Pan

Going into this movie, I knew it wouldn't do well at the box office. Unfortunately, that is true, due to the negativity surrounding it. It did indeed bomb at the box office... By default, does that mean it's a bad film? Absolutely not. As a matter of fact, I found it a ton of fun to watch!

The biggest problem the movie has is there are quite a few scenes that seem to rush themselves. Aside from that, the characters are a sheer delight to watch; all the cast members were clearly having a ton of fun in their respective roles and one can't help but feel that when watching. The music is absolutely enchanting and the visual effects are gorgeous; one scene in particular, though barely a minute long, has a beautiful combination of music, cinematography, and character intensity.

Fans of the source material may not like the changes they made, but try to watch this movie with the unbridled ambition of a child's imagination and judge the movie as a movie on its own merits first... and who knows? You may enjoy it too!

Like the recent "The Force Awakens," this is a movie that should really only be seen in 3D on a 100-foot screen and all-around loudspeakers. Why? Because where it excels is in its visual and audio presentation, which is simply superlative. As a viewer, you need to be captivated by this aspect of the cinematography because, in all other respects, it's a so-so film.

To be fair, it's decently acted, although perhaps not outstandingly so. None of the acting performances stank, but the actors weren't given a lot to work with so far as character depth was concerned. Some of the parts were played for laughs which, of course, is fair enough in a film of this genre. The part of Hook was ambiguous -- we all know that Hook turns out to be a villain, so it isn't clear why he's a good guy (and a rather insipid one) here. Still, perhaps the film-makers are already planning a sequel that will do for Hook with "Revenge of the Sith" did for Darth Vader?

In the end, what lets Pan down is the storytelling. If this were a children's book, rather than a blockbuster movie, by about page ten you'd be wondering what the heck was going on. So much of the plot makes no sense. Why is it such a big deal that Peter can fly? What does it prove if he can? The fantasy world is full of ships that fly about with no visible means of support, so clearly magical flight is unremarkable. Why do the characters keep bursting into song? It's not a musical, right? The characters in the original book have a certain amount of depth, and as a reader you can't help wondering what their back-stories are (which, of course, is a hallmark of great character writing). Pan ought to answer that question, but it doesn't -- we don't really learn anything about why Peter, Tiger Lily, Smee, et al., are who they are.

You can have the original Peter Pan performed on a packing-crate stage by high school kids, and it can still be magical. But if you take all the high-tech whizzbangery away from Pan, I wonder what is left? Not a great deal, I suspect.

For all that, worth watching in the right environment.

I won tickets to the movie premiere in London. The movie is good. But I am glad I had free tickets, because I would not have wanted to pay so much to see it (movie tickets in London are generally quite expensive, around £14 per ticket)! But if you're in America and can get a ticket for $5, then I would probably do that, otherwise I'd wait to rent it on a rainy day.

Hugh Jackman was amazing as Captain Blackbeard, he's a great actor. Even the kid who plays Pan, Levi Miller, did a very good job (he was a better actor in Pan than Daniel Radcliffe was in the early Harry Potter movies, if that comparison helps). Garrett Hedlund's acting seemed a bit over-the-top, but I am not sure if that's what he was aiming for because he thought that it fit with the character's personality? Or if that's just his acting style? His acting reminded me of Brendan Fraser's acting in The Mummy. Rooney Mara was believable as Tiger Lilly.

Plot was good, cinematography and movie sets were great. But the action sequences at times felt a bit too long and drawn out. Didn't find many of the jokes funny at all, but perhaps kids would enjoy them. All in all, a nice family movie that's good to rent on a rainy day.

Sassy British descendant of Time Lord Cosette and Thumbelina's Prince Cornelius is orphaned with his flute necklace and surrounded by ninja-kicking nuns who sell children on the black market. After being abducted by Jean Valjean the Nirvana-loving dictator, he befriends Indiana Jones, who falls in love with Emily Blunt's Native American alter ego. He is then saved from flying crocodiles by the Cara Delevingne mermaid quadruplets (with glowing Rapunzel hair) who live in a sea of memories. He proceeds to discover he has the force, pixie-edition, and saves Atlantis the lost fairy-kingdom empire, adopting the title of "The Chosen One". And after all of this, we still don't find out what caused the proverbial bad blood between Peter Flute and Captain Indiana Hook. So there's that.

Despite all of this (or maybe because of it), I actually did enjoy the movie quite a bit. Even if the singing of Smells Like Teen Spirit left me confused and thinking of Moulin Rouge.

Pan bears a lot of similarities to other adventure films, family animation and even role-playing games. It packs myriad of visual antics across the journey of self-discovery. However, it's also painfully one dimensional and predictable, using the "chosen one" plot to a fault. While it's admittedly aesthetically pleasing, this is not the innovative origin story it's advertised to be.

In a world tormented by pirates, one child must discover his destiny. You've seen this before. Some angles have been changed, but this is typical Peter's adventure to Neverland. It's so overused, one might find half the script in Final Fantasy games. Not to mention it's riddled with fantasy genre cliché and uninspiring romance subplot.

To their credit, the actors do a fine job. Hugh Jackman as Blackbeard is a good antagonist, he looks the part by carrying the character with ominous charisma, either it's by his flamboyant dialogues or even timely singing. He can appear funny yet still threatening. Well, as threatening as a villain in family flick can be.

While Blackbeard looks fit for Hook's replacement, Hook himself is played by Garrett Hedlund, who ironically tries too hard to be young Hugh Jackman. His delivery is forced to create a suave persona, but most of the times he just looks out of place. Levi Miller as Peter handles himself pretty well. The story focuses heavily on this boy's fate, and although he can seem rough at some scenes, he brings a commendable performance as the lead.

Graphical prowess plays important role, almost too much, and on its better parts Pan definitely has the stylish charm of fantasy vista. Setting is filled with colorful designs and details, although CGI takes the helm on most cases. Its soundtracks are splendid, it simply doesn't let go. From subtle chimes, loud symphony and even shanty version of popular songs, the audio is brilliant.

Pan would've been great if it didn't copy so many elements from other movies. In nearly every scene, there's a hint of Pirates of Caribbean, Mad Max and multitude of classic Disney flicks. The straightforward plot doesn't help either, it's tedious to see the predictable developments ahead. Ancient prophecies, letter from the past and hidden power manifestation are tired gimmicks. Please, you know he's gonna fly at some point.

For a movie that looks so appealing, Pan never really takes flight. One might find happy thoughts on the visual and songs, but the CGI charm and adventure gimmicks will not last through its boring plot.