Peter Pan & Wendy (Live-Action Film)

For the live-action remake of the 1953 film.

Full Circle Cinema, per the DisInsider, says Alan Tudyk Joins Disney’s ‘Peter Pan & Wendy’ As Mr. Darling. ComingSoon.net is saying it too, but Google isn't pulling it up on any trades so far (Deadline, Hollywood Reporter), so maybe take it w/ a grain of salt for now.

https://fullcirclecinema.com/2021/03/16/alan-tudyk-joins-disneys-peter-pan-wendy-as-mr-darling/
https://thedisinsider.com/2021/03/16/alan-tudyk-and-molly-parker-join-disneys-peter-pan-wendy-as-production-begins/
https://www.comingsoon.net/movies/news/1166495-live-action-peter-pan-wendy-begins-production

It turns out the source of the info is a press release by Disney itself, so it's true. This is the cast announced so far:

Jude Law - Captain Hook
Yara Shahidi - Tinkerbell
Ever Anderson - Wendy
Alexander Molony - Peter Pan
Molly Parker - Mrs. Darling
Alan Tudyk - Mr. Darling
Joshua Pickering - John
Jacobi Jupe - Michael
Alyssa Wapanatâhk - Tiger Lily
Jim Gaffigan - Smee

First look at Jude Law as Hook (more photos here):

He looks awful. I wonder if that means he's going to use his real hair rather than a black curly wig.

I already had super low expectatives for this movie but that picture of the new Hook was way worse than I expected him to be...

jeangreyforever wrote:

I wonder if that means he's going to use his real hair rather than a black curly wig.

I guess so, otherwise I don't think he would've grown his hair. Personally, I thought he would look worse. He looks the part a bit more than I expected. Also, I think he'll probably look better with his hat and jacket on, but we'll see.

New set photos featuring Captain Hook, Smee and the Jolly Roger. Jude Law has his jacket on this time, which is blue instead of red like in the original, but is still not wearing the hat.






Source: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-9519037/Jude-Law-action-Captain-Hook-films-scenes-Disneys-Peter-Pan-Wendy.html


Source: http://www.justjared.com/2021/04/27/jude-law-is-captain-hook-on-the-set-of-peter-pan-wendy-get-a-first-look/

I like the design of the ship, with the tree in the front, but it doesn't make much sense imo for the pirates to have that or feel connected to nature or Neverland or whatever it represents.

Hook's coat being red was popularized by the Disney movie. In illustrations for the book before 1953, it was just about every color that could exist. I've seen dark blue, light blue, black, and I think even orange, green, or purple.

jeangreyforever wrote:

I like the design of the ship, with the tree in the front, but it doesn't make much sense imo for the pirates to have that or feel connected to nature or Neverland or whatever it represents.

I thought the same when I saw it. After taking a closer look, I think it might represent the Hangman's Tree and maybe Peter there in the middle? (plus the mermaids), but I still don't understand what it's supposed to be happening in the scene depicted there. Here's a bigger image of it. Do you have any idea what could it be?

jeangreyforever wrote:

Hook's coat being red was popularized by the Disney movie. In illustrations for the book before 1953, it was just about every color that could exist. I've seen dark blue, light blue, black, and I think even orange, green, or purple.

That's interesting. Personally, I don't mind they changed the color, but now he and his crew look more like the Royal Navy in films like Captain Horatio Hornblower or Master and Commander to me than pirates.

D82 wrote:

jeangreyforever wrote:

I like the design of the ship, with the tree in the front, but it doesn't make much sense imo for the pirates to have that or feel connected to nature or Neverland or whatever it represents.

I thought the same when I saw it. After taking a closer look, I think it might represent the Hangman's Tree and maybe Peter there in the middle? (plus the mermaids), but I still don't understand what it's supposed to be happening in the scene depicted there. Here's a bigger image of it. Do you have any idea what could it be?

jeangreyforever wrote:

Hook's coat being red was popularized by the Disney movie. In illustrations for the book before 1953, it was just about every color that could exist. I've seen dark blue, light blue, black, and I think even orange, green, or purple.

That's interesting. Personally, I don't mind they changed the color, but now he and his crew look more like the Royal Navy in films like Captain Horatio Hornblower or Master and Commander to me than pirates.

It does appear to be Hangman's Tree, which was created for the Disney movie, so it would make sense they're keeping it here. It's an odd choice though considering Hook has been searching for Peter's hideout so the fact that he has the tree engraved on his ship makes you wonder why he isn't able to find it. I know there's a magical tree in the Disney Fairies movies (the Pixie Dust Tree) so I wonder if this is actually based on that.

I didn't realize that was Peter in the middle but you're right, it clearly is, especially with the cap covering his face. The mermaids are around him but there are some faces near the mermaids which are more grubby looking so I wonder if those are the Lost Boys. Peter looks tied up so I guess this is Hook's dream, find Peter's hideout and hold him captive.

Perhaps Hook will have an origin in this movie about his past in the human world before he came to Neverland. If he was a captain of the British Royal Navy at one point, that might explain the new costumes. There's also been so many live-action Hooks that I can understand why they might have changed the look here to shake things up. It doesn't bother me but that's mainly because I have zero interest in this film anyway so I don't really care what they do.

jeangreyforever wrote:

It does appear to be Hangman's Tree, which was created for the Disney movie, so it would make sense they're keeping it here. It's an odd choice though considering Hook has been searching for Peter's hideout so the fact that he has the tree engraved on his ship makes you wonder why he isn't able to find it. I know there's a magical tree in the Disney Fairies movies (the Pixie Dust Tree) so I wonder if this is actually based on that.

You're right, Hook doesn't know the Hangman's Tree is Peter's hideout. Maybe the tree on the ship is not the Hangman's Tree after all. Or perhaps in this version he knows his hideout is a tree, but doesn't know which one. Though, if that was case, it doesn't make sense he hasn't found it yet, as you said. I don't think they'll take inspiration from the Tinker Bell movies, so I doubt it's the Pixie Dust Tree, but we'll see, maybe I'm mistaken.

jeangreyforever wrote:

I didn't realize that was Peter in the middle but you're right, it clearly is, especially with the cap covering his face. The mermaids are around him but there are some faces near the mermaids which are more grubby looking so I wonder if those are the Lost Boys. Peter looks tied up so I guess this is Hook's dream, find Peter's hideout and hold him captive.

I had noticed those faces, but I didn't know who they could be. I think you're right that they're the Lost Boys. And it's true, it looks like Peter is tied up. What you say makes sense, it must be Hook's dream of capturing Peter what that scene represents.

jeangreyforever wrote:

Perhaps Hook will have an origin in this movie about his past in the human world before he came to Neverland. If he was a captain of the British Royal Navy at one point, that might explain the new costumes. There's also been so many live-action Hooks that I can understand why they might have changed the look here to shake things up. It doesn't bother me but that's mainly because I have zero interest in this film anyway so I don't really care what they do.

It didn't occur to me they could really be British Royal Navy uniforms. It would be interesting if the explored Hook's origin. But if it's just that they want to do something different with their outfits, that's fine too.

I know you don't like the animated movie much, so I thought you might be excited for this remake since it could correct some of the problems you have with the original. But I guess you don't have much faith that they can do that, am I right?

I also considered it may just be a random or generic tree but the imagery seems too focused on it for it to be unimportant. One thing to consider is how Neverland was composed of what children dreamed it to be. So for example Wendy dreamed of having a pet wolf and so in Neverland she found one. I don't remember what Michael and John dreamed of but I remember those things were in Neverland as well. It's possible that since Hook's dream is capturing Pan, Neverland conjures up a ship for him that truly epitomizes Hook's desire, down to even featuring imagery of a captive Pan.

I don't entirely remember Hook's origin but I know he studied at Eton and I think he was part of the Royal Navy or a genuine captain anyway before becoming a pirate. I know he was also more feared than John Silver and I think he was connected to Blackbeard somehow.

I still have some nostalgia for the animated movie because it did use to be a favorite of mine. The problem was that I loved it and its source material so much that over time I began to realize how the movie really doesn't compare to the source material and other adaptations are either equally as flawed or far superior. For me, the definitive live-action movie already exists with the 2003 Universal film, which makes this redundant. The 2003 movie is book accurate and has amazing casting. The biggest plus for me isn't just that it understands all the characters whereas Disney pretty much messes everyone up fundamentally, it's also that the movie took special care to pay attention to the romantic relationship between Peter and Wendy. Romance is a must for me in most of my favorite movies and Peter and Wendy are one of my favorite fictional couples, so the 2003 movie scored high points for succeeding in this and actually doing an even better job than the book. The Disney movie lost a lot of love from me because of how it utterly fails when it comes to portraying that relationship, which is central to the book's themes.

I don't have any faith that Disney would remedy that in the live-action movie because the 2003 movie already got some flack for "sexualizing" children (even though it's meant to be about growing up) and Disney always leans towards family friendly. Also I've seen the director's live-action Pete's Dragon which was plain boring to me but very much the epitome of family friendly and not controversial in the slightest, so I don't see Disney as being daring in this remake. They'll stick to their version of Peter Pan's central theme, about glorifying the concept of never growing up (when the original story's motto is actually the exact opposite and how dangerous and destructive it is to stagnate growth), since it's too closely tied to Disney's image and even their Disney Parks. So while it is possible that the remake might fix some of the faults of the animated movie, I haven't seen anything to suggest otherwise over the last few years, and I really don't need anything from this movie since the definitive take on the story already exists for me.

I will say though that The Jungle Book (2016) was a pleasant surprise because that's an animated movie I never cared for (one of the few Walt movies I feel that way towards besides Peter Pan), but I adore the remake, because it took the best bits from the animated movie and masterfully combined it with a faithful treatment of the book.

jeangreyforever wrote:

I also considered it may just be a random or generic tree but the imagery seems too focused on it for it to be unimportant. One thing to consider is how Neverland was composed of what children dreamed it to be. So for example Wendy dreamed of having a pet wolf and so in Neverland she found one. I don't remember what Michael and John dreamed of but I remember those things were in Neverland as well. It's possible that since Hook's dream is capturing Pan, Neverland conjures up a ship for him that truly epitomizes Hook's desire, down to even featuring imagery of a captive Pan.

I didn't know that about Neverland. Yes, that would explain the tree and everything else.

jeangreyforever wrote:

I don't entirely remember Hook's origin but I know he studied at Eton and I think he was part of the Royal Navy or a genuine captain anyway before becoming a pirate. I know he was also more feared than John Silver and I think he was connected to Blackbeard somehow.

I didn't know he had an origin story in the book either. I now wish they explored it in the remake.

jeangreyforever wrote:

I still have some nostalgia for the animated movie because it did use to be a favorite of mine. The problem was that I loved it and its source material so much that over time I began to realize how the movie really doesn't compare to the source material and other adaptations are either equally as flawed or far superior. For me, the definitive live-action movie already exists with the 2003 Universal film, which makes this redundant. The 2003 movie is book accurate and has amazing casting. The biggest plus for me isn't just that it understands all the characters whereas Disney pretty much messes everyone up fundamentally, it's also that the movie took special care to pay attention to the romantic relationship between Peter and Wendy. Romance is a must for me in most of my favorite movies and Peter and Wendy are one of my favorite fictional couples, so the 2003 movie scored high points for succeeding in this and actually doing an even better job than the book. The Disney movie lost a lot of love from me because of how it utterly fails when it comes to portraying that relationship, which is central to the book's themes.

I don't have any faith that Disney would remedy that in the live-action movie because the 2003 movie already got some flack for "sexualizing" children (even though it's meant to be about growing up) and Disney always leans towards family friendly. Also I've seen the director's live-action Pete's Dragon which was plain boring to me but very much the epitome of family friendly and not controversial in the slightest, so I don't see Disney as being daring in this remake. They'll stick to their version of Peter Pan's central theme, about glorifying the concept of never growing up (when the original story's motto is actually the exact opposite and how dangerous and destructive it is to stagnate growth), since it's too closely tied to Disney's image and even their Disney Parks. So while it is possible that the remake might fix some of the faults of the animated movie, I haven't seen anything to suggest otherwise over the last few years, and I really don't need anything from this movie since the definitive take on the story already exists for me.

I will say though that The Jungle Book (2016) was a pleasant surprise because that's an animated movie I never cared for (one of the few Walt movies I feel that way towards besides Peter Pan), but I adore the remake, because it took the best bits from the animated movie and masterfully combined it with a faithful treatment of the book.

Thanks for explaining your opinion of the animated film and the remake to me. Now I understand why you aren't looking forward to it.

Personally, I like the Disney movie, but it's not one of my top favorites from Walt and I've never been too interested in reading the original book or watching other film versions. The only one I've seen is Hook and I didn't like it much. But the details about the book you've mentioned sound interesting and I would like to be able to compare it to the Disney adaptation, so I'll have to read it someday and also watch the 2003 film you like so much.

As for the remake, I'm not too excited for it either, but it's fun for me to follow the news about these remakes and see who they cast in each role, what things from the original they keep and which ones they change, etc., even though I rarely enjoy the actual films once I see them. The Pete's Dragon remake is actually one of my favorites from this current trend. I don't think it's great, but I like that they didn't just copy the same story from the original, but took the basic premise and did something quite different with it. That's what in my opinion all remakes should do. Regarding it being too family friendly, it could be because of the type of story being told on that occasion. Pete's Dragon is basically about the frienship between a boy and his dragon pet. Maybe the director's approach will be different this time. Anyway, I think you're right not to have much faith in Disney with this film, because most of these remakes end up being disappointing.

D82 wrote:

jeangreyforever wrote:

I don't entirely remember Hook's origin but I know he studied at Eton and I think he was part of the Royal Navy or a genuine captain anyway before becoming a pirate. I know he was also more feared than John Silver and I think he was connected to Blackbeard somehow.

I didn't know he had an origin story in the book either. I now wish they explored it in the remake.

jeangreyforever wrote:

I still have some nostalgia for the animated movie because it did use to be a favorite of mine. The problem was that I loved it and its source material so much that over time I began to realize how the movie really doesn't compare to the source material and other adaptations are either equally as flawed or far superior. For me, the definitive live-action movie already exists with the 2003 Universal film, which makes this redundant. The 2003 movie is book accurate and has amazing casting. The biggest plus for me isn't just that it understands all the characters whereas Disney pretty much messes everyone up fundamentally, it's also that the movie took special care to pay attention to the romantic relationship between Peter and Wendy. Romance is a must for me in most of my favorite movies and Peter and Wendy are one of my favorite fictional couples, so the 2003 movie scored high points for succeeding in this and actually doing an even better job than the book. The Disney movie lost a lot of love from me because of how it utterly fails when it comes to portraying that relationship, which is central to the book's themes.

I don't have any faith that Disney would remedy that in the live-action movie because the 2003 movie already got some flack for "sexualizing" children (even though it's meant to be about growing up) and Disney always leans towards family friendly. Also I've seen the director's live-action Pete's Dragon which was plain boring to me but very much the epitome of family friendly and not controversial in the slightest, so I don't see Disney as being daring in this remake. They'll stick to their version of Peter Pan's central theme, about glorifying the concept of never growing up (when the original story's motto is actually the exact opposite and how dangerous and destructive it is to stagnate growth), since it's too closely tied to Disney's image and even their Disney Parks. So while it is possible that the remake might fix some of the faults of the animated movie, I haven't seen anything to suggest otherwise over the last few years, and I really don't need anything from this movie since the definitive take on the story already exists for me.

I will say though that The Jungle Book (2016) was a pleasant surprise because that's an animated movie I never cared for (one of the few Walt movies I feel that way towards besides Peter Pan), but I adore the remake, because it took the best bits from the animated movie and masterfully combined it with a faithful treatment of the book.

Thanks for explaining your opinion of the animated film and the remake to me. Now I understand why you aren't looking forward to it.

Personally, I like the Disney movie, but it's not one of my top favorites from Walt and I've never been too interested in reading the original book or watching other film versions. The only one I've seen is Hook and I didn't like it much. But the details about the book you've mentioned sound interesting and I would like to be able to compare it to the Disney adaptation, so I'll have to read it someday and also watch the 2003 film you like so much.

As for the remake, I'm not too excited for it either, but it's fun for me to follow the news about these remakes and see who they cast in each role, what things from the original they keep and which ones they change, etc., even though I rarely enjoy the actual films once I see them. The Pete's Dragon remake is actually one of my favorites from this current trend. I don't think it's great, but I like that they didn't just copy the same story from the original, but took the basic premise and did something quite different with it. That's what in my opinion all remakes should do. Regarding it being too family friendly, it could be because of the type of story being told on that occasion. Pete's Dragon is basically about the frienship between a boy and his dragon pet. Maybe the director's approach will be different this time. Anyway, I think you're right not to have much faith in Disney with this film, because most of these remakes end up being disappointing.

It's not so much an origin story in the book as much as certain facts about his past that are brought up. And JM Barrie did a speech at Eton College which was about Hook and that more specifically talked about Hook's background.

I've seen Hook as well, a long time ago, but it never left an impression on me. I've never understood why it became a cult film after it flopped at the box office. The book is good, especially if you enjoy reading, but if you don't, the 2003 movie is a good alternative that carries the spirit of the book without actually having to read it. At the same time, the movie still keeps some elements from the Disney movie. Like Michael's teddy bear, Tink turning red in anger, and Neverland being in space rather than an actual island on a random ocean.

I've had mixed feelings for the remakes so far. Was very hyped for Maleficent and then didn't even bother to watch it after hearing what it was about. That left me uninterested until Cinderella came out which I thoroughly enjoyed. Unfortunately, that made me set the bar very high for future remakes and BATB did not deliver. Aladdin was a step-up from BATB but still somewhat flawed, but nothing was as bad as The Lion King. Pete's Dragon was a remake I had high expectations for as well since I never cared for the original movie but I just found it boring. Ironically enough, I rewatched the original a while back and loved it a lot more so that's grown on me at least, unlike the remake. I'm fine with Pete's Dragon being family friendly and Peter Pan is also (like most other Disney stories) a family friendly tale but I don't like how all the depth and nuance, including the tragic elements, have been taken away. I'm not expecting this remake to do any better than that, especially going by their current trend. The only remake at this point that I'm somewhat interested in is Hunchback. I dread how they'll butcher Snow White. I think Cinderella and The Jungle Book so far have been the strongest remakes because they clearly adore the original Disney movies and aren't trying to fix them, but they're also using the source material to combine with the Disney movies to create a new experience.