The animation wasn't bad, though.
Return to Never Land (2002)
User ReviewsReview this title
The animation wasn't bad, though.
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.
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.
With a budget of a mere $20M the film was produced by Disneys 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 dont even notice, and sometimes in the case of Tinkerbells magical pixie dust to spectacular effect. However Hooks 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.
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
The film contains emotion , humor , fantasy , songs and a lot of fun . The plot is similar to Walt Disney's classic replacing Wendy with her daughter Jane who along with Peter undertake several adventures in Neverland ; as Pan with the help of her and the Lost Boys must save his friends by battling with Captain Hook and Smee once again . From the beginning to the end the amusement and entertainment is interminable . An entertaining movie , a little tiring when the characters are singing , but is still shines . The highlights film are the marvelous images when Peter Pan and Jane are flying throughout Neverland , it turns out to be colorful and delightful . Due to controversy over their appearance in original movie , as Disney attracted negative comments for their stereotypical depiction of Indians, as indeed did J.M. Barrie with his original play , it's probably for that very reason that the Indians do not appear in this 2002 sequel , though Peter and Jane briefly visit their places , however ; as they fly over Tipis , Indian tribes and skull monument . The giant octopus was created as a new nemesis for Captain Hook because it was felt that the Disney animators had exhausted all the comic possibilities of "Hook vs. the Crocodile" in the original Peter Pan (1953). The octopus's tentacles make a "Pock! Pock!" sound that is similar to the "Tick Tock!" sound heard from the crocodile in the previous film . Although original author J.M. Barrie is credited, this sequel and its original were the only major films versions of "Peter Pan" and both of them use little of his original dialogue . Because most of the original voice cast of the movie had died, including Hans Conried (Hook) and Bobby Driscoll (Peter Pan), an entirely new cast of actors had to be used to film this sequel such as Corey Burton as Hook , Jeff Bennett as Smee , Kath Soucie as Wendy , Roger Rees as Edward , Spencer Breslin as Cubby , Bradley Pierce as Nibs and Clive Revill . Many Peter Pan purists were very upset by the characterization of Tinker Bell as a petulant and voluptuous young woman as old film ¨Peter Pan¨ as its sequel the ¨Return to Never Land¨ . The fable will appeal to adventure and classic tale fan . Rating : 6,5/10 above average . It's a terrific familiar amusement that will appeal to vintage tale fans .
Other films and stage productions dealing with this classic personage are the followings : The original Broadway production of "Peter Pan", or "The Boy Who Wouldn't Grow Up" by J.M. Barrie opened at the Empire Theater on November 6, 1905 , it ran for 223 performances, closed on May 20, 1906, and starred nineteenth-century stage actress Maude Adams, who never made any films ; silent film ¨Peter Pan¨ (1924) starred by Virginia Brown Faire as Tinker Bell , it uses much of Barrie's original dialogue ; Peter Pan (1953) with voice by Bobby Driscoll, Kathryn Beaumont, Hans Conried ; ¨Hook¨(2001) with Steven Spielberg with Dustin Hoffman as Captain Hook , Robin Williams , Freddie Highmore , Julia Roberts , Bob Hoskins as Smee , Maggie Smith and Caroline Goodall ; ¨Finding Neverland¨ (2004) by Marc Foster with Johnny Depp as James M Barry , Kate Winslet , Kelly McDonald as Peter Pan , Julie Christie , Radha Mitchell , and recent version ¨Peter Pan¨ by JP Hogan with Jeremy Sumpter , Raquel Wood and Jason Isaac .
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.
This film isn't simply bad, it is heart breakingly terrible. The voice casting alone, above the myriad other flaws, completely ruins the film and prevents any suspension of disbelief. The main child characters sound too adult to ignore, and London in the Blitz is apparently a town in the United states judging by the accents and slang. The mindless Americanisms (schmaltzly "I love you's" called out by British troops leaving for battle in a hallmark way, thoughtless rehashing of details from the original and rushed personal development by the lead) further drag it into the mire.
The plot is predictable and pedestrian, in that you can almost see the numbers over which it was painted. Heartstring remain untugged, blood remains unstirred and yawns unstiffled.
This film contains none of J. M Barries style, appeal or themes, but instead slaps characters with the same name into a bland repeat of the actions and events he wrote, their sequel tactics writ small and emotionless. Even the youngsters at which it is aimed will sneer and loose interest long before the awful teeny band sings its squeaky cacophony over the welcome end credits!
First of all, I think I liked Peter more in this. Don't get me wrong, he was great in the original, but he was less cocky in this and I sorta liked that.
I liked how it was Wendy's daughter Jane, instead of the original characters like in most Disney sequels, it was more, I don't know, realistic.
Well, like I said, the plot isn't big at all, it's quite simple, but that doesn't spoil the goodness of the movie! I can see why they put it straight to Theatres instead direct-to-video, it is enjoyable!
There's one scene I just loved(Note:You may not wanna read this, it may ruin it for you, that's why I put Spoiler alert on), The scene near the end,where Peter and Wendy see each other again, and she's all grown up. Seriously, it's just aw!
But yeah, great movie!
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.
This is how I found out lots of things I didn't learn in the first movie. Like that feather thing on Hook's frequently-destroyed hat is really a pen. Not to mention his real name. (James) And how much Peter likes baseball, Tootles likes football, and Tinkerbell likes pulling on everyone's hair. I mean, I knew she liked to when I saw the first movie, but when I saw this one, I realized this might actually be one of her hobbies! Or addictions.
In closing, Peter still looks pretty good in tights.
Wendy is all grown up and has a family of her own, a loving husband, daughter, Jane, and son, Danny. Her husband goes to war and tells little Jane that she is in charge, so Jane takes that very seriously and acts as head of the household. Despite that she is still very young, she doesn't believe in Never Land and her mother's tales, but when Captain Hook thinks he grabs Wendy, he grabs Jane and takes her to Never Land to capture Peter Pan. Peter saves Jane and offers her to join the Lost Boys and hopes to restore her faith in his adventures and fairies, but all she wants to do is go home.
Return to Never Land is a fun Disney sequel that I have to admit that I was actually more impressed with. There are still a lot of great laughs and the story is still as adventurous as the first time when I watched the first Peter Pan. It was a little disturbing to hear the big difference of the voices, but I'm getting past it. After all, it's been over 40 years since the original Peter Pan, so I think it would've been hard to get the same actors. But I recommend Return to Never Land, it's a cute Disney sequel.
First of all, this movie is pretty pointless and plot-less. Maybe I'm spoiled with the original "Pan" or Spielberg's "Hook" (which is one of my favorite films of all time) - but I think that such a fantastical place such as Neverland needs a bit more exploration for the viewer. I've grown up with Peter Pan and his Lost boys. I'd like to see more of Neverland and less 'stuff' What I mean by 'stuff' is all the shenanigans that are constantly going on. This movie has ADHD for sure. I know it's geared towards kids, maybe that's why I'm having such a hard time connecting to it. If they're going to introduce some dramatic themes like war and timeless love, they could at least follow up with some depth. They skimmed the surface on everything that could've been something. Instead, Disney decided to give us a montage of slapstick worthy of having the Benny Hill 'Yakkety Sax' playing on repeat for the entirety of the Neverland scenes. Speaking of music... the very few musical sequences feel forced and unnecessary. I remember there's some Evanescence-Amy-Lee-ish lament in the beginning which in the lyrics reiterated events that happened 2 minutes ago. Both me and my girlfriend were scratching our heads, wondering if it was a joke.
"Return to Neverland"... I don't feel as if I just revisited the place I did when I was a kid. I feel as if I've just visited some spin off place where quick dollars and poor writing are placeholders for adventures and dreams.
GG Disney. I just hope this girl with her scene-girl A-line haircut (which I'm SURE is accurate for WW1/WW2 era) doesn't end up as an animatronic feature on the ride @ Disneyland.
To sum things up: If you want Pan - watch Hook, or maybe a good stage version. If you want Emo Loony Toons, I advise you to rent this movie.
The story begins at about the beginning of WWII. Jane's mother is Wendy, and her father has to go to war. Several years later, she gets into an argument with her brother. She is kidnapped by Captain Hook, who thinks she is Wendy. He takes her to Never Land, and sets a trap for Peter. He gives Jane a whistle to blow when she finds the treasure that Peter had "stolen" from them.
Earlier, Jane had declared that she didn't believe in fairies, even after she sees Tinker Bell. At that point, Tinker Bell's health starts failing. Remember, the story goes if someone says "I don't believe in fairies," a fairy somewhere drops dead. But of course, t's all fiction.
Jane however, thinks twice about it, and throws away the whistle, after she discovered the secret hiding place of the treasure. Unfortunately, a lost boy finds the whistle, and blows it. Minutes later, Jane goes to see Tinker Bell, who had been dying, because of what Jane had said. Luckily, she is healed by Jane, thanks to her faith, and Jane goes to rescue Peter.
The voice cast is the only other amazing thing about this movie; they almost sound exactly like the original cast from the original Peter Pan, over 50 years ago.
The story is a 6/10, but overall, it's a 5.