MacDonald sense. For all the fun and jokes and whimsy, the magic itself is taken absolutely seriously. Physical laws are turned upside down, but moral laws are upheld. Neverland is an escape from the real world that, properly experienced, prepares one to return and face the real world with renewed vigor, wisdom, and clarity. As MacDonald advised, the story does not “give” me these things to think about, it does not hammer them into me, but rather it causes me to think them for myself.

I am sure I am not the only one who, as a boy, longed to be Peter Pan and live forever in Neverland. I still want to fly like him. There is always a tragic, melancholic tint to the end of his story. By refusing to leave Neverland and grow up, he denies himself true love and the true potential which he has. I do not think Neverland would be the last magical world Peter would find, if he had the courage to leave it. As an adult, there are plenty of wonders to discover and exult in, if one looks with the right eye and mindset. As the Professor himself said,

Children are meant to grow up, and not to become Peter Pans. Not to lose innocence and wonder, but to proceed on the appointed journey: that journey upon which it is certainly not better to travel hopefully than to arrive, though we must travel hopefully if we are to arrive. But it is one of the lessons of fairy-stories (if we can speak of the lessons of things that do not lecture) that on callow, lumpish, and selfish youth peril, sorrow, and the shadow of death can bestow dignity, and even sometimes wisdom. (Tolkien 15)

Tolkien, J.R.R., “On Fairy Stories”
Most screencaps from MovieScreenshots


  1. Michelle says:

    I did enjoy this review–you made me want to watch that movie again. I left my window open for Tinkerbell when I was little…and the story will ever have a special place in my heart.

    I appreciated the movie’s handling of the different themes. For once, someone got the “death would be a very great adventure” line down! It’s one of my favorite lines from the book (which I DO recommend), and I have always seen it handled poorly. I know it sounds morbid at first, but as a believer…I see it differently now.

    Also, your take on the romance was spot-on, as far as Peter and Wendy were concerned. I did think that the interaction between Hook and Wendy was something to be noted too, maybe in a much darker, unpleasant sense. I’d need to watch the movie again to get a better read of it.

    1. David says:

      Great point; I neglected to mention the scenes between Hook and Wendy. They are rather creepy, with him coldly manufacturing a kind of eerie seduction that preys on her innocence. While all the pirates are rather cartoony and simplistic, and innocent in a way, Hook clearly is no innocent himself in regards to “the ways of the world,” and that does make him a bit scarier. Quite unpleasant.

      I’ve been meaning to read the book of a long time, but haven’t found a copy for myself yet. I should check my local library sometime soon, methinks, so I’ll know better what you mean about that line of dialogue.

      Thanks so much for the comment!

      1. Samantha says:

        I personlly thought that Peter Pan was cute!

  2. Beth says:

    Best review I’ve seen on this movie. I love this version of Peter Pan and appreciate it more because it skillfully deals with the themes of growing up and what it is really all about. Wendy senses there is a greater adventure awaiting all who grow up. Peter can almost reach out and grasp it, but not quite, and that is his true tragedy. Thank you for acknowledging that Peter could continue his adventures and be greater than ever, if he’d ever take the plunge and become a man.

    1. David says:

      You’re welcome, Beth, and thanks for the kind and intelligent comment. I only realized that point — that Peter’s adventures would continue, just in different ways — as I was writing this review. The other adaptations had never made me think it, although Spielberg’s Hook does engage the questions of Peter’s future quite interestingly. I look forward to reading the book!

  3. Samantha says:

    I really liked it! It was freakin awesome!!!!111111

    1. Samantha says:

      and it was really detailed but i kinda needed to know to compare the 2003 peter pan movie and the original book

      1. David says:

        You should read the book yourself! It’s pretty short and VERY good.

        1. Barrie kept revising Peter Pan, but I don’t know if he ever really improved it – though it is a great piece of writing. The story I liked the best was Peter Pan in Kensington Gardens, the events of which aren’t as far as I know featured in any of the films or in the popular versions of the story, but it’s a great, weird account of how Peter became separated from his Mother and had to learn how to live with the ‘fairies’ – most of whom are pretty nasty from what I remember.

          1. David says:

            The fairies are certainly tricky, capricious folk, to be sure. I haven’t read the Kensington Gardens book, but do look forward to it. A few months back I finally read the main book; I suppose a review is due.
            Thanks for the comment!

  4. Micah says:

    oh how I loved the live action movie all my life I never wanted to grow up and just stay a little girl forever but now that I think about it if I staying little forever I would miss a lot of exciting thing ahead of my life of course when I was little I thought Peter pan ( Jeremy sumpter ) would come through my window and take me to never land and fall in love with me and I never really read any of the books in my life but I have seen all of the Peter pan movies and the Peter pan 2003 movie was my favorite out of all of them

    1. David says:

      Glad you like the movie too. Read the book, if you get the chance. It’s short and wonderful.

      1. Micah says:

        I certainly will do that thank you for the wonderful suggestion.

  5. Katy says:

    A wonderful review! I recently watched the modern version of Peter Pan, Peter and Wendy, set in Great Ormond Street Hospital in London. It is a different take on the classic story that I definitely recommend! I can’t wait to watch Peter Pan, it should be great seeing I am the same age as Peter and Wendy when they shot this movie. Thanks for the great review!

    1. David says:

      I hadn’t heard of this newer adaptation but it sounds pretty interesting. Wonder if it’s available in the US.

      Glad you enjoyed the review! I’ve rewatched this version several times and it’s just as fun and magical as the first time. Hope you enjoy the movie too. Thanks for stopping by!

  6. Marina says:

    Thank you. I needed to read a review like this. I thought no one had got the idea of the film just like me, and you just nailed it. I absolutely agree with you. The only reason I’ve found logical about Peter staying in Neverland and not growing up (as I see it, the movie shows how Peter actually matures with the love of Wendy, as he lets her go instead of getting angry with her for leaving) is that he just can’t. If he leaves, Neverland would be destroyed. Fairies would be destroyed and childhood in itself would be gone. So he must remain on his island, despite of what he desperately really wants, that is, growing up loving Wendy, and takes a selfless, mature decision: to stay, and to let them all go so they can live the lives they deserve.

    Even though, I would’ve loved watching him stay with Wendy. I think it’s what he really wants (and what I really want!!!). It’s just simply impossible.

    1. David says:

      You’re very welcome, and thanks for commenting. That’s an interesting and very hopeful interpretation! I like it, although I’m not quite sure that everything would fall apart if Peter left. I could believe that he thinks it will, though! Still, this Peter is much gentler than in the book, so you have a fair point.

      And if you want Peter to stay with Wendy, you can always enjoy Spielberg’s Hook! It may not be faithful in every detail to Barrie’s original story, but it’s still a fun and fascinating movie about what might have happened had Peter gone with Wendy and abandoned Neverland so suddenly.

Leave a Comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.