Neverland

Last night we rented NEVERLAND from RedBox and upon coming home I spot previewed the titles before my wife came down, and since it advertised several SCIFI channel films, such as the dreadful RIVERWORLD, I thought I had chosen poorly. (See IndyJones and Last Crusade). So when we began to dig into this, the casting of Bob Hoskins as Smee was a surprise jolt!!! An homage to HOOK by old Spielberg. OK, good casting. Then Kiera Knightly as voice of Tinkerbell. OK, a knod over to Pirate of the Carribbean. Better still.

Then we forgot the world for 4 hours straight!!! We never do that, but this one HOOKS you, pun intended, and takes the viewer for a surprisingly intelligent ride into fact and fantasy. I shall not give plot points away, enjoy this one yourself, but it is even better than the PETER PAN of a few years ago. It catches all of the plot points that BEGAN the story quite well. Rhys Ifan is almost a younger David WARNER in every respect and Charlie Rowe makes Pan a living, breathing young boy straight out of the world of Dickens in Edwardian London. Anna Friel - a charming, sexy counterpoint to the pirate legend. And Hoskins, only a six day shoot as Smee, bring a welcome touch of nostalgia for the show.

We did not get tired at all. 4 hours right through which we never do, only Sir Francis Urqhart in the classic HOUSE OF CARDS trilogy was so compelling. And this is a smart tale too. Again, intelligent thought and writing here.

Find it, clear the decks, grab some rum and splice the main brace for a wonderful evening just off the second star to the right straight on till morning.

This is a prequel dealing with Peter Pan (Charlie Rowe) as an orphan on the streets of London. Peter and his band of thieves work as pickpockets. Their evil mentor Jimmy Hook (Rhys Ifans) gets them to steal a magical treasure which transports them to Neverland. Once there Hook join with a group of pirates led by Elizabeth Bonny (Anna Friel) in search of more magic dust. Peter lands with the Indians and the beautiful Aaya (Q'orianka Kilcher) where the people don't age.

The story lack any pace. It drags along. With 240 minutes, this is way too long. It doesn't help that they explain away the magic. It reminds me of Star Wars explaining away The Force. Why can't they leave it alone? The acting is acceptable. All the big name give the expected performance. Charlie Rowe as Peter Pan is average. As for the production, it's got TV movie level. It's nothing to brag about. It's dark and dreary. Again all the magic is gone.

I enjoyed almost every minute of this series. I thought it was far above the average SyFy flick. The special effects, while not perfect, are very adequate. The story is imaginative and refreshing. I found myself drawn in from the beginning. Watching Bob Hoskins as Smee again was pure joy.

Every part of the story was as logical and well thought out as any fantasy could be. Often in movies I find myself thinking "Why would they do that?" That was not the case in this movie. Other than some mistakes made that any child could make, the characters all acted logical within the parameters of their character.

Unlike some other fantasy TV that left us with nothing but questions at the end, (Lost, I'm looking at you.) origins and motivations for almost every character and aspect of the Peter Pan story is given, and satisfactorily explained by the end.

Another aspect of the series that I like is the fact that by the end Every story line and mystery is satisfactorily wrapped up with a nice big bow on top. Yet with this nice satisfying ending the door is still left open just enough for a sequel.

The only negative aspect I can find in this is the depiction of Tinkerbell. Somehow I found it lacking, but that could easily be attributed to personal tastes.

I wondered just how much similarity SyFy's version of a Peter Pan prequel would have with the Dave Barry/Ridley Pearson "Peter and the Starcatchers" series, and come to find out there actually is some. A powder that has the ability to make one fly ("Starstuff"), an obsessed crocodile ("Mr. Grin"), and the names of Peter's mates -- not the first group, who returned to England at the end of the first book, but the next group: Slightly, Tootles, Curly, Nibs, and The Twins.

There's also a bit of a hat tip to Michael Scott and his "The Secrets of the Immortal Nicholas Flamel" series in "Dr. Flood", who introduced himself as the Alchemyst to Queen Elizabeth the First. Of course, her majesty's Alchemyst was Dr. John Dee, who actually had nothing to do with the Philosopher's (or Sorcerer's) Stone; that was Nicholas Flamel...which brings us to yet another great series of books, this time by J.K. Rowling!

By the way, I'm almost 68 years old and I still enjoy books and movies of this sort!

I thought this was a very interesting take on the PETER PAN story - I liked Rhys Ifans' Hook and the Fagin-like origin with the "lost boys" and Charlie Rowe as Peter was a fairly rounded character and is certainly the stand out performance of the film - And Anna Friel is gorgeous as pirate Capt. Bonny!... Sadly the film falls apart with the tech side of things... the direction on this film is so boring and lack-luster, there are some edits that are just plain horrible and lazy - and speaking of horrible Q'orianka Kilcher as Aaya (tiger lily) is just awful... She is beyond wooden, she is lifeless and drains any life out of every scene she is in... which is too bad! Overall the film is visually interesting and well worth a courtesy watch!