(1991)

Critic Reviews

52

Metascore

Based on 19 critic reviews provided by Metacritic.com
75
The Globe and Mail (Toronto)
Spielberg hooks us again with state-of-the-art craft, the director taps into powerful myths, both primal and pop, and makes them seem new. He allows grownups to return to childhood, but manages to catch fish in all generational waters.
75
San Francisco Chronicle
Hook never reaches Nirvana. It doesn't grab the audience, fling it into another world and make people forget where they parked their cars. But it does leave the viewer with a glow, and along the way it has magical moments, even if it's not fully magical as a whole. [11 Dec. 1991, p.E1]
67
Hook is jam-packed with ''entertainment value,'' enough to give you your money's worth, and to guarantee (in all probability) that Spielberg earns his. Yet something has clouded this director's vision... The problem isn't that Spielberg has lost his gift for fantasy. It's that he no longer seems to know (or care) about anything else.
50
Like the massive shipboard set that is its centerpiece, the film is huge and impressive - though, again like the captain's imposing vessel, it stubbornly and disappointingly remains at anchor. Hook never sets sail.
50
Miami Herald
Hook is shot through with Big Theme, and it's splashy- looking and big of heart, as you'd figure a Steven Spielberg take on Peter Pan would be. But it's not the mega-movie that combination seemed likely to inspire, either. It isn't magic. [11 Dec. 1991, p.D1]
50
USA Today
Peter Pan is the boy who wouldn't grow up, and Hook is the movie that grows unbearable once a grown-up Peter arrives in Neverland with a merciless 90 minutes to go. [11 Dec. 1991, p.1D]
50
Poignancy. Lessons to be learned. Speeches to be made. Lost marbles to be rediscovered. Tears to be shed. The conclusion of Hook would be embarrassingly excessive even for a movie in which something of substance had gone before.
40
Hook has you marveling at the nuts-and-bolts work of producers and assistant directors, but never at the intrinsic imaginativeness of the story. It's as if Spielberg calculatedly set out to make a perennial classic -- certain folly if ever there were.
40
How did such a dream project on paper turn out so wrong. It should remain one of the great mysteries of cinema. The less said about this one, the better. For Spielberg completists only.
38
Boston Globe
Hook touches neither fantasy nor soulfulness nor yearning. Mostly, it's benign spectacle in which the actors keep yielding the camera to some expensive playground or other. Hook is neither wistful nor primal. It's film's most expensive wind-up toy. [11 Dec. 1991. p.53]

More Critic Reviews

See all external reviews for Hook (1991) »

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Reviews | User Ratings | External Reviews | Message Board