#they have tinkerbell and wendy darling LIKE WHAT

[romanceyourdemons]

the resurrection of tinkerbell is really fucked up if you think about it. virtually everyone in neverland is either a figment of peter pan’s imagination or so deeply under peter’s thrall that their reality is simply what he dictates. the only three people in neverland who have free will outside of peter pan are captain hook, wendy darling, and tinkerbell, who are able to maintain an existence outside of peter pan’s will through the sheer force of a firmly adult desire—for captain hook, a desire for honor and chivalry, and for wendy and tinkerbell a desire for romance and love. wendy and hook are both people from the real world, and both adults or young adults, and thus have more power to fight against peter pan’s narrative. but even though tinkerbell has agency of her own, she doesn’t have the physical power to enact it—she can’t leave like wendy, can’t fight with honor like hook—in fact, the only thing she has the power to do is die. but her death comes the closest of anything to making peter pan want to grow up. except that in a desperate, confused hail mary, peter pan reaches out beyond the confines of his changing world and appeals to all the children and all the adults who want to be children, saying “believe for me that this isn’t happening. believe that fairies are real and death is not.” and, because he says so, and because he’s provided us with a glimpse of such a magical world, we do. and just like that tinkerbell is no longer able to die, and peter pan no longer has any reason to grow up

[filmmakerdreamst]

P.J.Hogan's 'Peter Pan' is still an underrated masterpiece 20 years later

Peter Pan is a live-action fantasy adventure film directed by P. J. Hogan that reimagines the classic story of Peter and Wendy. The screenplay was written by P. J. Hogan and Michael Goldenberg and was released in cinemas in December 2003. The screenplay is based on the 1904 play Peter Pan, or The Boy Who Wouldn’t Grow Upand the classic novel Peter Pan by J.M.Barrie, which was originally published under the title Peter and Wendy.

The film tells the story of a young Edwardian girl, Wendy Darling (Rachel Hurd-Wood) and her two younger brothers John and Michael. On the night she is told she must grow up, a wild, fairy-like boy called Peter Pan (Jeremy Sumpter) flies into her room with his high-maintenance fairy Tinkerbell. When he learns that she tells stories, he whisks Wendy and her two brothers away to a magical Island called Neverland — where you supposedly don’t “grow up” — so that she can mother his henchmen, the Lost Boys. There she fights pirates led by the evil Captain Hook (Jason Isaacs), meets mermaids, dances with fairies, falls in love and grows up.

I have strong family connections tied to Peter and Wendy and J.M.Barrie. My great, great uncle Nico was one of the sons of Sylvia Llewelyn Davies'. He and his other brothers "the Lost Boys" were adopted by J.M.Barrie; which ultimately inspired him to write Peter Pan. Nico’s daughter Laura — my cousin — who I met for the first time a few years ago, told me that she was flown to Australia for the filming of P.J. Hogan’s Peter Pan because she was J.M.Barrie’s goddaughter. She told me that she was thrilled with the cast, especially Jason Isaacs, who played Captain Hook and Mr Darling. She also mentioned that Jeremy Sumpter, who played Peter Pan, was a lovely boy. However, she said she was very surprised and sad that the film wasn’t a big success as she really liked what they did with the story. I have loved the fairytale of Peter Pan from a young age, and learning that I am literally part of the family that inspired the story was very exciting and I’ve only begun to internalise it more as I’ve grown older.

When I was in my mid-twenties, I was diagnosed with a high level of Autism. One of my main symptoms was labelled “ageless”, which in simple terms means that one half of me is still a child that I can’t mentally leave behind. I can’t do many things that most adults can do, such as pay bills, drive a car, look after my own well being etc. I flap my hands when I get excited. I bounce. I sometimes speak in a baby voice. I overcommit to things I enjoy. I admit that it was hard to come to terms with the diagnosis when I first received it. But over time, I’ve come to believe that the two can coexist in a healthy way. I believe that I am an adult who is able to develop and grow while still carrying the child within me, and that this is not seen as a bad thing. I think Peter and Wendy can be seen as a reflection of that.

I was first introduced to P.J. Hogan’s Peter Pan a few years after it was released (I was maybe nine or ten years old), and I absolutely loved it. It wasn’t only one of my favourite film adaptations, but one of my favourite movies of all time. What surprised me most about the film at that age was how dark and gruesome it was, and full of this underlying sexual tension that I hadn’t expected at all from Peter Pan. Even today, this film still has a special place in my heart. It is made with so much passion and love for the original text that I can automatically put myself back into the story. After watching the film again as an adult, I almost immediately opened my copy of Peter and Wendy and started reading. I would even go so far as to say that I prefer the film to the book. However, part of me wishes that the age rating had been set much higher, as the dark and gruesome moments were some of the strongest parts of the film adaptation. This is possibly why some critics and viewers had difficulty categorising the film at the time.

However, I often consider P.J.Hogan’s Peter Pan to be the same equivalent as Joe Wright’s Pride and Prejudice. (which came out a few years later in 2005, starring Keira Knightley and Matthew Macfadyen). The film moves at the same dreamlike pace. It is light, dark, colourful and deeply romantic.

I also often prefer P.J.Hogan’s Peter Pan to the 1953 Disney Animation of the same name, even though it’s the version I grew up with and liked. I find it much less straightforward and innocent. Also, the 2003 film is much closer to the original source material, which I loved reading as a teenager, and to J.M.Barrie’s original vision. The film manages to reflect the same intellectual subtext and depth of the novel while retaining the whimsy and magic.

Magical Realism

Peter Pan was a perfect blend of fantasy and realism. A lot of media these days focus too much on “realism” and make their sets and CGI look bland and washed out. It’s a common myth these days that no one likes whimsy anymore; it’s somehow seen as too childish. As a result, much of the magic of fantasy is lost. But in this Peter Pan, a lot of colour was used in the set design and cinematography. Everything was so brightly and colourfully lit. Most fantasy films these days, including the new live-action adaptation of Peter Pan and Wendy on Disney+, are all so gloomy and dark. You almost have to light up the screen to make out the actors’ facial expressions or what’s happening in the scene. But this film understands that a viewer who watches fantasy wants to be swept away, but also wants a certain amount of believability. Although the film contained a good amount of darkness, it did not shy away from being cartoonish either (which I think was partly inspired by the Disney animation), i.e. characters blushing or bouncing on the clouds.

The design of Neverland was breathtaking. I think the CGI, although criticised by some, made the island and creatures look more dreamy and fairytale-like. It was a good combination of CGI for the landscapes and real backdrops for the jungle, so there was enough magic and believability to transport the viewer into the story. A bright colour palette was used for the landscapes, while down-to-earth colours such as browns and greens were used on the ground, such as in “The Lost Boys Hide” under the tree, to give a sense of realism. The costume department also reflected this, from the majestic reds and blacks of the pirates, to the earthly colours of blue and red for the Native Americans, to the natural greens and browns of the Lost boys. I noticed that the colours in Neverland were used as a contrast to the Edwardian London back home, which is realistic but dull compared to the island.

One aspect I liked was that the lighting on Neverland always changed depending on the mood of the scene- unlike the naturalistic lighting on Earth. It was almost as if the island was a living being. For example, when there was a fight on the ship, the lighting was red. When Peter took Wendy to the mermaids, who were scary and frightening, the lighting was dark and blue. This created a surrealistic atmosphere, almost like a fever dream or a kind of nightmare.

Sometimes the environment changed depending on Peter Pan’s mood in the respective scene. I particularly liked how Peter Pan influenced the weather on Neverland. Just his mere presence when he flew to the island changed the entire atmosphere in an instant. His feelings also determined whether it was summer or winter. In other words, its suggested in the film that the longer he has been there, the more the island has become a part of him, so that he can no longer leave it. It’s almost as if the island has transformed him into a magical being.

The exuberant musical score by James Newton Howard: I’ll never forget that. I think that was one of the first movies I saw where I actively noticed the music because it was so brilliant. Even today, the “Flying” soundtrack still gives me goosebumps. It perfectly encapsulates the whimsy, joy and imagination of Peter and Wendy. I loved that there were always different variations. One of my favourite pieces from the movie is ‘Fairy Dance’, which starts off cheerfully and moves up and down depending on the characters’ conflict/what they’re saying in the scene.

Cast

The cast of this film adaptation was magnificent. The look of all the actors not only matched the book description, but also the mood, especially with the Darling family. One of the standouts was Olivia Williams as Mrs Darling. She captured the gentleness of the character perfectly. I also loved the new addition of Aunt Millicent, played by Lynn Redgrave. She fitted into the story so well that I was surprised not to find her in the novel. She had the perfect amount of ridiculousness and hilarity that suited J.M.Barrie’s style.

One particular member of the cast we can probably all agree on that was perfect, was Jason Isaacs, who played both Wendy’s father Mr Darling and Captain Hook. He was certainly a star in this film for sure. I just can not think of anyone who could play him better, especially in a live-action film adaptation. He was particularly good in the role of Captain Hook. When I first saw the film as a child, I did not know that Captain Hook and Mr Darling were played by the same person until my dad pointed it out to me because he was so good. I loved how they portrayed Wendy’s dad as shy and reserved, as opposed to Captain Hook who was flamboyant and sinister. Mirror versions of each other in different realities — that’s a common theme throughout the film. As Captain Hook, Jason Isaacs perfectly captured the essence of viciousness, deviousness and brutality that was necessary for the character. But also the deep loneliness and frustration behind it all. I have seen a quote that was supposedly cut from the film (and never should have been) that provides so much context for his hatred of Peter Pan:

“Imagine a lion in a cage and into that cage flies a butterfly. If the lion was free, it would pay no heed to such creature. But the lion is not free…and so the butterfly drives him slowly insane.” — Captain Hook

They did a really good job of showing how Peter Pan and Captain Hook are mirror images of each other. Peter Pan is a child who secretly wants to be an adult, while Captain Hook is an adult who secretly wants to be a child. Both fight each other for different reasons, but the goal is the same. For example, there is a great scene towards the end where Captain Hook uses his wits to defeat Peter in a fight. Here it becomes clear that there is deep symbolism for the inevitability of adulthood and the loss of childhood. Jason Isaacs really showed off his acting talent here. I liked that he wasn’t portrayed as a “dumb villain”, which he easily could have been.

There were also some great performances among the adults. Most notable was Richard Briers as the ‘pirate’’ Smee. But the child actors, especially the lost boys, really held the movie together. Their solid performances made it so believable that the island was ruled by children. I loved Theodore Chester as Slightly. He was very charming and funny in that role.

Another member of the cast I thought was brilliant was Carsen Grey, an indigenous actress of Haida descent, who played Princess Tiger Lily. I liked that they let her speak her ancestral language, Mohican, in this film. Although this film came out in the early 2000s, it is the only version of Peter and Wendy in which Native Americans are neither erased nor white-washed even though the representation is far from great. Considering how they’re treated in the novel, it’s perhaps for the best overall that they limited some of their scenes. However, I liked how firey she was in this adaptation and not the damsel in distress she was portrayed as in the Disney animation. I think it was a wise decision to cut the infatuation she had with Peter Pan, as it was really just one line in the book that would have added unnecessary drama, and all in all, it would have fallen short if all the female characters were jealous of each other.

They also downplayed Tinkerbell’s jealousy in this regard, portraying it more as her trying to protect Peter Pan’s youth from romantic advances, as hinted at in the novel, and also being sad that Wendy is attracting all of Peter Pan’s attention. Ludivine Sagnier has, in my opinion, succeeded well in making Tinkerbell equally repulsive and endearing, as befits the character.

Wendy Darling

Rachel Hurd-Wood was the perfect cast for the role of Wendy Darling.I was actually surprised to learn that this was her first film role ever, because she was a natural. She effortlessly possessed the same caring nature and charm that makes Wendy so endearing. She is exactly how I imagine the character when I read the story. When people talk about Peter and Wendy, they always mention Tinkerbell, Pan or Hook, but personally I am always drawn to Wendy. She is the real heroine of the story. After all, she was the main reason for Peter to bring her and her brothers to Neverland.

What always amazes me about Wendy’s role in the story is the fact that Wendy literally doesn’t spend much time being a “child” in the time she spends in Neverland. When she’s not escaping death at the hands of mermaids or pirates, she acts as a mother to the ‘lost boys’ and her brothers. She asks herself what she really wants from life. In comparison, she was allowed to behave more like a child at home in Edwardian London. Neverland is not a place where you never grow up. It’s the place where she chooses to grow up. Many people have described Neverland as a manifestation of Wendy’s subconscious as a result of trauma, and I’ve never found that to be more true in this adaptation.

One of the reasons why I think P.J. Hogan’s Peter Pan is the best adaptation of the novel is the fact that the film revolves around Wendy’s coming of age. I loved that they expanded on her love of storytelling and also gave her a tomboyish streak. Instead of just being on the sidelines, she’s able to get involved and fight pirates while retaining many of her feminine traits such as her maternal instincts and romantic feelings for Peter. She makes mistakes and sometimes gets dragged into things she knows she shouldn’t do. But in the end, she triumphs.

In many film adaptations of Peter and Wendy that I have seen, Wendy is either only present in passing or not at all. Characters like Peter Pan, Captain Hook and Tinkerbell always take centre stage, which I think is a strange decision as they are part of Wendy’s story and not the other way around. Peter Pan is meant to metaphorically represent the childhood she does not want to give up (which is why the character is always played by a woman in the original play, as he is a mirror image of Wendy). And Captain Hook (J.M.Barrie also wanted him to be played by the same actor as Mr Darling) represents the dark side of her father, or rather what she imagines adulthood to be. This is particularly emphasised in this film adaptation because he is an important factor in her being told to grow up. The father, the concept of adulthood, and Peter Pan, her childhood, are at constant war with each other.

“You’re not supposed to be like Peter, who kept every good and bad aspect of being a child and can’t tell right from wrong. You’re not supposed to be Hook, either. He let go of everything childish and loving about him and became bitter and evil..You’re supposed to fall in the middle, to hold onto the things about childhood that make it beautiful — the wonder, the imagination, the innocence — while still growing up and learning morality and responsibility. You’re not supposed to be Hook. You’re not supposed to be Peter Pan. You’re supposed to be Wendy Darling.” — @maybe-this-time

The 2023 film Peter Pan and Wendy took a different approach, by making Wendy a kind of powerhouse who always saved the day and outshone Peter Pan overall. In my opinion, the 2003 film adaptation emphasised very well that Wendy really is the yin and yang. She's allowed to be romantic, be rescued by others and at the same time determine her own destiny and stand up for herself. Because that’s what her journey in the adaptation is all about. She is pressured by all the adults in her life to grow up. She allows herself to be seduced with the prospect of an eternal childhood by Peter Pan. Then she realises that it is not self-fulfilling. She is tempted by Captain Hook with the concept of adulthood. And finally, she finds a balance between these two extremes on her own terms. By the end of the film, Wendy has made her peace with growing up while still remaining a child at heart. That requires a certain mental strength that we should all strive for.

Peter Pan and Wendy Darling

In most adaptations of Peter and Wendy, such as Hook and Syfy’s Neverland, the focus is on the title character Peter. In the more recent film adaptation Peter Pan and Wendy, the focus is on Wendy. This film adaptation of Peter and Wendy, on the other hand, sticks more closely to the original source material, as the story focuses on Peter and Wendy’s relationship. This is perhaps the reason why I always hesitate when I watch other adaptations, because these two characters are supposed to go together. It’s definitely a relationship that can be portrayed in all sorts of ways because they are symbolically the same person.

Although there is no romance between Peter and Wendy in either the original novel or the play, Wendy quickly develops romantic feelings for Peter which, as a prepubescent child, he does not consciously reciprocate as he has no concept of love other than that of a mother’s. Although Peter cares deeply for her, he ultimately only longs for her to be the maternal figure that is missing in his life. One could go into the symbolism that Peter and Wendy are one and the same, and that this is an expression of Wendy learning to love herself. But in a literal sense, J.M.Barrie had unintentionally created this very strong potential between the two characters. And I personally feel if your'e going to make an adaptation of Peter and Wendy that potential needs to be explored in some way, even if it’s not necessarily romantic.

Hogan recognised this potential and developed the romantic elements, e.g. ‘the “thimble” from the novel, into a very real and tangible plot. In other adaptations, Peter and Wendy’s relationship is rather one-sided. But in P.J. Hogan’s film adaptation, however, it is not at all. Over the course of the film, Peter and Wendy fall deeply in love with each other.

Rachel Hurd-Wood and Jeremy Sumpter had a remarkable on-screen chemistry for young actors, which helped give the adaptation its own identity. Whenever they interacted on screen as Peter and Wendy, it was — like the glittering pixie dust of Tinkerbell — simply magical. The off-screen chemistry between the two definitely helped make the romance so believable as well. When I was younger, I didn’t like romantic subplots in family films. I personally found that they clogged up the main plot because the “romance” tended to be very one-dimensional- but Peter and Wendy in the 2003 film version were simply enchanting.

In the original novel, J.M.Barrie alludes to the possibility of a romance between the two. In the film adaptation, they go all out. Their love story was written so beautifully and profoundly, while staying true to the original text and J.M.Barrie’s themes. This made the conflict hinted at in the novel of “staying in Neverland with Peter or growing up on Earth with Wendy” even more poignant and relevant, because in reality there was only ever one option. They couldn’t find a way to have both. That made the ending even more “heartbreaking” for me as a child, because even though they had the chance to be happy together, she couldn’t give up on growing up to stay. And he couldn’t give up being a child to leave, even though it was a natural progression for him.

Peter Pan

Jeremy Sumpter delivered a fantastic performance as Peter Pan. Not only did he perfectly match the illustrations, but he also managed to perfectly capture the essence of the charismatic, mischievous little boy from the novel. What’s more, of all the versions I have seen so far, he is by far the most accurate, right down to the clothes made of skeleton leaves, the dirty fingernails, the feral mannerisms, the traumatised soul behind the charm and the downright creepy insinuations. By today’s standards, you could almost take Peter Pan for a grown man who consciously decides not to behave like this.

However, when I watch the film again as an adult, I can now understand why he has reservations about growing up in Edwardian England and would rather remain a “child” in Neverland forever. As Peter says in the film, “Would they send me to school? And then to an office?” I feel like most of us today have so many choices as we get older, but back then it was much more limited. The choices were very restricted in that “heterosexist” environment. You could only be a certain thing, and it was much harder to hold on to the pleasures of life. I can now also understand the initial reactions of Michael and John to Peter: He must have seemed scandalous to people at the time. His bright colours, his inappropriate clothing and his behaviour are repulsive to the boys, but Wendy is immediately fascinated and attracted.  I think it was a deliberate choice that he is the only character with an American accent to set him apart from the rest of the cast; to emphasise the wildness of the character and his non-conformity to the people of Edwardian London.

Another small aspect I liked was the suggestion that the Lost Boys, although they lived with Peter and obeyed his commands, lived in constant fear of him and did not worship him as in other adaptations. (A fear that is justified as Peter tries to kill them more than once in the film). What the 2003 film adaptation captured perfectly about Peter's character was: how terrible of a person he really is. Peter Pan is a hero when he goes on adventures and fights pirates. You could argue — via the quote “Leave Hook to me” (which Peter says to her in the film) — that Peter is Wendy’s split self who can fight her father (Captain Hook) for her, just like antibodies do with germs when we can’t handle them ourselves.

However, when it comes to understanding emotions, caring about others, even his henchmen, the Lost Boys, and doing anything that inconveniences him, Peter Pan is possibly as bad as Captain Hook. This makes Wendy’s decision to leave him all the more powerful. Although she was initially seduced by his adventurous life, she soon realises that his “life” of joy and adventure is not fulfilling at all. Because in reality, there is no real joy. There is no real adventure. In reality, his life is empty because it is not earned. In addition, she realises that she is gradually losing her memory of the outside world, including her parents - a sign that she is “slowly awakening from the dream”. This leads Wendy to realise that she wants more than what he can give her in Neverland (e.g. romantic love) and decides to leave. Being alive means feeling, accepting and growing. However, as long as Peter remains a boy, he can never truly be alive. Peter Pan conveyed this important message, whereas earlier film adaptations, including the Disney animation, did not.

One of the reasons why good adaptations of Peter and Wendy are so hard to come by, especially in this day and age, is not only because they adapt a performative story that exists in layers of subtext. They also work with a protagonist who doesn’t change. Who doesn’t develop in any way, neither negatively nor positively. Not even just physically, but also mentally. (Even Eli from Let the Right One In, the child vampire, changes in the course of the story). At the end of day, Peter Pan is ultimately there to serve someone else’s story. It works in a fairy tale format. But it doesn’t usually translate very well to the screen because it often leads to one-dimensional storytelling. Even if it seems so natural, it doesn’t come naturally.

However, this adaptation allows Peter Pan to grow. The writers expanded on the small aspect from the book, which is the moment when Wendy enters Peter’s life; he begins to feel emotions. Not just love. But anger. Fear. Sadness. Pain. Disgust. And above all: self-awareness. Almost like a version of puberty in condensed time, as if the change suddenly caught up with his body. When Wendy brings this up, Peter immediately rejects it out of fear. I think most of us can all relate to this when we were in the midst of growing into a young adult. We experience feelings that are scary and new, that we can’t yet fully understand or even want to. For Peter Pan, falling in love is exactly what he is afraid of: growing up and no longer being a child. This adds to an interesting conflict that arises between the two when she asks him to leave with her.

“The thing about Peter Pan is, he’s a coward. Had the chance of a lifetime and he bottled it. Just fucked off back to Neverland. All alone, forever he was, by his own hand. Poor old Wendy, she had to grow old without him.” — Skins, 6x07 “Alo”

In the original novel, the reason Wendy can’t take Peter Pan with her (apart from the fact that he refuses to grow up) is the same reason Lyra in His Dark Materials can’t take Pan — the animal manifestation of her soul — on the boat to the land of the dead. She has to split in order to grow up and leave a part of herself behind. She can’t keep both in order to move on. But that does not mean I always agree with the ending either. In which Peter remains a child and takes Wendy’s future descendants to Neverland and back to look after him. It leaves an icky aftertaste, but at least it fits in with the story J.M. Barrie wanted to tell.

Even though the adaptation conveys the same message, that Peter Pan is the manifestation of Wendy’s youth, even to the end. In this version of Peter Pan, that is no longer the case. By the end of the film, the way he holds himself is different. The way he looks wistfully through the open window and solemnly says, “To live would be an awfully big adventure,” : a sign of self-awareness, while Wendy happily reunites with her family. So much so that Tinkerbell has to pull him by the hair to stop him from joining them and reconsidering his decision. Peter is now old enough to know that he loves Wendy. Maybe he’s also mature enough to know what he’s missing, but he knows he can’t have her the way he wants, so he does the most selfless thing he’s ever done in the whole film by letting her go.

There is no such conflict at the end of the 1953 Disney animated film. Peter Pan is described by Wendy as “wonderful”. In reality, everyone else gets their happy ending, except him, because he deliberately chooses not to. Peter Pan very much turns himself into a tragic figure because he is afraid of the most natural thing in the world. He is afraid of life. And I feel like this version of the story knew that and expressed it strongly, which makes me conflicted now as an adult. I’ve seen endings like this before, where two people fall in love but do not end up together because they grow apart or they are both interested in different things, and it’s very important to reach those points in different ways. It very much reflects real life and is also reminiscent of first love. How that love never really fades. It reminds you of simple times, even when you’ve grown up and moved on. That a part of you is still at that age when you look back on it. These endings happen because people grow — which Peter Pan does not.

“Peter in the books lives in oblivious tragedy. He may suspect that he’s not fully happy, but he tends to forget about it… yet this Peter doesn’t… Wendy leaving him and growing up to be a wife of another man is his unhappy thought…It’s the loss of innocence since Peter could not forget this…It’s the process of growing up…all but confirms that Peter’s character arc in the film is one of accepting the fact he too must grow up to be happy.” —  @rex-shadao

And I think that’s the real reason why his character is both the strongest and the weakest part of the adaptation. The writers didn’t make it clear enough that Peter Pan forgets in their version of the character. In the novel, Peter Pan forgets everything automatically, which is why he can exist in this limbo of childhood and not go mad. However, as mentioned earlier, this version of Peter Pan is old enough to remember and, more importantly, to feel. Even though he is the closest to J.M. Barrie’s original vision, unlike his counterpart in the book, he is capable of evolving. That’s why the ending sometimes feels strange to me as an adult.

It was hard to say why I had a strange feeling at first, but I realised that a lot of my mixed feelings stemmed from having seen the film adaptation fresh after reading the novel. Since Peter Pan fully reciprocates Wendy’s love in this version, he ends up being a different character than in the book, which is why I now disagree with them keeping the original ending instead of having him grow up with Wendy. It would symbolise that childhood can co-exist with adulthood, that you don’t have to leave a part of yourself behind. That you can be your true and complete self if you find the balance between the two extremes.

The original ending still works however, in all its bittersweetness. I know what it means and understand what it stands for. Wendy basically says goodbye to her childhood and promises never to forget it. There’s a reason it made such an impression on me when I was younger. It could just be because I’m trying to pick up all the pieces of my broken heart from the floor. But personally, as an adult, I just find it weaker compared to the novel. Sometimes I like to imagine an ending to this version of the story where Peter Pan comes back, having quickly realised that he has outgrown Neverland, but doesn’t meet Wendy again until they are both much older, at a time when Wendy is coming to terms with womanhood and the idea of marriage. Or she even meets his real earth counterpart (if we were to delve into the psychology of Neverland being Wendy’s dream). And their relationship is subjected to the natural test of time and growth.

Peter Pan is an almost perfect adaptation. It matches the humour, the tone and the vision of J.M.Barrie. But I can certainly understand why the film didn’t do so well at the box office. In the month it was released, there was an unfair amount of competition, namely the film Lord of the Rings — The Return of the King. And as an adult, I can now understand why it’s not the film people think of or remember when it comes to Peter Pan adaptations. And it’s not just because it doesn’t fit the elfish, jolly trickster persona that Disney has created.

The film adaptation suffers more from what it doesn’t do — such as maintaining a stable tone and consistent editing — than from what it does. It’s one of those films that would have benefited from being much longer. And this is going off a point I've seen someone make in the past, that no Fantasy Film should be under two hours because of all the worldbuilding it has to introduce. That way, the inconsistent tone and some of the rushed parts of the adaptation would be much more balanced. It feels like it was missing an extra twenty minutes. For example, the film is narrated by an older version of Wendy, but without the deleted ending where it becomes properly clear that it’s her telling the story to tie everything together, the ending feels a little abrupt. Say what you will about Tim Burton’s adaptation of the Series of Unfortunate Events, but the audience could see where the film’s narration was coming from the whole time. I think if they knew the alternate ending wasn’t going to work (that scene is a classic example of something working well in the novel but not in the film), they should have removed the narrator altogether with the deleted ending and adjusted the film accordingly. They should have extended some scenes so that parts of the film weren’t rushed, such as the introduction, and the story would have been left more up to interpretation as there was no voiceover throughout.

Despite its weaknesses, P.J.Hogan’s Peter Pan is still an underrated masterpiece 20 years later. It is an irresistible film that captivates and warms the heart. The film adaptation has certainly stood the test of time, staying true to the original while adding its own flavour to the story. It is full of magic, wonder and heart. It was clearly made by people who loved the origins of the story and explored where they came from, while also digging deep into the text to reshape the character arcs in a fresh and meaningful way. They succeed in capturing J.M.Barrie’s original message, which is that growing up is a natural progression of life, but that doesn’t mean leaving childhood behind entirely. That it is important to maintain a healthy balance between the two: Taking responsibility while appreciating the joys of life. From the vibrant colour palette to the goosebump-inducing music to the solid performances and gorgeous chemistry between Jeremy Sumpter and Rachel Hurd-Wood, my love for this adaptation will never end, no matter how old I am.

[princess-ibri]

Just a fun question. So as we know from the sequel, Wendy has two children and one got to visit Neverland.

What do you think John and Michael are up to? Do you have a next gen storyline for them? If so, what is the relationship like with the Darling cousins?

Hey! Sorry for the wait. I don’t really have a storyline for the other Darling siblings, I figured they just grow up and deal with life (and world wars) as well as they can. But I do have a family tree I’ve been sitting on for a while!

I always thought Alice and Wendy ought to be related to explain their facial similarities in universe, and as I’d already named Alice’s daughter Mary-Jean in my Canon Descendants rewrite it worked perfectly to have her be Mary from Peter Pan.

I decided to make Anita be John’s daughter based on her maiden name being Darling in the live action Cruella movie. And while that movie isn’t canon to the DisneyVerse I did like the thought of tying her into the family.

The Alice in “Alice’s Wonderland Bakery” is said to be the great granddaughter of the og Alice so I made her the daughter of Michael to round all the Darling siblings out (plus try to get her as close as possible to a time when tennis shoes existed).

I knew I wanted to tie in Lizzie from the Tinkerbell movies somehow, and having her be the younger sister of Wendy’s eventual husband felt like a good fit. Maybe the two girls meet later and bond over their mutual magical experiences and that’s how Wendy meets Edward.

I already had a daughter for Jane as part of the Canon Descendants rewrite (and a name for her thanks to the original book), so it made it easy to just tie her into the family tree down to Gwendolyn who appears as a Wendy descendant in the Tinkerbell books.

And that’s the family tree!

I imagine that overall it’s a very loving family that, if not always getting up to magical adventures, definitely get into plenty of mundane ones together

[crystallizsch]

can you tell I like yuuyu..?

HDBSJSJS HI HI YUUYU LIKES YOU TOO ISA 💥💚💥💚💥💚

also that infodump is SO outdated, i've completely scrapped the tinkerbell/frozen crossovers because it's so convoluted dkhsflk

but some of the tidbits about his personality and backstory still stands i just need to rewrite all his backstory and lore eventually into his intro post (which i still need to make ;;;) 😭

anyways uhh i want to take this opportunity to infodump (some of) my new thoughts here (+ some ghost bride tidbits) below the cut!! (some will also just be repeats from the old post)

while Yuuyu is mostly based on Tinkerbell, his personality is also a mix with Peter Pan’s (and his backstory having inspirations from Wendy Darling)

he can be curious, mischievous, and he's a does-what-he-wants type of guy. when he puts his mind into something, there’s no going back and he pretty much is motivated out of spite most of the time.

although he doesn’t vocalize it, he always wants to one-up anyone doing better than him even if it’s a thing that is not in his wheelhouse. Yuuyu hates being seen as inferior in any given case.

Yuuyu tends to be quiet most of the time despite the seemingly competitive personality. he would prefer to make bodily gestures or noises such as whistles, claps, tongue-clicking, snaps, etc.

like Tinkerbell (and Riddle hdjsns) his face absolutely turns visibly red when he’s REALLY mad (fortunately he doesn’t often express big emotions whether positive or negative, his mannerisms are always pretty chill)

(^ this is based on something i saw somewhere that fairies can only deal with one emotion at a time that's why any emotion that Tinkerbell seem very amplified, at least the Peter Pan movie version of Tinkerbell)

being based on Tinkerbell, his talent is tinkering and making stuff out of literally anything. and that means he is pretty proficient with machinery/technology/etc. (omg i just realized he can relate with deuce…)

━━━━━━✦

anyways i STILL want to incorporate a lightning bug familiar with him somehow based on Blaze from one of the tinkerbell movies

from the tinkerbell movies too, tinkerbell had a twin sister who's a winter fairy named Periwinkle; so i was thinking of twin yuu isekai where Yuuyu was transported to NRC while a twst periwinkle was transported to RSA 🤔🤔🤔

(^ but i'm also still debating on whether or not he's going to be a yuu or just another ramshackle student who is also coincidentally named yuu and still incorporating twst periwinkle 🤔)

he has a scar on his nose because of an accident (that i haven't thought of yet)

also i still think if he had unique magic it'll be able to heal any physical wounds/scars no matter how severe (the caveat is that he needs his sibling to cast it)

(^ again based off one of the tinkerbell movies where tinkerbell’s wings were ripped and was only healed bc of magical sisterly wing magic)

ALSO ALSO i know you sent in an ask a while ago for a Phantom Bride Yuuyu so i’m just going to include that here finally hehe—

omg it's so cool to hear that he gives off flirty shoujo vibes, you inspired me….

anyways Yuuyu is incredibly oblivious to romance and flirting 🧍

he comes off as flirtatious and charming quite unintentionally, he thinks he's just being nice -

when Yuuyu DOES attempt to be romantic, it comes off unnatural and weird :(

i'd like to think that he's on the aroace spectrum or that he's demiromantic/demisexual specifically. he NEEDS to be friends with someone first before any romantic pursuit.

^ and i think that would be what he would be preaching to Eliza: that you should have a close bond with someone you want to be with the rest of your life. it'd be a shame if one's standards for a partner is only their physical appearance.

(also forgive me i haven't seen phantom bride for a while so i'm just throwing things at the wall 😭)

[sailorplanet1997]

is it just me who always felt like (even in the first movie) Terence is truthly really the only one who has ALWAYS been there for Tinkerbell even despite the messes she have created since from the very beginning? (speaking for mainly the sprinting thistles in the first movie that nearly ruined spring)

i mean if Terence wasn't even there to convince Tinkerbell otherwise, she would've been left pixie hollow long time ago and she may have ended up like Zarina did going against each fairies just because they haven't been there for her in bad times

i've watched the Peter Pan version for the way how Tinkerbell dealt with a situation and i can tell you guys she was Zarina and Vidia combined so my guesses is she'll go against everybody this way similair to Zarina but worse (Tinkerbell tried to kill Wendy on purpose and she disliked Jane Darlings…i'm sure it has something to do because no one payed attention to her, not even Peter Pan so i can't completely blame her for acting all angry all the times even though for what she did was wrong in the Peter Pan movies)

in "The Lost Treasure" she DID left pixie hollow but thanks to Terence, it kind of convinced her to come back to pixie hollow (in my opinion in this scene Terence was the first person to sacrifice his life for Tinkerbell by flying the whole day for her and the rat fight of course)

maybe he have something that works on Tinkerbell the others don't? (just a thought but Terence thinks stuff through first before he act and he's overly optimistic over a situation which keeps Tink's spirits up that won't work from others on Tinkerbell)

i wished he appeared after this (The Lost Treasure) movie even if he's not the main focus

he's so freaking underrated, he deserves some love because he did lots of good things for Tinkerbell, especially "The Lost Treasure" movie

no matter how many friends she have made over the movies, nothing can beat Terence in my opinion

[doverstar]

Been going through your tags trying to find an explanation (after I found your blog looking up Captain Hook), but I'm not quite sure where the dislike for the D+ 2023 film comes from. Granted, I've little familiarity with the book, and most of the hate I'd seen thrown its way was in regards to its Tinkerbell (for exactly the reasons you'd assume with the internet), but I remember enjoying it, mostly for Peter, Hook, and Tiger Lily. It seems the issue stems from Wendy's character: what, might I ask, was the major change?

So firstly, it was a play, and then it was a book. The book has more detail and is by the same person who created the play, therefore it's more fun to read than the play. The good news is, I don't actually have to go into detail about this because you can just read the book and you'll know what I was talking about. Read the first three chapters, nay, the first few pages, and you will see that Disney+'s film was the farthest cry it could be. If you want some opinions, I'll take the rare opportunity to indulge:

I really don't care about Tink in the 2023 film. Tinker Bell does not have to look any specific way apart from being no bigger than your fist, slightly inclined to an hourglass figure (the only real physical descriptions of her in the original) and making a sound like the sound of bells when she speaks. She can look any way apart from that; it's open to the imagination. She's a fairy. There were some interesting moments dialogue-wise with Hook in the Disney+ film. The rest of the movie is garbage from start to finish. But if you have no familiarity with the source material, you won't understand the hate the film rightly gets (it does not get enough). As for Wendy, my favorite character, this film is not about the same person. This film depicts a girlboss™ in a nightgown. That's not Wendy. Wendy is actually strong, because she's soft, and compassionate, and mother material. But in a movie like the 2023 film, in a Neverland like the one in the 2023 film, there's no room for girls like that. We can only have strong, independent nothings. Little boys like Peter and his friends and dirty vicious men like Hook and his crew need a little girl like the real Wendy. She comes to Neverland and changes start happening. Neverland functions essentially the same way all the time, and then the Darlings show up. Wendy's influence affects changes in Peter and in Hook that directly lead to a final confrontation between the two, which is something that had not happened for who-knows-how-long, and which needed to happen. I could go on. I could talk about Wendy and Peter Pan as a story forever and ever, because it's my favorite, but I don't need to say more because if you just read the book and broaden your horizons, you'll immediately get what people are talking about. Even Walt's first foray into Peter Pan adaptations understood the story better than this live-action mess.

[uhm-hi]

My fairy!Lucifer spiral gave birth to thoughts of a Peter pan! Radioapple AU

Luci as tinkerbelle, Charlie as Peter, alastor as Wendy, husk and nifty as Wendy's siblings, the rest of the hotel residents as the lost boys

Husk and nifty aren't actually related to alastor here, he just brings them to neverland anyways bc he's an asshole like that. He could be a killer in this au too and just didn't wanna leave loose ends + free labor, idk

Charlie runs into some trouble in the mainland and alastor helps her out bc it was convenient for him

She offers to bring him to neverland as thanks, he would just have to help her take care of her hotel(?)/safe haven

Alastor jumps at the chance to go. Seems awfully eager to leave the mainland 🧐 almost like he's running from something... my guy is mad sus

Luci is like Charlie darling I love you but wtf is this creepy thing you brought back home with you and when can u send him back

((like a person's reaction when their darling indoor cat somehow brings a live fucking rat home and the rat is HUGE and MEAN and SUDDENLY FRIENDS WITH THE CAT))

Luci vs alastor it's on sight. Endgame radioapple qpr or romantic partners

No, luci does not romantically love Charlie in this au and neither does alastor, they love Charlie in a parental way. Also lucifer does not die at the end, bc what happened to tink was fucked up and I refuse to think abt it happening to luci

[sbk-zgvlt]

1. I’m honestly impressed about how you two made a whole ass fan fiction which I heavily enjoy with just a simple question

2. I’m hoping onto that Peter Pan idea train

3. This random idea which has less Angst. Basically one day at NRC, all the main cast suddenly get transported into to a story book where they get each character is transported into a different story that best matches there personalities(or in author sense what there character was inspired by), so when the Diasomnia group get transported to the story of sleeping beauty, the can’t find Sebek anywhere. Meanwhile, Sebek is wondering where the hell everyone is and why he’s on a deserted island in the middle of nowhere, where’s there’s apparently pirate ships. (I also imagine sense Sebek is half crocodile fea he has a crocodile tail which can disappear and reappear)

1. We're just that cool

2. I think i need to make a tag for that now...

3. IM SO INSANE ABOUT THIS

They probably messed around with this cursed storybook that Crowley keeps in his office and now they suffer the consequences.

The thing is though that they have to complete each story by their order in the book to actually progress. So, we start with Alice in Wonderland where Heartslabyul is stuck in. The further down the story is in the book (First story = Alice in Wonderland, last story = Sleeping Beauty), the longer the dorm has been inside.

For example, Heartslabyul have only been stuck for a day. Savanaclaw for a week. Octavinelle for a month, etc.

The basics of how this works is that while the first story is being played out, the others haven't even started yet. They're basically on pause. It's like Heartslabyul is trying to finish the story in a day while Savanaclaw is stuck inside the story 1 week before the events actually happen.

When Heartslabyul finish their story, they get transported to the Lion King and meet with Savanaclaw. They finish the story, then meet with Octavinelle in Little Mermaid, so on and so forth.

They eventually reach the Sleeping Beauty, only to be met with a frantic Diasomnia who have been stuck in the story for 5 months (They don't age or something by the way...when they return to the real world they've only been gone for a minute).

Turns out they have NOT seen Sebek at all, and Silver is in a FRENZY. Malleus is starting to embrace his villain role a bit too well in the story, and Lilia has practically reverted back to his old war veteran days.

The cast finally snap them out of it when they're able to finish the story, and Riddle suggests that maybe Sebek wasn't affected by the storybook for some reason? Or they'll be able to find him once they reach the true end of the book.

So, the true characters of thr story finally manifest so Diasomnia can just watch things play out with the rest of the cast as well.

They watch Aurora get married, some get a bit teary-eyed while Leona and Malleus argue over the color of her dress, then all they have to do now is wait for the end of the story-

Everyone gets transported to a room. The Darlings' room. Everyone freaks out because WHAT THE FUCK I THOUGHT WE WERE SUPPOSED TO GO HOME???

Diasomnia are inconsolable because they think that Sebek was left behind in the Sleeping Beauty story and will be stuck there forever and are continuously trying to find ways to go back-

"Uh, you guys aren't Wendy." Everyone turns towards the window. Peter Pan, in all his glory, was sitting by the windowsill with his arms crossed. He thinks that they broke in and is prepared to beat their asses until Jack and Trey explain their situation.

Peter hears about this Sebek guy and goes "Oh! You mean ole' croc? I know where he is!" Diasomnia pause and then immediately start screaming at him to bring them to him.

A few pixie dust later (courtesy of a disgruntled Tinkerbell), they're flying over Neverland. Peter is about to introduce them to the lost boys only for the sound of a cannon to interrupt him.

Pirates are invading the island once more, and the cast are quick to defend themselves. They can't seem to get a single hit on Captain Hook though, mostly because of fairy tale laws or whatever.

They're in a bit of a disadvantage, and even Peter is getting restless-

Tick.

Tock.

Captain Hook goes pale, as well as the rest of his crew. NRC look confused only for a familiar voice to ring throughout the fight: "ARE YOU BACK FOR ANOTHER ROUND, CAPTAIN?" It's Sebek!

Except he looks...different. Not different in the way that Rook now has black hair for whatever reason, nor different by the fact that Lilia's hair is long again.

This Sebek looks older. Not too old, but there are key differences. His usual round ears are now a bit pointed, his hair past his shoulders. He's wearing something wildly different- there's no trace of his uniform.

Instead, an old, raggy pirate's cloak hangs off his shoulders that just serves to make him look more intimidating. And uh the rest of his clothes are the ones that Will Stetson is wearing in his cover of Shinunoga E-wa with black pants LOOK MAN im writing this in my notes app offline.

His magestone is no longer placed in a pen, rather it hangs off his ear as an earring.

The biggest change however is the scales and tail...as well as the ticking face of a clock that replaces his right eye.

Hook's crew are quick to retreat, not before Sebek can suddenly jump into their ship though. The cast watch Sebek raise Hook up by the scruff of his neck, and with a flick of his wrist, his claws retract.

"P-please!" Hook pleads. "Have mercy!" Sebek smiles. "I'm true to my word, Captain." And promptly slices his hand off.

He jumps off the ship with Hook's hand, Peter quick to catch him as they ignore Hook's frantic screams. Blood trickles down his claws, and once they reach solid ground, Peter puts Sebek down.

Sebek throws the hand into the sand, and with a single kick, sends it flying into the ocean. Right on time, a crocodile jumps from the water and catches it into its mouth, before retreating back into the water.

"That was so cool!" Peter exclaims from behind him with childlike wonder. Sebek doesn't react, only sighing, "HUMAN, JUST BECAUSE IVE BEEN HERE FOR A YEAR DOESNT MEAN ILL BE HERE FOREVER. SOONER OR LATER, YOU WILL NEED TO FACE THE CAPTAIN BY YOURSE-"

He turns around to continue to berate Peter, only to pause when he sees the mildly injured forms of the NRC cast.

"...PETER WHAT THE FUCK"

[kawaiichibiart]

....how many fairy tales/stories has PRSK used for card sets?

Because we've got:

Wonder Magical Showtime! - Alice in Wonderland (with Tsukasa being the King of Smiles/Diamonds as opposed to King of Hearts, Emu is the White Rabbit, KAITO is the Cheshire Cat, Nene is probably the Caterpillar, Rin is the Mad Hatter, I believe in promotional art Miku is revealed to be Alice, who knows who/what Rui would have been assigned if he got a card)

Amidst a Dream, Towards the Shining Stars - Peter Pan (Emu is Peter Pan, Len is Tinkerbell, Tsukasa is Wendy Darling, Rui is John Darling and Nene is Michael Darling)

Mirage of Light - Snow White (and like, they're all Snow White, but I think it's very obvious that Mafuyu is the one who's meant to truly be Snow White, but it's still interesting to see how everyone else lines up as Snow White)

Mermaid Admiration - the Little Mermaid (Nene is the Little Mermaid, Ariel if you want to make things easier, Rui is the Sea Witch (or Ursula), if we go with the original version, Emu and Luka would be Nene's sisters, but yeah they're also mermaids, not sure who KAITO would be, maybe Triton, maybe a merman, maybe a third option that hasn't crossed my mind, and while in their show, Tsukasa was a merman, had he had a card, I think him being a human would make things more interesting, note: he doesn't have to be the prince)

Screaming?! Welcome to the Forest of Wolves - Mix: Little Red Riding Hood (Kohane as Little Red Riding Hood, Shiho as the Big Bad Wolf and Haruka as the Huntsman) Mary Had a Little Lamb (Rin, I honestly can't connect her or Minori to LRRH's story? So I figured they're both different characters from different stories), Three Billy Goat's Gruff (Minori)

[vanishcs]

grace van patten. demi-woman. she/they. 27/100. ⸻ king roberon cole welcomes winnie durst to fabletown—or, as they were once known, wendy darling from peter pan. before the magic mirror, they come glamoured in the mirage of a book always tucked under her arm, a blood stained white linen dress, blurred vision as dreams bleed into reality, trying to forget bits that you remember while clamoring to remember things you have forgotten, a gentle smile fading, clinging to innocence that was never really yours, ribbon held hair, moonlight shining through the window, twinkling dreams of pixie dust, early morning sunrises & a head thrown back in laughter. the tale from which they hail exalted their imagination and compassion, but decried their fanciful and insecure nature in equal measure. no matter; this time, they shall write their own. in accordance with the fabletown compact, they are granted amnesty for any and all transgressions, even that which is little known: young wendy left neverland one time prior to the exodus, to “kill” the identity of wendy darling in order stay in neverland forever.

the forever child ( tw neglect & death mentions ) ;

the beginning of wendy's life was anything but darling. born to parents who were not overly concerned about her well-being. leaving the child alone for long periods of time with the family dog as a guardian and playmate. one would think that if they didn't particularly care about their first child, they wouldn't have anymore, but the darlings hadn't quite learned that lesson. along came john and michael. wendy as the eldest child in the home ( most of the time the oldest human ) was forced into a caretaking role they never wanted.

the child was much happier frolicking about with their peers, skinned knees, blotchy face from exertion, giggling, chasing, catching, playing. and boy did she do as much of that as possible. keeping themself and their brothers outside playing until the darkness forced them into their home. a delicate balancing act between childhood innocence and adult responsibilities. it was easy for her to slip inside her own mind, create fantastical stories to distract from the nightmare of her reality. reciting those tales to their brothers. keeping the pair shrouded in the unblemished childlike wonder that she'd been chasing ever since she could remember.

neverland unlocked the fierceness of her craving. peter gave her a glimpse at a future that would allow wendy to be nothing but the wild child they had had to subdue in the face of survival. it was tinkerbell who wormed into her skin. at first there was a feeling of admiration blossoming, then it turned into something she couldn't articulate. the fairy was free in a way she was not, mirrored something possibly feral, something that wendy had to suppress. though old habits are hard to kill. there was a fraction of themself, the prior forced maturity gnawing to come out in the name of caring for the inhabitants of neverland. the weight of all she'd left behind pressed firmly on her shoulders. then came the ribbon.

a gift that wendy tied to herself easly. a symbol of friendship, of connection, something keeping her tethered to neverland. before she could even notice, before she could even miss it, the memories of home changed from the dirty flat full of dust and dog hair to the glittering water and vast swaths of wild land. there was less and less darling, leaving just wendy in their place. it felt like a shadow hovering over her, leaving a sour taste in her mouth. it had to be severed.

so that's what they did. returned home to leave a bloody scene in the bed that used to hold all her wildest dreams. wendy darling was dead and gone. the only evidence of life disappearing into the night. the gash on their arm healed into something jagged and ugly, the only solid memory of the evening. their leaving of neverland was not by choice. she attempted to survive the chaos, though the home they had made was ripped from their hands and survival was in her dna. wendy slipped through to safety at the last possible chance only to meet the adulthood she'd spilt blood to avoid.

the growing up ;

split from her siblings and the refuge she'd made, she shed the name and the ribbon that connected them to the happiness and freedom she'd never feel again. to the person she lost, though continued to echo in her mind. the ribbon is there though, always with them, never worn. a seeming missing piece that didn't quite fit right anymore, not where winnie found herself at least. they work since they must and fill their free time by consuming stories, reminiscing on the days in neverland, and clinging to the things that remind her of the simpler times. sleep is evasive and far and between. hanging on by a thread is a lot harder than hanging on by a ribbon.

some of her favorite adult things ? liquor mostly. giving her the bubbly and weightless feeling that was nearly impossible to replicate. bringing back a time where she felt unburdened. however fleeting it had been. over indulging only on occasion, the hangover always slamming them with reality in the morning. the constant reminder that her innocence is gone forever - as if she ever really had it. the freedom of choice, even if it's to make the wrong ones. which winnie was known to do here and there. books. neverland didn't have any. money. is a cool thing too, even though she doesn't have all that much. she's proved herself a survivor so far.

[thatpunkmaximoff]

Story Rating: 5/5 Stars Spice Level: 3.5/5 Peppers

Book one of four; Inspired by Peter Pan and Wendy, The Never King showcases Peter Pan like never before. Dark and broody and wanting something of his that’s been taken, he kidnaps Darling women on their 18th birthday, only to return them with broken minds.

Only, this particular Darling- Winnie- is not like the others and proves it by.. well, I won’t mention spoilers.

But if you’re interested in a decently smutty dark romance, this book is perfect! And definitely have book two ready to go because there is a cliffhanger.

I also have a feeling we’re gonna learn more about Vane given the title of the second book.

* Winnie Darling; love the name. Oh, and we start off right away with mediocre sex. It’s crazy to hear about the Darking women who disappear on their 18th birthday, only to return broken/crazy. Wendy is the great grandmother. Meredith is the mom’s name. Enter Peter Pan who seems hot af. Winnie willingly goes with Peter.

* Peter Pan; bad guy? The Lost Boys; Vane, twins Kas and Bash. Vane likes to make Darlings cry; Kas is a bleeding heart; Bash most likely to fuck Winnie. One rule: don’t fuck the Darlings because fucking Darlings is what got them into this mess.

* Winnie learns the twins are the nice ones, while Peter and Vane are the mean ones. Vane has some type of magic that with just a look, he can make you feel terror like no other.

* Vane, Kas, and Bash are finding it difficult to not fuck the Darling. She moans at the taste of food and Vane’s eyes go black, something about his shadow? Cherry pops up, a woman who has the biggest crush on Vane and wants his attention.

* Sun can kill Peter; pirates are hunting him; magic is waning. What did the Darlings and Tink do?! So Vane looks like a vampire when his shadow takes over.

* Winnie decides Kas might be a weak link because he keeps staring at her body, so she decides she’s gonna fuck him to get him on her side lol.

* Kas and Bash are fae. Fucking a Lost Boy does pan out for Winnie.

* Welp. Bash broke the rule. He fucked Winnie 😂 Peter walks in and makes Bash continue; Bash cums, but just as Winnie is about to cum, Peter pulls her off of him. Now, she’s getting herself off as Peter watches. He then fingerbangs her, reminds her they don’t fuck Darlings, and leaves.

* Winnie befriends Cherry. She talks. A lot. Gets to talking about Hook and slips up, referring to him as “my” before catching herself. Could she be a spy?

* The twins admit to gutting their father which earned them banishment.

* What the fuck is Brownie? Tilly is the twins’s sister, queen of the fae. She wants Neverland under her rule so she’s sabotaging Peter Pan. Peter Pan killed tinker bell. Tilly plans to go against Peter, possibly Hook too.

* Winnie teases Vane. He tries to scare her while pleasuring her, but she’s unruffled. He’s annoyed she’s not scared more. Winnie is trying to get it on with a no-name Lost Boy? Peter is not going to like this.

* “Three, two, one. One, two, three. Better watch out: Peter Pan is going to murder thee.”

* Pan fucks Winnie. Then Bash and Kas fuck her at the same time. Vane spits in her mouth and she gets pissed.

* Vane is known as the Dark One. Peter and Vane kill two of Hook’s pirates.

* Bash and Kas are fae princes.

* Winnie tries to fuck Vane; he denies her.

* The Queen needs to dig into the memories. Why do I get the feeling Tilly made the Darlings mad on purpose?

* So the boys promised Merry, nicknames for Winnie’s mom, that she wouldn’t go insane? And then she did? And wtf, the Death Shadow intervened in the Queen “looking” through Winnie’s memories?!

* Wow. Tinkerbell was in love with Peter, but Peter loved a Darling. So she took his shadow. Bitch.

* Tink was the twin’s mother.

* Winnie helps Peter get his shadow back. They kill the Brownie. Winnie asks to go back to Neverland because she has a feeling Queen Tilly is plotting against Peter and wants to help him.

* Wait, what? Two shadows?!

[ramblings-of-a-mad-cat]

”I have an unusual amount of analysis to offer about a handful of specific children's stories turned musicals”

I would love to hear that analysis

You have opened a floodgate, and there is no putting a stopper in it now.

So our version of Peter Pan takes aspects from multiple adaptations but also pulls stuff right out of the original book. There's a great scene of Mrs. Darling "combing her children's thoughts" as they're asleep before she leaves for the dinner party, and we have that. It's hard to explain but basically the book says that all mothers clean out their children's minds of the bad thoughts like they might clean out their rooms. And the Darling kids are all dreaming of things they'll see in Neverland. It's kind of suggesting that Neverland manifests differently to everyone who goes there, and stuff like the Pirates and the Indians are only there because the kids dreamed about them.

But we directly defy stuff from the book as well. The book (and the Broadway show) are actually quite sad in a lot of ways because Peter is a tragic character. He will never grow up, but that comes with implications that the full story does not ignore. He never learns any lessons or grows as a person because that means growing up, and he will never do it. He refuses. It's why he can't even conceptualize Wendy in the romantic way, (and versions that have him reciprocate her feelings misunderstand him tbh) because that's an "older kid" thing, and "older kids" are starting to...say it with me...grow up. Plus, he needs Wendy to be his mother. Like, he needs that specifically. This gets more into his canon backstory but what Peter wants more desperately than anything is a mother. She just can't be a grownup, because he hates grown-ups, doesn't trust them.

Sorry, I got off topic. One thing we directly changed from the book is that in the original story, Tinkerbell has died by the time Peter returns for Wendy in her adulthood, and Peter has already forgotten about Tink. We specifically have Tink come with him, to see adult Wendy and fly away with Jane, because you can't have the literal climax of the stage play (or what I consider the climax) be about saving Tinkerbell's life and then not have her be alive in the epilogue. Screw that. We have Peter fly off with Jane, leaving Tinkerbell to share the final bit of dialogue with Wendy. Given where their relationship started and how much Wendy has grown since then, it's actually quite beautiful. "You'll never believe it, but...I actually missed you."

It's perfect because...potentially hot take here...Peter is not the main character. Wendy is. I know the story is named for Peter, but so what? The Wizard of Oz isn't named for Dorothy. Peter is an important character, to be sure. He's a main character, and the lead in the stage play. But this isn't his story. It's Wendy's. We don't go to Neverland until she decides to go, and once she decides to leave, we go with her. Wendy is the one who goes through an actual arc. She ends up in a different place by the end of the story. Peter, by his very nature, does not change. He's a static character. Which is not a criticism, the whole point and the whole tragedy of Peter is this unwillingness to grow up, to the point where...this is hard to explain, but Peter more or less isn't completely human anymore. He is a "betwinxt and between" basically he's part fairy.

[filmmakerdreamst]

Peter Pan (2003) officially turns 20!

Peter Pan is a live-action fantasy adventure film directed by P.J.Hogan that reimagines the classic story of Peter and Wendy. The screenplay was written by P. J. Hogan and Michael Goldenberg and was released in cinemas in December 2003. The screenplay is based on the 1904 play Peter Pan, or The Boy Who Wouldn’t Grow Up and the classic novel Peter Pan by J.M.Barrie, which was originally published under the title Peter and Wendy.

The film tells the story of a young Edwardian girl, Wendy Darling (Rachel Hurd-Wood) and her two younger brothers John and Michael. On the night she is told she must grow up, a wild, fairy-like boy called Peter Pan (Jeremy Sumpter) flies into her room with his high-maintenance fairy Tinkerbell. When he learns that she tells stories, he whisks Wendy and her two brothers away to a magical Island called Neverland — where you supposedly don’t “grow up” — so that she can mother his henchmen, the Lost Boys. There she fights pirates led by the evil Captain Hook (Jason Isaacs), meets mermaids, dances with fairies, falls in love and grows up...

I have strong family connections tied to Peter and Wendy and J.M.Barrie. My great, great uncle Nico was one of Sylvia Llewelyn Davies’ sons — who was adopted by the writer J.M.Barrie (on whom Peter Pan is based). Nico’s daughter Laura — my cousin — who I first met a few years ago, told me that she was flown to Australia for the filming of P.J. Hogan’s Peter Pan because she was J.M.Barrie’s goddaughter. She told me that she was thrilled with the cast, especially Jason Isaacs, who played Captain Hook and Mr Darling. She also mentioned that Jeremy Sumpter, who played Peter Pan, was a lovely boy. However, she said she was very surprised and sad that the film wasn’t a big success as she really liked what they did with the story. I have loved the fairytale of Peter Pan from a young age, and learning that I am literally part of the family that inspired the story was very exciting and I’ve only begun to internalise it more as I’ve grown older.

When I was in my mid-twenties, I was diagnosed with a high level of Autism. One of my main symptoms was labelled “ageless”, which in simple terms means that one half of me is still a child that I can’t mentally leave behind. I can’t do many things that most adults can do, such as pay bills, drive a car, look after my own well being etc. I flap my hands when I get excited. I bounce. I sometimes speak in a baby voice. I overcommit to things I enjoy. I admit that it was hard to come to terms with the diagnosis when I first received it. But over time, I’ve come to believe that the two can coexist in a healthy way. I believe that I am an adult who is able to develop and grow while still carrying the child within me, and that this is not seen as a bad thing. I think Peter and Wendy can be seen as a reflection of that.

I was first introduced to P.J. Hogan’s Peter Pan a few years after it was released (I was maybe nine or ten years old), and I absolutely loved it. It wasn’t only one of my favourite film adaptations, but one of my favourite movies of all time. What surprised me most about the film at that age was how dark and gruesome it was, and full of this underlying sexual tension that I hadn’t expected at all from Peter Pan. Even today, this film still has a special place in my heart. It is made with so much passion and love for the original text that I can automatically put myself back into the story. After watching the film again as an adult, I almost immediately opened my copy of Peter and Wendy and started reading. I would even go so far as to say that I prefer the film to the book. However, part of me wishes that the age rating had been set much higher, as the dark and gruesome moments were some of the strongest parts of the film adaptation. This is possibly why some critics and viewers had difficulty categorising the film at the time.

However, I often consider P.J.Hogan’s Peter Pan to be the same equivalent as Joe Wright’s Pride and Prejudice. (which came out a few years later in 2005, starring Keira Knightley and Matthew Macfadyen). The film moves at the same dreamlike pace. It is light, dark, colourful and deeply romantic.

I also often prefer P.J.Hogan’s Peter Pan to the 1953 Disney Animation of the same name, even though it’s the version I grew up with and liked. I find it much less straightforward and innocent. Also, the 2003 film is much closer to the original source material, which I loved reading as a teenager, and to J.M.Barrie’s original vision. The film manages to reflect the same intellectual subtext and depth of the novel while retaining the whimsy and magic.

Magical Realism

Peter Pan was a perfect blend of fantasy and realism. A lot of media these days focus too much on “realism” and make their sets and CGI look bland and washed out. It’s a common myth these days that no one likes whimsy anymore; it’s somehow seen as too childish. As a result, much of the magic of fantasy is lost. But in this Peter Pan, a lot of colour was used in the set design and cinematography. Everything was so brightly and colourfully lit. Most fantasy films these days, including the new live-action adaptation of Peter Pan and Wendy on Disney+, are all so gloomy and dark. You almost have to light up the screen to make out the actors’ facial expressions or what’s happening in the scene. But this film understands that a viewer who watches fantasy wants to be swept away, but also wants a certain amount of believability. Although the film contained a good amount of darkness, it did not shy away from being cartoonish either (which I think was partly inspired by the Disney animation), i.e. characters blushing or bouncing on the clouds.

The design of Neverland was breathtaking. I think the CGI, although criticised by some, made the island and creatures look more dreamy and fairytale-like. It was a good combination of CGI for the landscapes and real backdrops for the jungle, so there was enough magic and believability to transport the viewer into the story. A bright colour palette was used for the landscapes, while down-to-earth colours such as browns and greens were used on the ground, such as in “The Lost Boys Hide” under the tree, to give a sense of realism. The costume department also reflected this, from the majestic reds and blacks of the pirates, to the earthly colours of blue and red for the Native Americans, to the natural greens and browns of the Lost boys. I noticed that the colours in Neverland were used as a contrast to the Edwardian London back home, which is realistic but dull compared to the island.

One aspect I liked was that the lighting on Neverland always changed depending on the mood of the scene- unlike the naturalistic lighting on Earth. It was almost as if the island was a living being. For example, when there was a fight on the ship, the lighting was red. When Peter took Wendy to the mermaids, who were scary and frightening, the lighting was dark and blue. This created a surrealistic atmosphere, almost like a fever dream or a kind of nightmare.

Sometimes the environment changed depending on Peter Pan’s mood in the respective scene. I particularly liked how Peter Pan influenced the weather on Neverland. Just his mere presence when he flew to the island changed the entire atmosphere in an instant. His feelings also determined whether it was summer or winter. In other words, its suggested in the film that the longer he has been there, the more the island has become a part of him, so that he can no longer leave it. It’s almost as if the island has transformed him into a magical being.

The exuberant score by James Newton Howard: I’ll never forget that. I think that was one of the first movies I saw where I actively noticed the music because it was so brilliant. Even today, the “Flying” soundtrack still gives me goosebumps. It perfectly encapsulates the whimsy, joy and imagination of Peter and Wendy. I loved that there were always different variations. One of my favourite pieces from the movie is ‘Fairy Dance’, which starts off cheerfully and moves up and down depending on the characters’ conflict/what they’re saying in the scene.

Cast

The cast of this film adaptation was magnificent. The look of all the actors not only matched the book description, but also the mood, especially with the Darling family. One of the standouts was Olivia Williams as Mrs Darling. She captured the gentleness of the character perfectly. I also loved the new addition of Aunt Millicent, played by Lynn Redgrave. She fitted into the story so well that I was surprised not to find her in the novel. She had the perfect amount of ridiculousness and hilarity that suited J.M.Barrie’s style.

One particular member of the cast we can probably all agree on that was perfect, was Jason Isaacs, who played both Wendy’s father Mr Darling and Captain Hook. He was certainly a star in this film for sure. I just can not think of anyone who could play him better, especially in a live-action film adaptation. He was particularly good in the role of Captain Hook. When I first saw the film as a child, I did not know that Captain Hook and Mr Darling were played by the same person until my dad pointed it out to me because he was so good. I loved how they portrayed Wendy’s dad as shy and reserved, as opposed to Captain Hook who was flamboyant and sinister. Mirror versions of each other in different realities — that’s a common theme throughout the film. As Captain Hook, Jason Isaacs perfectly captured the essence of viciousness, deviousness and brutality that was necessary for the character. But also the deep loneliness and frustration behind it all. I have seen a quote that was supposedly cut from the film (and never should have been) that provides so much context for his hatred of Peter Pan:

“Imagine a lion in a cage and into that cage flies a butterfly. If the lion was free, it would pay no heed to such creature. But the lion is not free…and so the butterfly drives him slowly insane.” — Captain Hook

They did a really good job of showing how Peter Pan and Captain Hook are mirror images of each other. Peter Pan is a child who secretly wants to be an adult, while Captain Hook is an adult who secretly wants to be a child. Both fight each other for different reasons, but the goal is the same. For example, there is a great scene towards the end where Captain Hook uses his wits to defeat Peter in a fight. Here it becomes clear that there is deep symbolism for the inevitability of adulthood and the loss of childhood. Jason Isaacs really showed off his acting talent here. I liked that he wasn’t portrayed as a “dumb villain”, which he easily could have been.

There were also some great performances among the adults. Most notable was Richard Briers as the ‘pirate’’ Smee. But the child actors, especially the lost boys, really held the movie together. Their solid performances made it so believable that the island was ruled by children. I loved Theodore Chester as Slightly. He was very charming and funny in that role.

Another member of the cast I thought was brilliant was Carsen Grey, an indigenous actress of Haida descent, who played Princess Tiger Lily. I liked that they let her speak her ancestral language, Mohican, in this film. Although this film came out in the early 2000s, it is the only version of Peter and Wendy in which Native Americans are neither erased nor white-washed even though the representation is far from great. Considering how they’re treated in the novel, it’s perhaps for the best overall that they limited some of their scenes. However, I liked how firey she was in this adaptation and not the damsel in distress she was portrayed as in the Disney animation. I think it was a wise decision to cut the infatuation she had with Peter Pan, as it was really just one line in the book that would have added unnecessary drama, and all in all, it would have fallen short if all the female characters were jealous of each other.

They also downplayed Tinkerbell’s jealousy in this regard, portraying it more as her trying to protect Peter Pan’s youth from romantic advances, as hinted at in the novel, and also being sad that Wendy is attracting all of Peter Pan’s attention. Ludivine Sagnier has, in my opinion, succeeded well in making Tinkerbell equally repulsive and endearing, as befits the character.

Wendy Darling

Rachel Hurd-Wood was the perfect cast for the role of Wendy Darling. I was actually surprised to learn that this was her first film role ever, because she was a natural. She effortlessly possessed the same caring nature and charm that makes Wendy so endearing. She is exactly how I imagine the character when I read the story. When people talk about Peter and Wendy, they always mention Tinkerbell, Pan or Hook, but personally I am always drawn to Wendy. She is the real heroine of the story. After all, she was the main reason for Peter to bring her and her brothers to Neverland.

What always amazes me about Wendy’s role in the story is the fact that Wendy literally doesn’t spend much time being a “child” in the time she spends in Neverland. When she’s not escaping death at the hands of mermaids or pirates, she acts as a mother to the ‘lost boys’ and her brothers. She asks herself what she really wants from life. In comparison, she was allowed to behave more like a child at home in Edwardian London. Neverland is not a place where you never grow up. It’s the place where she chooses to grow up. Many people have described Neverland as a manifestation of Wendy’s subconscious as a result of trauma, and I’ve never found that to be more true in this adaptation.

One of the reasons why I think P.J. Hogan’s Peter Pan is the best film adaptation of the novel is the fact that the film revolves around Wendy’s coming of age. I loved that they expanded on her love of storytelling and also gave her a tomboyish streak. Instead of just being on the sidelines, she’s able to get involved and fight pirates while retaining many of her feminine traits such as her maternal instincts and romantic feelings for Peter. She makes mistakes and sometimes gets dragged into things she knows she shouldn’t do. But in the end, she triumphs.

In many film adaptations of Peter and Wendy that I have seen, Wendy is either only present in passing or not at all. Characters like Peter Pan, Captain Hook and Tinkerbell always take centre stage, which I think is a strange decision as they are part of Wendy’s story and not the other way around. Peter Pan is meant to metaphorically represent the childhood she does not want to give up (which is why the character is always played by a woman in the original play, as he is a mirror image of Wendy). And Captain Hook (J.M.Barrie also wanted him to be played by the same actor as Mr Darling) represents the dark side of her father, or rather what she imagines adulthood to be. This is particularly emphasised in this film adaptation because he is an important factor in her being told to grow up. The father, the concept of adulthood, and Peter Pan, her childhood, are at constant war with each other.

“You’re not supposed to be like Peter, who kept every good and bad aspect of being a child and can’t tell right from wrong. You’re not supposed to be Hook, either. He let go of everything childish and loving about him and became bitter and evil..You’re supposed to fall in the middle, to hold onto the things about childhood that make it beautiful — the wonder, the imagination, the innocence — while still growing up and learning morality and responsibility. You’re not supposed to be Hook. You’re not supposed to be Peter Pan. You’re supposed to be Wendy Darling.” — maybe-this-time

The 2023 live-action film Peter Pan and Wendy took a different approach, making Wendy a kind of powerhouse who always saved the day and outshone Peter Pan overall. In my opinion, the 2003 film adaptation emphasised very well that Wendy really is the yin and yang. She’s allowed to be romantic, be rescued by others and at the same time determine her own destiny and stand up for herself. Because that’s what her journey in the adaptation is all about. She is pressured by all the adults in her life to grow up. She allows herself to be seduced with the prospect of an eternal childhood by Peter Pan. Then she realises that it is not self-fulfilling. She is tempted by Captain Hook with the concept of adulthood. And finally, she finds a balance between these two extremes on her own terms. By the end of the film, Wendy has made her peace with growing up while still remaining a child at heart. That requires a certain mental strength that we should all strive for.

Peter Pan and Wendy Darling

In most adaptations of Peter and Wendy, such as Hook and Syfy’s Neverland, the focus is on the title character Peter. In the more recent film adaptation Peter Pan and Wendy, the focus is on Wendy. This film adaptation of Peter and Wendy, on the other hand, sticks more closely to the original source material, as the story focuses on Peter and Wendy’s relationship. This is perhaps the reason why I always hesitate when I watch other adaptations, because these two characters are supposed to go together. It’s definitely a relationship that can be portrayed in all sorts of ways because they are symbolically the same person.

Although there is no romance between Peter and Wendy in either the original novel or the play, Wendy quickly develops romantic feelings for Peter which, as a prepubescent child, he does not consciously reciprocate as he has no concept of love other than that of a mother’s. Although Peter cares deeply for her, he ultimately only longs for her to be the maternal figure that is missing in his life. One could go into the symbolism that Peter and Wendy are one and the same, and that this is an expression of Wendy learning to love herself. But in a literal sense, J.M.Barrie had unintentionally created this very strong potential between the two characters. And I personally feel if you’re going to make an adaptation of Peter and Wendy that potential needs to be explored in some way, even if it’s not necessarily romantic.

Hogan recognised this potential and developed the romantic elements, e.g. ‘the “thimble” from the novel, into a very real and tangible plot. In other adaptations, Peter and Wendy’s relationship is rather one-sided. But in P.J. Hogan’s film adaptation, however, it is not at all. Over the course of the film, Peter and Wendy fall deeply in love with each other.

Rachel Hurd-Wood and Jeremy Sumpter had a remarkable on-screen chemistry for young actors, which helped give the adaptation its own identity. Whenever they interacted on screen as Peter and Wendy, it was — like the glittering pixie dust of Tinkerbell — simply magical. The off-screen chemistry between the two definitely helped make the romance so believable as well. When I was younger, I didn’t like romantic subplots in family films. I personally found that they clogged up the main plot because the “romance” tended to be very one-dimensional- but Peter and Wendy in the 2003 film version were simply enchanting.

In the original novel, J.M.Barrie alludes to the possibility of a romance between the two. In the film adaptation, they go all out. Their love story was written so beautifully and profoundly, while staying true to the original text and J.M.Barrie’s themes. This made the conflict hinted at in the novel of “staying in Neverland with Peter or growing up on Earth with Wendy” even more poignant and relevant, because in reality there was only ever one option. They couldn’t find a way to have both. That made the ending even more “heartbreaking” for me as a child, because even though they had the chance to be happy together, she couldn’t give up on growing up to stay. And he couldn’t give up being a child to leave, even though it was a natural progression for him.

Peter Pan

Jeremy Sumpter delivered a fantastic performance as Peter Pan. Not only did he perfectly match the illustrations, but he also managed to perfectly capture the essence of the charismatic, mischievous little boy from the novel. What’s more, of all the versions I have seen so far, he is by far the most accurate, right down to the clothes made of skeleton leaves, the dirty fingernails, the feral mannerisms, the traumatised soul behind the charm and the downright creepy insinuations.

By today’s standards, you could almost take Peter Pan for a grown man who consciously decides not to behave like this. However, when I watch the film again as an adult, I can now understand why he has reservations about growing up in Edwardian England and would rather remain a “child” in Neverland forever. As Peter says in the film, “Would they send me to school? And then to an office?” I feel like most of us today have so many choices as we get older, but back then it was much more limited. The choices were very restricted in that “heterosexist” environment. You could only be a certain thing, and it was much harder to hold on to the pleasures of life. I can now also understand the initial reactions of Michael and John to Peter: He must have seemed scandalous to people at the time. His bright colours, his inappropriate clothing and his behaviour are repulsive to the boys, but Wendy is immediately fascinated and attracted. I think it was a deliberate choice that he is the only character with an American accent to set him apart from the rest of the cast; to emphasise the wildness of the character and his non-conformity to the people of Edwardian London.

Another small aspect I liked was the suggestion that the Lost Boys, although they lived with Peter and obeyed his commands, lived in constant fear of him and did not worship him as in other adaptations. (A fear that is justified as Peter tries to kill them more than once in the film). What the 2003 film adaptation perfectly captured about Peter’s character was: how terrible of a person he really is. Peter Pan is a hero when he goes on adventures and fights pirates. You could argue — via the quote “Leave Hook to me” (which Peter says to her in the film) — that Peter is Wendy’s split self who can fight her father (Captain Hook) for her, just like antibodies do with germs when we can’t handle them ourselves.

However, when it comes to understanding emotions, caring about others, even his henchmen, the Lost Boys, and doing anything that inconveniences him, Peter Pan is possibly as bad as Captain Hook. This makes Wendy’s decision to leave him all the more powerful. Although she was initially seduced by his adventurous life, she soon realises that his “life” of joy and adventure is not fulfilling at all. Because in reality, there is no real joy. There is no real adventure. In reality, his life is empty because it is not earned. In addition, she realises that she is gradually losing her memory of the outside world, including her parents (a sign that she is “slowly awakening from the dream”)”. This leads Wendy to realise that she wants more than what he can give her in Neverland (e.g. romantic love) and decides to leave. Being alive means feeling, accepting and growing. However, as long as Peter remains a boy, he can never truly be alive. Peter Pan conveyed this important message, whereas earlier film adaptations, including the Disney animation, did not.

One of the reasons why good adaptations of Peter and Wendy are so hard to find, especially in this day and age, is not only because they adapt a performative story that exists in layers of subtext. They also work with a protagonist who doesn’t change. Who doesn’t develop in any way, neither negatively nor positively. Not even just physically, but also mentally. (Even Eli from Let the Right One In, the child vampire, changes in the course of the story). Peter Pan is ultimately there to serve someone else’s story. It works in a fairy tale format. But it doesn’t usually translate very well to the screen because it often leads to one-dimensional storytelling. Even if it seems so natural, it doesn’t come naturally.

However, this adaptation allows Peter Pan to grow. The writers expanded on the small aspect from the book, which is the moment when Wendy enters Peter’s life; he begins to feel emotions. Not just love. But anger. Fear. Sadness. Pain. Disgust. And above all: self-awareness. Almost like a version of puberty in condensed time, as if the change suddenly caught up with his body. When Wendy brings this up, Peter immediately rejects it out of fear. I think most of us can all relate to this when we were in the midst of growing into a young adult. We experience feelings that are scary and new, that we can’t yet fully understand or even want to. For Peter Pan, falling in love is exactly what he is afraid of: growing up and no longer being a child. This adds to an interesting conflict that arises between the two when she asks him to leave with her.

“The thing about Peter Pan is, he’s a coward. Had the chance of a lifetime and he bottled it. Just fucked off back to Neverland. All alone, forever he was, by his own hand. Poor old Wendy, she had to grow old without him.” — Skins, 6x07 “Alo”

In the original novel, the reason Wendy can’t take Peter Pan with her (apart from the fact that he refuses to grow up) is the same reason Lyra in His Dark Materials can’t take Pan — the animal manifestation of her soul — on the boat to the land of the dead. She has to split in order to grow up and leave a part of herself behind. She can’t keep both in order to move on. But that does not mean I always agree with the ending either. In which Peter remains a child and takes Wendy’s descendants to Neverland and back to look after him. It leaves an icky aftertaste, but at least it fits in with the story J.M.Barrie wanted to tell.

Even though the adaptation conveys the same message, that Peter Pan is the manifestation of Wendy’s youth, even to the end. In this version of Peter Pan, that is no longer the case. By the end of the film, the way he holds himself is different. The way he looks wistfully through the open window and solemnly says, “To live would be an awfully big adventure,” : a sign of self-awareness, while Wendy happily reunites with her family. So much so that Tinkerbell has to pull him by the hair to stop him from joining them and reconsidering his decision. Peter is now old enough to know that he loves Wendy. Maybe he’s also mature enough to know what he’s missing, but he knows he can’t have her the way he wants, so he does the most selfless thing he’s ever done in the whole film by letting her go.

There is no such conflict at the end of the 1953 Disney animated film. Peter Pan is described by Wendy as “wonderful”. In reality, everyone else gets their happy ending, except him, because he deliberately chooses not to. Peter Pan very much turns himself into a tragic figure because he is afraid of the most natural thing in the world. He is afraid of life. And I feel like this version of the story knew that and expressed it strongly, which makes me conflicted now as an adult. I’ve seen endings like this before, where two people fall in love but do not end up together because they grow apart or they are both interested in different things, and it’s very important to reach those points in different ways. It very much reflects real life and is also reminiscent of first love. How that love never really fades. It reminds you of simple times, even when you’ve grown up and moved on. That a part of you is still at that age when you look back on it. These endings happen because people grow — which Peter Pan does not.

“Peter in the books lives in oblivious tragedy. He may suspect that he’s not fully happy, but he tends to forget about it… yet this Peter doesn’t… Wendy leaving him and growing up to be a wife of another man is his unhappy thought…It’s the loss of innocence since Peter could not forget this…It’s the process of growing up…all but confirms that Peter’s character arc in the film is one of accepting the fact he too must grow up to be happy.” — @rex-shadao

And I think that’s the real reason why his character is both the strongest and the weakest part of the adaptation. The writers didn’t make it clear enough that Peter Pan forgets in their version of the character. In the novel, Peter Pan forgets everything automatically, which is why he can exist in this limbo of childhood and not go mad. However, as mentioned earlier, this version of Peter Pan is old enough to remember and, more importantly, to feel. Even though he is the closest to J.M. Barrie’s original vision, unlike his counterpart in the book, he is capable of evolving. That’s why the ending sometimes feels strange to me as an adult. It was hard to say why I had a strange feeling at first, but I realised that a lot of my mixed feelings stemmed from having seen the film adaptation fresh after reading the novel. Since Peter Pan fully reciprocates Wendy’s love in this version, he ends up being a different character than in the book, which is why I now disagree with them keeping the original ending instead of having him grow up with Wendy. It would symbolise that childhood can co-exist with adulthood, that you don’t have to leave a part of yourself behind. That you can be your true and complete self if you find the balance between the two extremes.

The original ending still works however, in all its bittersweetness. I know what it means and understand what it stands for. Wendy basically says goodbye to her childhood and promises never to forget it. There’s a reason it made such an impression on me when I was younger. It could just be because I’m trying to pick up all the pieces of my broken heart from the floor. But personally, as an adult, I just find it weaker compared to the novel. Sometimes I like to imagine an ending to this version of the story where Peter Pan comes back, having quickly realised that he has outgrown Neverland, but doesn’t meet Wendy again until they are both much older, at a time when Wendy is coming to terms with womanhood and the idea of marriage. Or she even meets his real earth counterpart (if we were to delve into the psychology of Neverland being Wendy’s dream). And their relationship is subjected to the natural test of time and growth.

Peter Pan is an almost perfect adaptation. It matches the humour, the tone and the vision of J.M.Barrie. But I can certainly understand why the film didn’t do so well at the box office. In the month it was released, there was an unfair amount of competition, namely the film Lord of the Rings — The Return of the King. And as an adult, I can now understand why it’s not the film people think of or remember when it comes to Peter Pan adaptations. And it’s not just because it doesn’t fit the elfish, jolly trickster persona that Disney has created.

The film adaptation suffers more from what it doesn’t do — such as maintaining a stable tone and consistent editing — than from what it does. It’s one of those films that would have benefited from being much longer. That way, the inconsistent tone and some of the rushed parts of the adaptation would be much more balanced. It feels like it was missing an extra twenty minutes. For example, the film is narrated by an older version of Wendy, but without the deleted ending where it becomes properly clear that it’s her telling the story to tie everything together, the ending feels a little abrupt. Say what you will about Tim Burton’s adaptation of the Series of Unfortunate Events, but the audience could see where the film’s narration was coming from the whole time. I think if they knew the alternate ending wasn’t going to work (that scene is a classic example of something working well in the novel but not in the film), they should have removed the narrator altogether with the deleted ending and adjusted the film accordingly. They should have extended some scenes so that parts of the film weren’t rushed, such as the introduction, and the story would have been left more up to interpretation as there was no voiceover throughout.

Despite its weaknesses, P.J.Hogan’s Peter Pan is still an underrated masterpiece 20 years later. It is an irresistible film that captivates and warms the heart. The film adaptation has certainly stood the test of time, staying true to the original while adding its own flavour to the story. It is full of magic, wonder and heart. It was clearly made by people who loved the origins of the story and explored where they came from, while also digging deep into the text to reshape the character arcs in a fresh and meaningful way. They succeed in capturing J.M.Barrie’s original message, which is that growing up is a natural progression of life, but that doesn’t mean leaving childhood behind entirely. That it is important to maintain a healthy balance between the two: Taking responsibility while appreciating the joys of life. From the vibrant colour palette to the goosebump-inducing music to the solid performances and gorgeous chemistry between Jeremy Sumpter and Rachel Hurd-Wood, my love for this adaptation will never end, no matter how old I am.

Read More

[medea10]

My Review of Peter Pan no Bouken

Nearing the end of watching Little Lord Fauntleroy, instead of airing the preview for the next episode there was a preview for an upcoming anime that was going to air in it’s current timeslot. When you watch these World Masterpiece Theater animes in their original video format, you come upon that. In the past, I saw previews for other series I have yet to watch like Heidi and The Bush Babies. What do we have here this time?

Peter Pan?!

Peter Pan is an anime?! For real?! Okay, we’re watching this.

All I can say is, who hasn’t heard of Peter Pan? How many movies and television shows have been made that was loosely based off this fairy tale? Too many to count! Hook, Finding Neverland, Pan, Walt Disney’s Peter Pan, Peter Pan starring Mary Martin, Tinkerbell, the live-action Peter Pan in 2003, Return to Neverland, Chip n’ Dale Rescue Rangers, Peter Pan and the Pirates on FOX Kids, Once Upon a Time…It’s just endless! Add to that a new Disney live-action reboot to the tale starring Jude Law. So, this story is never going to die. And it shouldn’t! I grew up with the story. I’ve watched several plays. I’ve seen many movie adaptations. Because I have a boomer parent, I watched the Mary Martin Broadway version. But as we all know, the one I know front-to-back would be Walt Disney’s 1953 animated feature film starring Bobby Driscoll, Hans Conried, and Katherine Beaumont.

I know this film is canceled eight ways from Sunday and I don’t care. Disney+ has advisory notices everywhere with this one. And if I’m not mistaking, if you’re under 7 on Disney+, you’re not even allowed to watch this without parental permission. I’ll save the bitching about that for a different day. I liked this film. Disney’s Peter Pan is one of my guilty pleasures despite outdated stereotypes and major sexism. At least I know the Japanese version won’t sing a song called, “What Makes the Red Man Red”. I’m curious to see Japan’s take on this tale as these World Masterpiece Theater classics seem to be very accurate in their telling of the stories. And they’ve got 41 episodes to do so.

I do have to wonder though. Aren’t the main characters of the World Masterpiece Theater animes supposed to deal with heavy subject matter? The Darling children have it easy compared to nearly every other character from the other animes. They’re not orphaned. They’re not put to work in slave conditions. They're not escaping Nazis. Their home was not burned to the ground by Confederate soldiers. That’s a foreshadow to what I watch after Peter Pan. These kids get to hang out in Neverland with a boy that never grew up. Then again, it is a literary classic and I suppose they wanted to change things up with a more light-hearted story.

The story was created by Scottish playwright/novelist J.M. Barrie. Peter Pan is the story about a free-spirited and mischievous young boy who can fly and never grows older. Peter Pan lives in Neverland with a fairy named Tinkerbell. He spends his days hanging with other kids who didn’t grow up named the lost boys, conversing with the mermaids, dodging danger from the Indians, and occasionally fighting against the notorious pirate, Captain Hook.

But as we all know the story truly begins with the Darling family. Wendy, John, and Michael Darling are spirited children who are well taken care of by their loving and strict parents and a watchful dog named Nana. The children have recently been having dreams about the titular character. It’s an uncommon phenomenon for children their age to dream about a boy that never ages named Peter Pan. It’s just that there’s no book to prove his existence. But Peter Pan has found a fascination with the Darling household and shows up several times. After losing his shadow, Peter ends up meeting Wendy, John, and Michael. Peter tells them all about the place he lives, Neverland. Next thing you know, they’re covered in pixie dust and they’re flying from the UK all the way to Neverland.

Here, Wendy and her brothers spend their time hanging out with the lost boys, conversing with the mermaids, dodging danger from the Indians, and…okay, you get the idea. The Darling children are getting the Neverland experience.

BETWEEN THE DUB AND THE SUB: You ain’t gonna believe this. This anime has a dub. Not just one, but two dubs. In 1993, Sky One in the UK aired this anime (under the name Peter Pan: The Animated Series) and gave it a dub. Not to be confused with the other shows that went as Peter Pan: The Animated Series. This, I’m okay with. Real British people voicing real British characters. Thank you! Yeah, I praise that here, but when the UK dubs for Crayon Shin Chan and Urusei Yatsura, I make cringe faces. The other dub was done by Saban. Wow, how dated can you get with that company? Due to the limited data, I can’t really talk about the dub here. As usual, we get a few veterans from the World Masterpiece Theater animes and a few well-known voice actors early in their career. One more addition, it’s quite clever that Chiako Otsuka not only played Captain Hook here, but he was also the Japanese dub voice for many Disney movies that feature Hook (as well as some of the Kingdom Hearts games) and continued to do so before passing away several years ago. The more we know!

*Peter Pan is played by Noriko Hidaka (known for Kikyo on InuYasha, Akane on Ranma ½, Near on Death Note, Soujirou on Rurouni Kenshin, Ursula on Little Witch Academia, and Bellemire on One Piece)

*Wendy is played by Naoko Matsui (known for Misora on Death Note, Noriko on Itazura na Kiss, Monet on One Piece, Shikamaru’s mother on Naruto, and Bridget on Little Lord Fauntleroy)

*John is played by Kyouko Hamura

*Michael is played by Yuriko Fuchizaki (known for Anthy on Revolutionary Girl Utena, Hiro on Fruits Basket, Cyprine on Sailor Moon S, and Megumi on Ah My Goddess)

*Tinkerbell is played by Sumi Shimamoto (known for Ishizu on YGO, Kanata on Lucky Star, Sara on Princess Sara, and Mitsuba on Gintama)

*Captain Hook is played by Chiako Otsuka (known for Gol D. Roger on One Piece, Arthur on Hellsing, and Tao Pai Pai on Dragon Ball) [R.I.P.]

SHIPPING: Wait…what?! There should be no talk of shipping here.

Oh, but in episode six John has a crush on Tiger Lily. And then John continues to be all blushy around her throughout the series.

John and Tiger Lily? What sick fan-fiction tripe is this?! I’ve never seen any poppycock related to what I just wrote anywhere. Tiger Lily is supposed to have a crush on Peter and hate Wendy. Not on a yandere level like Tinkerbell, but still. Japan, do better!

To be honest, there is one ship I support in the Peter Pan universe and no, it is not Peter Pan x Wendy. That was never something I supported, not even as a kid.

I actually support Captain Hook x the crocodile. Yes, I am pro this. Even three-year old me would support this.

ACCURATE OR NOT: Time to see if this adaptation stacks up well compared to the original source material.

*This adaptation has fewer Lost Boys. Many of the adaptations are pretty loose when it comes to the lost boys in terms of how many there are and their names. Originally, there were six. So, we seem to be missing Nibs and the twins. I guess that’s one thing Disney’s Peter Pan got right and they didn’t even say their names.

*Not sure if all of these places in Neverland truly existed in the original text. Because here, it feels like there are a lot of places that even Peter Pan has never heard of or been to. Pretty sure Peter Pan has been in Neverland since God farted out the solar system. So, why would he question any part of the land he’s lived in his whole life? And don’t get me started on Tinkerbell’s situation. That’s a fairy-hole I don’t feel like traveling down.

*There was potential of a really threatening antagonist for this series with Darkness and her ambitions of stealing dreams from children. And it’s up to her granddaughter Luna to save this woman and show her the right way. Too bad Darkness and Luna do not exist in the original material. Hey, if this series is gonna be 41 episodes, you’ve gotta stretch it out as much as possible.

*Yeah, little Rascal here doesn’t exist outside the anime. Just like every other cute animal featured in these animes. Okay, go join the rest of the animals like Chouchou, Milky Ann, Piccolo, and Caesar that never existed.

*Mama Hook. Surely, she existed. I mean, Hook was originally a fellow who studied at the best schools of England including Eton and Oxford. It’s just that I don’t think she was ever mentioned in the novel. Other adaptations, very rarely. Even Disney didn’t have a Mama Hook until 2011 where they got Sharon Osbourne of all people. In the anime, it is always implied that Hook’s mother passed away, but he loves her so dearly. Every so often, he will talk about her.

THIS GODDAMN ANIMATION: I swore I would never yell about the Nippon animation for the World Masterpiece Theater collection. And it’s great that many of the Nippon animators went on to do greater pieces including movies for Studio Ghibli. But I can’t hold it in with this one. This is just bad. The animation quality went down after Little Lord Fauntleroy and it really shows. I keep wanting to wipe away Peter Pan’s mouth because I think he has a chocolate milk stain. And this might be bias on my part, but most of the Captain Hooks I’ve watched were (for a lack of a better term) PILFs. This Captain Hook looks like he belongs in that Oingo Boingo ending theme from Jojo's Bizarre Adventure Pt. 3.

ENDING: Depending on what Peter Pan adaptation you watch; chances are the ending will be different. Some will end with the Darling children back home with their parents, some end with the Darling children bringing the Lost Boys with them back home, and other endings show the future where Wendy is all grown up with her daughter Jane. And most of the non-Disney live-action ones will do something way out of left field, I turn off the TV in disgust and howl at the moon.

While I’m on a tangent, why did Pan have a scene where they’re singing Nirvana’s Smells Like Teen Spirit?

While most adaptations will showcase a Peter Pan vs. Captain Hook showdown, this series has Darkness and Luna. Darkness has plans for her granddaughter and Neverland. She plans to use this Black Mirror that will destroy Neverland. But of course, Darkness is too old to carry out anything and is missing a few things to make this come true. That’s where Luna comes in as she tries to groom her to become her successor. Luna has been hesitant and defiant against doing her grandmother’s bidding. Unfortunately, things do not go well when Captain Hook and the pirates get involved in this family squabble as well. Peter Pan and Wendy are friends with Luna and help her when she’s around, so yeah, they’re caught up in this mess too.

The pet raccoon Rascal was holding this special key that Darkness needs to make her dream into a nightmarish reality. Once everything was in place, Darkness was able to use her granddaughter’s body as a vessel in order to take over. The Luna that Peter and Wendy knew no longer exists. She’s out to destroy Neverland. Captain Hook is one for destruction, but even he knows to not fuck with the natural order of Neverland. Thankfully, Wendy was able to break through to Luna. The black mirror that Darkness has been harping about for several episodes is now the white mirror and peace can continue across the land. Okay, we’re at the final episode at this point. Is that all?

Wendy and her brothers feel like their time in Neverland is over after everything that has just happened. Yeah, just randomly bring up going home now. Absolutely no talks about leaving prior to this moment. Sure, they mention their lives in London every now and then while in Neverland but never talked about wanting to return. In this version, Wendy, John, and Michael leave without bringing back the lost boys.

After returning from Neverland, Wendy and the boys would always remember their time in Neverland…at first. In time, they will gradually forget what transpired there until it felt like nothing more than a dream. Peter promised to come visit. But days turn to weeks. Weeks to months, months to years. But one night, many years later, Peter Pan returns to the nursery to find Wendy’s daughter Jane. Better late than never!

Ehhh…not my favorite Peter Pan adaptation and right now my least favorite of the World Masterpiece Theater collection. I think for me, when it comes to Peter Pan, I prefer it to be in movie form and not a 41-episode trilogy. Frankly, this series bored me more than you would think. The addition this anime made with the black mirror, Darkness, and Luna piqued my interest slightly. It’s new to the Peter Pan story and stepping into unfamiliar territory, but it caught my attention for a short while. But to be blunt, I would rather stick to the movies I’ve grown up to enjoy.

Does that mean you’ll watch Disney’s latest Peter Pan & Wendy now?

Fuck naw. Disney can suck on a huge tray of dicks with their live-action reboots. After what they did to The Lion King, I wash my hands of that.

But if you are curious about the Peter Pan anime…good luck finding it.

Now that Peter Pan is over, it’s time I pick up another World Masterpiece Theater classic where we go back to America.

Way back when in 1863, now part of the American lore.

(psst...It's Little Women)

[havewereadthis]

"When Peter Pan loses his shadow in the Darling children's nursery, things will never be the same again..

Over the rooftops of London, Peter Pan and the fairy Tinkerbell lead Wendy, Michael and John Darling to Neverland to start a new life with his gang of Lost Boys.

There, they will encounter mermaids, princesses, a ticking crocodile and the fearsome Captain Hook and his terrible crew of pirates.

What will their new life be like in Neverland? If Captain Hook has his way, they won't live long enough to find out..."

[mk-wizard]

I could kiss you for making this list because this exactly what I have been saying for YEARS. May I also add some other honourable mentions of both princesses and non-princesses?

In Robin Hood, Maid Marian is an upper class woman yet is not spoiled by her status. She even sees the absurdity of classism and shows kindness and respect to people by way of their actions not their status. And her lady in waiting Lady Cluck shared those honourable values and was a fighter. Maybe having her as a mother figure is what shaped Marian into being such a kind and fair person. Also, Marian was ready to leave her lavish lifestyle at any time as she was already not happy being there. She was just waiting for the right time and wanted to make her exit the smart way. Yes, she was still in love with Robin and hoped the feeling was mutual, but she was NOT living just for him.

In The Black Cauldron, Elonwy is the proactive one and often the voice of reason of the group. She saved Taran and everyone else before she was saved later on. And might I remind everyone, it wasn't even Taran who saved her. It was Gurgi who is that hairy strange short creature who talks in third person. She can be tough and outspoken, but only when she needs to be. She is not mean spirited in the least. In fact, quite the opposite, she is kind, positive and genuinely helpful to the team.

In Peter Pan, Wendy Darling is the first to learn that there are good things about growing up as well as being mature. She also comes to realize that it's not a good thing to be childish, irresponsible and treat everything like a game all the time. It thanks to her that she made the lost boys and her brothers rethink the way they act as well as to stop and appreciate their mothers. However, she is not above being playful and imaginitive. Wendy is the ideal big sister figure or babysitter who is a great balance between fun and kind, but also responsible and smart. If anyone was truly guilty of being overly fixated on a man, it was Tinkerbell in how she was overly possessive of Peter. And even then, Tinkerbell went on to become her own woman with her own franchise.

In Atlantis, we have Princess Kida who like Mulan and Tiana doesn't need explaining.

In Treasure Planet, we have Captain Amelia who is a damn CAPTAIN. Even though she clearly has a feminine side, she takes her job seriously, she is very brave and she is good at what she does. Even when she was severely injured, she toughed it out even when near death. Yes, she got married and had kids, but she clearly didn't stop doing her job.

In Lilo & Stitch, Lilo's big sister Nani is trying her best to hold it together as the breadwinner and parent which is not easy because they are struggling. There's also the fact that Lilo did not make it easy for her. She is also not painted as a Mary Sue about it. She makes mistakes, she faces tough decisions and is not always as confident about her actions as she makes herself out to be. Yet she keeps pushing through, grabs every opportunity and does it all for her family. And in the end, she manages to make it work. Nani is both relatable and inspiring. Yeah, she had a boyfriend, but she was absolutely not focused on landing a man. In fact, quite the opposite. If anything, she is what we imagine a loving "single mom" to be like.

It seems to me like everyone and their mother has forgotten about Brave which focused on the bond between princess Merida and her mother Queen Elinor, and how they learn to see eye to eye. Yes, Merida took a stand against being reduced to a prize to be won, but even before than, Merida's main thing was that she wanted the freedom to be the kind of young woman SHE wanted to be not what her mother believed she had to act like. Merida is also flawed in how she is still just a teenager and makes bad decisions such as feeding a magic cake to her mom which winds up turning her into a bear. Queen Elinor also deserves some honourable mention here because she too is crucial to the story. She is not Merida's enemy. She genuinely does have her best interest at heart and wants to do right by her. By the end of the story, both Elinor and Merida not only come to genuinely understand each other, they are also realize they were both in wrong about certain things and in the end, make up.

Disney was much more feminist and progressive when it wasn't trying to be. It just tried to make good stories. I love the Disney princesses and think they are highly misunderstood. They don't fixing. Society's view of them does.

Rant incoming

I feel like the problem with a lot of Disney's live action remakes (and arguably Wish) is they're trying to appeal to a crowd that no longer exists, namely the people who used to claim that the Disney Princesses were sexist.

All the interviews tend to include, "Well she's not chasing a MAN anymore" which...almost no one sees the princesses like that, anymore. Virtually NO ONE still believes the princesses are man-chasing sexist caricatures of women.

Cinderella is now hailed as an abuse victim who stayed strong long enough to get help to get out of her situation. Anyone who says she should have saved herself is basically regarded as a victim blamer. And it's very clear in the film she wasn't looking to marry the prince, she just wanted a night off. She was the only one who wasn't in line to meet him. She didn't find out she met the prince until he went looking for her!

Snow White is now hailed for her negotiation skills, ability to calm down after extreme stress (she had a moment of panic and had to cry for a bit, but who wouldn't after finding out The Queen hired someone to kill you?), and ability to take charge of a house of adult men. And again, she was an abuse victim, this time trying to escape ASSASSINATION ATTEMPTS. While she dreamed of her prince, it was secondary to her main goal of SURVIVAL. There are also entire video essays about how Snow White gave hope to people during The Great Depression.

Everyone acknowledges that Ariel wanted to be human BEFORE meeting Eric. We all know she was a nerd hyperfixating on humans, and also standing up to her prejudiced father.

We understand Sleeping Beauty wasn't the main character, the Three Good Fairies were, AND PHILLIP WOULD NEVER HAVE BEATEN MALEFICENT WITHOUT THEM! He literally depended on them! WOMEN SAVED THE DAY! But even then, is it really such a sin for a girl to fantasize about romance and fall for someone with corny pickup lines?

We all understand Jasmine just wanted someone to treat her LIKE A PERSON. She rejected every Prince before Aladdin because they treated her like a prize. So why did they need her to want to be Sultan? How did that make her more feminist when she already wanted to be treated like an equal and have a say in her future? Is it only empowering if you want a career in politics?

We admire that Belle, despite living in a judgemental village, was kind to everyone (even though she found the village life dull), and her story teaches girls that the guy everyone else loves isn't always a good guy. What's sexist about teaching girls about red flags? And she didn't start being nice to The Beast until he started treating her with respect and kindness.

Do I really NEED to defend Mulan or Tiana? I think they speak for themselves.

Rapunzel was yet another abuse victim who just needed a little help to get out of her bad situation. In this case, she also needed to learn that she was an abuse victim, and that what Mother Gothel did WASN'T normal, much like many victims of gaslighting.

And don't get me started on the non-princess animals.

Perdita had a healthy relationship with Pongo to the point she was open to express her pregnancy fears to him, and was ready to TEAR APART Cruella's goons for daring to touch her puppies as well as adopting the other puppies. Like, she was so ferocious the goons mistook her for a hyena! She's basically that "I AM THAT GIRL'S MOTHER!" scene from SpyXFamily if Yor were a dog. She and her husband were a TEAM.....but they made a Cruella live action to turn her into a girlboss?! The literal animal abuser!? THAT'S the woman you wanted to put on a pedestal when Perdita was RIGHT THERE!?

Duchess kept her kittens calm after they had been catnapped and was classy as heck. Nice to everyone regardless of social class during a time period where that was uncommon.

Lady stood up to Tramp when she believed he had abandoned her and didn't really care about her. She found out he was a heartbreaker and was like, "Nuh uh. No. You are not doing that to me! You put me through enough."

Miss Bianca from The Rescuers was IN CHARGE the whole movie, and was willing to risk life and limb to save an innocent child. THAT TINY MOUSE TOOK ON ALLIGATORS! And she picked Bernard to accompany her because he was the only one who wasn't ogling her. And then in the sequel SHE DID IT ALL AGAIN! I wish I were as brave as her.

Like, the public haven't accused these ladies of being sexist caricatures since 2014 (Actresses and actors don't count, they're out of touch like the rest of Hollywood) yet Disney is operating under the assumption that the public still thinks that way, hence all the "sHe'S nOt AfTeR a MaN iN ThIs VeRsIOn" talk.

The live action remakes are trying to attract an audience that doesn't really exist much, anymore, and back when it did exist, was comprised mainly of people who didn't actually watch the films. The Disney princesses are no longer seen as sexist, and feminine qualities are no longer seen as weak or undesirable.