IMDb > Return to Never Land (2002) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Return to Never Land
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Return to Never Land More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 8:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [Next]
Index 73 reviews in total 

26 out of 32 people found the following review useful:
Not a true sequel, 14 October 2006
1/10
Author: mad4u689 from New York, USA

Take this review with a grain of salt, because I am a massive fan of Peter Pan and all things properly based on the James Barrie classic. This sequel, however, made me cringe. I've enjoyed liberal interpretations before - Hook and Finding Neverland, for example - but this movie completely trashed whatever character Peter Pan is supposed to have. Peter Pan is not a hero - he is a mischievous and often forgetful boy. He is entirely selfish and entirely charming, and these are his two flaws. However, in "Return to Neverland," this character of "Peter Pan" is a mere ghost of the complex Barrie creation. Whatever beautiful messages Peter Pan has about nostalgia and childhood, "Return to Neverland" turns them upside down at worst, and simply ignores them at best.

The animation wasn't bad, though.

Was the above review useful to you?

18 out of 27 people found the following review useful:
A good Disney sequel, 30 December 2002
10/10
Author: Jess from Australia

One thing I've noticed about most Disney sequels is that the storyline tends to be the opposite of the original. It's not different here. In the original "Peter Pan", Wendy has no intention of growing up too soon and instead goes to Never Land for a while, where she'll never grow up. But in "Return to Never Land", Wendy has grown up, gotten married and had kids of her own. Her son, Danny, who's still very young, is always intrigued by his mother's stories of Peter, but her older daughter Jane, who feels as though now her father's gone to war, she must protect her family, it means no more silly stories. And then the movie develops from there, when Jane is thought to be Wendy and is kidnapped by Captain Hook. Then, of course, Peter Pan meets her and then the story continues from there. Jane thinks she's really mature, and it's up to Peter and the Lost Boys to bring out her childish side again.

I think "Return to Never Land" is one of the better Disney sequels, as heaps of others have turned out to rip-offs of the original. If they thought this was going to be like the others, they would've released it straight to video. So, if you have to see a Disney sequel, then this is a pretty good one.

Was the above review useful to you?

11 out of 14 people found the following review useful:
Magical, 15 February 2002
8/10
Author: Olivia S. from Lewisville, Tx

All you need is faith, trust and pixie dust! This is a surprisingly pleasant sequel. The C.G. Tinkerbelle is not as ...delicate as I remember from the first, but she is still made well and is just as spunky! I think they did a very good job on this movie...so good of a job that I would not classify it with normal sequels. I think it will be on the shelf with the other classics. They still have the Tink that turns red when she's mad, and the lost boys haven't changed a bit. Peter is just as I remember him, and in all this they did a great job. And overall, I love this movie. The credits did surprise me. They reminded me of the last page in the Little Golden Books I read as a child. Very similar artistry...very similar lay out.

Also, I'd like to add that the music was actually not torture for me to listen to...which counts for a lot for my opinion of cartoons.

I would not miss taking my children to this movie. It's even a sweet date movie.

I think you will like it.

Was the above review useful to you?

8 out of 11 people found the following review useful:
another amazing Disney movie, ruined with a sequil, 22 December 2006
1/10
Author: troyjien from United States

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

before i begin, i must say, that all of you immature fools who thought this was a good film should go and read the book! you are the people who are keeping Disney alive. and for the children who say they like this, well i think we should all fear the next generation if they really found THIS entertaining! this movie starts out by showing that it takes place during WWll. a bombing occurs and Windy, who is now an adult with two children, run to the shelter. after an overly dramatic 'escape', Windy's daughter, JANE, goes off on her brother about believing in peter pan. i do not recall his name, so for all intended purposes, I'll be calling him Jon. now, Jon can't be older than 5, and his sister, probably around 10, is screaming at him about believing in peter pan. now he goes off crying. I'm gonna skip ahead a little bit here for I refuse to waste any more time than i have to warning you about this morbidly horrible film. so Capt. Hook mistakes Jane for Windy, and takes her to Neverland. peter, making the same mistake, saves her. then there's about half an hour of the lost boys being annoying. she decides to leave on a boat, and then gets an offer from capt. hook that he'll take her home if she finds his treasure. then there's a song about farts, which i swear, will lower your IQ! within that song, Jane decides that she wants to be a lost girl. then peter and the lost boys get captured, and Tinkerbell becomes nice. now if any of you read the book, you'll know that Tinkerbell ISN'T nice! she could be nice, but you could tell that this whole plot was just to make 6 year old girls go "OH MY GOD! GIRL POWER! WOHO!" well, like i said before, i fear the future generation. also, the voice of peter is so HORRIBLE! it doesn't resemble the original at all! all in all, i must say that if you think this is better than the original, than i hope you will go blindfold yourself, and play kick the can in traffic. have a nice day.

Was the above review useful to you?

9 out of 13 people found the following review useful:
He's back...., 12 June 2002
7/10
Author: Chris Brown (christopher6453@hotmail.com) from Fresno, CA USA

"Peter Pan In Return To Never Land" is Disney‘s animated sequel to their truly classic 1953 adaptation of J.M. Barrie‘s beloved children‘s story. Time‘s moved on since the first movie and although Peter Pan never grew up, Wendy did. It‘s now World War Two and an adult Wendy is living in London, still telling tales of Peter Pan, Captain Hook, Tinkerbell and all the other inhabitants of Never Land to her two children; Danny, an awe struck little boy and Jane, a more cynical, pragmatic older girl who has no time for fairytales. However when Hook flies his sailing ship to London, kidnaps Jane and takes her to Never Land, she soon wishes she has paid more attention to her mother‘s stories.

With a budget of a ‘mere‘ $20M the film was produced by Disney‘s TV animation department (who have previously toiled over ‘straight to video/DVD‘ sequels for other Disney movies including "Cinderella," "The Lady And The Tramp," "The Lion King" and "The Little Mermaid"), but this was apparently always planned as a cinematic release. The film succeeds in combining the traditional feel of the original ‘50s animation with a more contemporary look, particularly for the intrepid young heroine Jane (whose modern looking bobbed haircut was actually highly fashionable during World War Two!). The use of computer generated animation does successfully enhance certain scenes, sometimes so subtly you don‘t even notice, and sometimes – in the case of Tinkerbell‘s magical pixie dust – to spectacular effect. However Hook‘s computer generated ship, while certainly impressive, unfortunately stands out uncomfortably from the traditionally animated environments that surround it. Overall though "Peter Pan In Return To Never Land" – only the second sequel to a Disney feature to be released on the big screen – more than deserves a cinematic outing, and will no doubt go down well with the latest generation of Disney fans, who have grown up with a VHS copy of the original at home.

Was the above review useful to you?

11 out of 17 people found the following review useful:
You don't know what you're missing, 16 February 2002
9/10
Author: Rozie83 from New Hampshire

My friend and I went and saw this movie and felt like we were little again. It made us laugh and it was great to see some of our favorite characters come alive again. I hate to read about critics when they dissect the movie, all you need to know is that it's a wonderful sequel, that personally, I plan to see again. No matter what age you are you'll leave after with a smile on your face. Jane is the perfect portrayal of kids these days and what they're missing. So do yourself a huge favor and just go see it.

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
Rather unimpressive!, 20 March 2009
3/10
Author: TheLittleSongbird from United Kingdom

Return To Neverland isn't terrible, but it does fail on many levels, so can't be classed as a good sequel. The animation and the story were the redeeming qualities, but unfortunately the songs and the characters fall flat.

The animation is mostly bright and colourful, but falls flat in the dark backgrounds. The story wasn't bad either, trying to keep Hook from getting the treasure and everything. I also liked the war scene, because that was quite interesting on an animation perspective, and brought some intrigue on a contextual level. I was unimpressed by the trailer, but the film itself wasn't bad, but loses the charm about 15 minutes in. I will say it has a great message about cherishing your childhood.

The first problem was that the kidnapping scene took far too long, despite the breathtaking animation of Hook's ship, and I hated the change to Hook. In the original and the criminally underrated TV series Peter Pan and the Pirates, which are both classics, he is complex and vindictive, but here he was manipulative in a negative way, and lacked menace. The best character was Jane, but that isn't saying much, and Peter's new voice was horrible, too bolshy. The songs were terrible and forgettable immediately after you've finished watching the movie, likewise with the dialogue. The main problem was that it isn't a true sequel at all, compared to the first film and the book. And the octopus, why replace the crocodile may I ask?

I'm sorry that this is mostly negative, but Return To Neverland was very disappointing. Though better than the trailer suggested, it is still a pretty charmless film, with a 3/10(Adequate) Bethany Cox

Was the above review useful to you?

5 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
If Wendy knew what Pan had done, could *she* still believe?!, 20 February 2002
2/10
Author: innerspaceusa

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

***NOTE: my review contains spoilers, but none so spoiled as my expectations.***

Some will say that Disney has sold out in recent years. But MY gripe is not with marketing strategies, nor with flooding us with sequels to all these classics within a couple year's timespan. I can learn to accept that.

My gripe is with this character development of Peter Pan. It's kind of like the comic book that saw Luke Skywalker join the dark side, but without as good an excuse.

Another user commented that Peter Pan always bordered on violence. I just don't remember him being mean, though.

This movie has Peter Pan & the Lost Boys pulling a little girl's hair, destroying her journal to shreds, and getting ANGRY at her and calling her a traitor (at a time when she was innocent)! (Where is the magic of Neverland???)

Peter Pan lies to her also...in a plot to save Tinkerbell, he tells her he's sorry and wants to make it up to her...but he is just using her and has already explained why and how, to the Lost Boys!

I guess this film was made for little girls during a time of war. I guess by showing her have a change of heart, SHE is the real hero, and Peter Pan is irrelevant.

But I came to see Peter Pan! Do we really really have to have good guys do bad things and not know any better...and did the sequel really have to be a big fat trailer for the original classic?

Instead of endlessly discussing faith and believing, GIVE US THE OLD MAGIC...THE PURE FANTASY back. I still don't know WHAT to believe about this effort.

Was the above review useful to you?

7 out of 11 people found the following review useful:
RETURN to Never Land., 15 April 2002
10/10
Author: masonireton12 from pacific city, oregon

I am a 13 year old kid and I saw the movie and when I saw the war parts I was shocked and sort of felt sorry for wendy because she was in the war area but when the movie got to the where the ship is entering the second star to the right I heard sounds in that scene like: I'll get you for this pan if it's the last thing I do,ticking,and Peter famous line from "Peter Pan": Once you're grown up you can never back. I liked the lost boys, though in number one they used to fight alot.And pan wasn't mean to Jane he was just upset because tink's light was fading and the ending was almost sad because peter sort of felt that he didn't give a darn about wendy but she cared for him.my favorite lost boy is Slightly he rocks. Plus the songs were great I liked "So to be one of us" and "now that you're one of us" but My favorite song is the new version of "Do you believe in magic" it's a new version of the song then the oringal.the reason why disney wanted to do a sequal to peter pan is because they thought that we kids and adults might to see peter pan again and take us back to neverland and have us forget what's going in the world like the Terrorism war.The movie was a huge hit at my Regal cinemas in lincoln city,oregon everyone clapped and I yelled "GIVE US MORE PAN". Rumor has it that disney is thinking about doing a thrid Peter pan movie called: Peter Pan 3, the plot: it is going to be about peter's past,how tink came in his life,how hook and the pirates got to neverland,and how the lost boys got there too.

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
Fantastic, 4 September 2006
10/10
Author: tkachmax from United States

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This movie was much better than the original, in my opinion. It had better songs, more exciting action, better voice acting, and funnier lost boys. It was a great tribute to Peter Pan and his legacy as well as a great movie. I watched it until I could play it over in my head any time I want to. I only had 2 problems with it:

1. It starts out by saying "The story always ends the same" and goes on to show an unprecedented ending.

2. Captain Hook is a Tom kind of villain-not too scary. I like him as a dark figure, not as someone who has to narrowly avoid death all the time.

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 1 of 8:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Ratings Awards
Newsgroup reviews External reviews Parents Guide
Official site Plot keywords Main details
Your user reviews Your vote history