My favorite part was when, after Peter and Wendy defeats Hook, Peter picks up his detached hook and says “This hook is literal perfection”. To which Wendy snatches it away from him and says, “It will be….once it fits a woman!” Riveting.
I liked when Tiger Lily took her tomahawk and smashed open a Horcrux, destroying a piece of Voldemort's soul, that will be a precious cinematic moment I can carry with me forever.
As someone else pointed out, I love how Wendy dreamed of flying a WWI-style airplane... when those airplanes didn't exist when she was a child. *sigh* Disney truly doesn't care about history anymore.
She did though because after the events of Endgame was over Antman popped back into the time machine with a spare suit so Wendy could be whisked forward to 1917 to meet Manfred von Richthofen who actually gave her a few flying lessons in his favourite triplane.However because his English wasn’t so good he ended up with an embarrassing smack on the cheek when he offerd to Fokker!
I'm doing my best to save information on the current state of the world so future generations know what's happening. But that may be a bit optimistic since there may be no future generations.
Lara, the Critical Doggo, had the best take on Wendy and Patel Pan. She was incredibly concise and insightful. I hope she stays as a permanent host for The Open Bar.
She definitely comes out Top Dog in this discussion. No bones about it, she did not take her analysis lying down. Best of all, she focused on the parts of the film that were important. One might describe her as a good girl for this.
I found her comments to be ruff at times but commend her for never rolling over. She had a bone to pick, didnt hesitate to scratch at the buried truths and overall it was just a treat to watch.
Dying old and alone on a couch with no friends, family or kids around is the 2023 idea of being a proper feminist. The future of the human race looks dim.
It makes me appreciate Hook so much more and realize even more that Spielberg understood the lore. Peter’s happy thought was his children. He realized that it wasn’t even his love for Moira that made leave neverland, but the vision he had of himself being a father.
Hoffman as Captain Hook is a classic. “Don’t try to stop me Smee. I’m going to do it. Don’t you dare try to stop me. Smee. Try and stop me! SMEE! Never scare me like that again.”
Remember how Peter was chasing his shadow as part of his introduction as a character? Metaphor of the endless child who refuses to grow up. I love that. 😊
I mean this seriously and without hyperbole: This video is the best for both describing how badly the producers&writers gutted this story and how, in a global sense, these writers simply don't have the emotional life experience to write anything with character depth. Ever. Sincerely I say, this video should be distributed to every so-called film and screen-writing school across the country. It's a lesson on so many levels of what makes a story work - and what is trite and soulless. I'm going to save the URL and just use this from now on to send to people.
These writers never grew up so they CAN'T write a story about the conflict between needing to grow up and the desire to retain the innocence and security of childhood.
You don't have to have life experience. But these awful juvenile writers write as if they never read any BOOKS. They simply don't understand classic ways to make literature work, and have no experience of complex plots and characters that don't fit some contemporary ideology. Ideology makes for BAD art.
@@JOHN----DOE You're sorta right. Experience in a story isn't necessary, otherwise only astronauts, killers, detectives, fairies, etc would be able to write. Which hits on the larger side of your point... These people have No Imagination. Their Inner Life is void of Truth or humanity. They have Little to No Talent, which is why they've been hired. They don't have much in the way of Skill, either. Their abilities are below entry level. You see, Imagination, Talent, and Skills aren't what's being sold. It's socio-political ideology. And as college graduates, these companies once thought they were getting a "fresh, new, young, modern" perspective. Until they realized that these college grads had Nothing to say, Nothing to write about, and Nothing to offer. But, by the time they figured this out -- which they should have known by looking at their portfolios -- the shift had taken place, and none of these attributes were needed because What became the goal of the corporate middlemen was Changing the culture by changing its stories. So, the franchises were bought and targeted. And when the fans rebelled, they excused it as bigotry against [Enter Group Here]. Just watch Disney's videos on the writing roundtable for Star Wars. The only thing they discuss is how to insert their ideologies. Not once do they discuss the original stories, legacy, or improving anything. It's been about one thing and one thing only. Search for that video. It's very interesting
So, here's my biggest question: If Hook was found and taken in by the pirates, and eventually rose through the ranks to command them... well, they said in this video the pirates are basically Hook's "found family". Found families breed happy memories. Even if they were evil pirates, Hook bonded with them enough to, even as captain, stick around rather than leave to find his actual family. So how is it possible that such a character with such a backstory would not have a single positive memory? They don't even have to be morally good. Hook just has to acknowledge them as positive to him.
The 2003 adaptation has a bit of fun with that concept. In that movie's finale, Hook evens the playing field by getting some fairy dust as well. When he then notices he's floating right above the crocodile he desparately starts rattling down _his_ happy thoughts to not fall down. Which include gems like "kittens on spikes".
Peter: "Just think happy thoughts, positive memories! You'll be able to fly!" Hook: [starts flying] Peter: "Awesome, how'd you do it? What's your happy thought?" Hook: "Well, that one time, we caught a Lost Boy and fired him from our main canon. His head made such a funny noise hitting the rocks near the beach." Peter: "Yo, that's ... fucked up!" Hook: "Innit, hee hee" [flies even higher]
The supposed anti-racists are the worst racists of the lot. They even have her speaking in her native language which nobody else can understand. Why would anyone do this? It's just a display at that point.
I am no longer surprised by anything that makes peoples of Christian/Pagan and/or European ancestry look bad in film/media anymore. Just as a thought experiment[, and proof of concept], watch TV/movies from the last ... oh maybe 50 years, and as you do so, try and estimate the % of villains who were played by actors pretending to be characters of a certain ethno-cultural, geographical-background shall-we-say, and you will see what i mean. I warn you though, once you start noticing it you may have difficulty ever ceasing to notice it. [P.S. Rant incoming: Sorry for being somewhat cryptic about exactly what i mean here, but i'm sure enough of you can figure out what i mean, if you care to do so, and i prefer to be as "polite" as possible when putting things up online (since anything that goes online apparently does so permanently and privacy is rapidly becoming either impossible or nearly-so). [Even though freedom of speech is the foundation that all decent social systems are built upon, and one of the first targets of tyranny and authoritarian-takeover... even scarier are those who seem to agree that freedom of speech isn't more important than "not offending anyone". NEWSFLASH that may be fine and well on a personal, small-scale level among friends, family, village etc... but it, like many other things do not scale up well or safely, to the level of larger numbers of people; when people can no longer know each other personally. This is also why socialism looks fine on paper and sounds great... might even work on a small scale, but it fails in the most horrific way imaginable every time it's tried on state or larger scale. But i digress. if people aren't allowed to communicate openly, they will not learn, nor will anyone else know just how messed up they/others are, and so it leaves us all vulnerable to the only alternative there is to talking... action.] /end-of-rant]
I'm so impressed with the panels' research and analysis of this great story. You all put in more work than the entire writing staff at Disney, clearly.
Mate, I genuinely wouldn’t be surprised at all, and it would have Romeo *self deleting* and Juliet realising she is actually perfect and can get on in life without a man. I’m 100% serious.
I think they should have been a bit more honest and titled the movie "Wendy and it doesn't matter what his name is because he's male, so he's useless and unimportant compared to how brave and wonderful Wendy is." That seems to be the way they feel over in Hollywood.
In terms of audience approval, this flick is heading towards Velma levels (IOW, single digits). If _Peter Pandering and Mary Sue_ was any more of a dog it’d have fleas.
I always like how BaggageClaim manages to tie characters to symbolism (e.g. Tinkerbell as a fantasy vs Wendy as a real woman) and it makes me wonder why I didn't think of that myself
Curiously, one aspect they completely eliminated - and the 1953 Pan obscured - is that in the book it is TINKERBELL who is originally the 'mother' to the Lost Boys, even to the extent of playing aspects of motherhood such as tucking the boys in and making them take their (fake) medicine. This is why she is so insanely jealous of Peter allowing Wendy to show up and be the 'mother'. And, as mentioned, she actually is a better 'mother' in a real sense, even wanting to return the boys to the real world and adopt them because that's what would actually be better for them. In the book, Tinkerbell in no way cooperates so they have to sail Hook's ship back to England.
The whole "The pirates are Lost boys who Peter got rid of" is a really old tumblr headcanon that has never actually sat right with me. No one in Neverland grows up, sure, Peter could have thrown his 'toys' out of the pram, but they would still be young children, they wouldn't just immediately grow through puberty and become pirates.
@@MegaSpideymanI thought that they were just Neverland entities like the mermaids and natives. They don’t get any older than they already are and they play the role of the antagonist for the lost boys to fight against.
The original Peter pan literally explains there only being lost boys with the line "There are no "lost girls" because, as Peter explains, girls are far too clever to fall out of their prams" So for the remake they technically made girls a lot stupider than the original for "teh holey inclusion".
The counter I've heard for Wendy's "happy thoughts" of dying alone is that not everyone wants/needs a family to be happy. First off, again, nixing the motherly aspect of Wendy is nixing a core part of her character. Secondly, I haven't seen the movie, but I've seen a clip that flashes through her happy thoughts. Unless that clip portrayed it wrong, she was alone on her couch. When you've accomplished something, family or no, parent or no, the people you've effected will remember you fondly and celebrate what you've done. *Why didn't they show **_that?!_* I'm not talking about showing funeral, but even just a plaque on a building acknowledging the good she's done or and some adult reading it to their kid or _something._
Its true that not everyone wants or needs a family to be happy, but that "not everyone" represents a miniscule fraction of the entire human race. The vast, vast, vast majority of us _do_ want or need it. That argument sounds very much like a first-world self-insert (and particularly feminist) cope tactic doesnt it? Lol.
Someone brings up the problem of creating backstory for everyone as a problem. But I think the real issue with Hook is not that they gave him a backstory. It's that the backstory they gave him fit this pattern from so many modern movies where the villain HAS to have an intimate personal connection to the main character. Peter and Hook can't just hate one another because they represent these polar opposite ends of male childhood and adulthood. They have to have the long, drawn out, personal connection that explains their every interaction in intimate detail. Very few of these big budget movie writers seem to believe in the less-is-more concept anymore. Tell only what you need to make the conflict believable, and then STOP.
Said this below under another video.. making everyone related is a cheap trick to add some 'depth' to characters' relationships. We know that Hook is a pirate, which is quite enough, just like the sheriff being a sheriff in Robin Hood.
@@KopperNeoman I don't mean to say that every sheriff at that time was a villain, but we don't really need to know about this one's childhood traumas, or his entire backstory, to understand that he is not a good man. A few words about his 'deeds' are just enough for the story.
I do owe one thing to this remake - it's made me realize (by listening to the discussions around it) just how layered and nuanced and profound JM Barry's original story is.
It really is! There's so much in there about the nature of growing up and what it means to be an eternal child, among so many other profound themes. If you would like to see an actually good interpretation of the source material, definitely take a look at the 2003 live action film. You can tell that the makers really understood the book's subtext and tried to bring it out in the film. It's an adult version of the Peter Pan story without being drab or colourless, the actors are all having so much fun and the visual design of Neverland is pleasantly stylised. The film also has a very cool psychological trick up its sleeve where Hook and Mr Darling are played by the same actor (Jason Isaacs), as he traditionally was in the original stage version.
And the great thing is you probably picked up on all these ideas and subconsciously consumed them. That's the difference between past writers and modern ones. If they wanted to inject politics into stuff they used to do it in a much more nuanced and subtle way. Theres so much older content i love that didnt resonate with my belief system but it was presented in a good way that it wasnt problematic as a viewer to enjoy.
I've bought into the theory that the Girlboss is a body-snatching demon that travels from universe to universe, and whichever universe she travels to and possesses someone, she ruins it and moves onto the next.
While not wanting to be a mother as a woman is not a bad thing at all (not every man wants to be a father either), robbing Wendy of her motherly nature was just a horrible idea. It added so much to her character and was also the reason Peter brought her along: to be their mother.
Peter pan from Hook: my happy thought is being a father Wendy from this film: my happy thought I'd being a feminist What a fitting update for modern audiences™
It is interesting looking back at the gyrations of feminism over time. In my youth 'macho' behavior was mocked and feminists insisted that less aggressive female behavior was superior. Nowadays, macho behavior is feminine behavior.
Damnation, but TheLittlePlatoon is just so well thought and spake; always a pleasure listening to his thoughts and analyses. I'm so glad chaps like you guys are inspiring more of each other to have a voice. If memory serves: Mauler inspired you (Drinker) who inspired Platoon, and I just love all 3 of your opinions, personalities, and senses of humor -the type of mentally-functional good 'ol boys I'd most likely spend my time with given my druthers.
This video helped bring together what I have been thinking about for the past few months. For a change I can boil it down to two main point. Please, do not hesitate on exchanging your own thoughts. Here goes nothing. POINT ONE: It seems writers of these movies have not bothered to study the tale their story is based on. They took the name, read a review and/ or comments then wrote. They were never made to dissect stories in English class in high school. They never learned to break down what the author tried to write. It's like they don't understand the elements of crafting words. IE; motivation, story arc and characters development. Yes, I meant characters as in more than one. You can't have one character growing in a story. In addition, Rather than retelling the story you make your own. The ideas in Peter Pan redone as a whole new story. Captain Hook in my opinion would have been wonderful addition if done right. Hook use to be Peter's best friend. When he returns, he is an adult matured and leader of the pirates, who were evil toward the lost boys. Hook extends the hand of friendship and wishes to seal the gulf between the two. Peter, still a young lad feels betrayed and fights Captain Hook, cuts off his hand, which flies into the mouth of the hungry crocodile. Just one example of the multiple things that could improve the movie, in my opinion. POINT TWO: Please please please Hollywood stop with the woke or whatever any of what you want to call it. Yes, almost every story tries to teach or expand on the writer's personal belief. But stop pushing it down our throat. You want to show Wendy as a female is as good as any male don't make her a Mary Sue. Show her sword fighting with her brothers, but not winning. Maybe even getting hurt. But when she comes to Never Never Land she learns from the female leader of the lost girls. Yes, the lost girls. Why boys and girls. They are children and I remember my childhood 58 years ago. (Yes, I am 64) Us boys knew girls had cooties. I even called two gargoyles. (They became in a way my adopted sisters, never a romantic relationship. The only thing worse than a girl with cooties is a female gargoyle with cooties) In the climax the two lost groups combine forces and defeat the pirates. Wendy's training pays off and her and Peter fight back-to-back protecting each other, and Peter discovers Wendy does not have cooties. You have shown a woman can be just as good as a man, even the hero can make evil mistakes and both genders together can overcome anything. I hope I got my point across and not to many people want to chase me down and take my computer away. Most likely the extreme feminist on the left and the extreme conservatives on the right hate me. You can't please them unless you 100% repeat what they believe. Thank you for reading to the end. I know I have a tendency for long posts, so I appreciate anyone who reads to the end. Now your turn to comment, maybe even write something better than what I just wrote. It won't be that hard to be better.
@@TiagrajI Thank you for the compliment. I have to agree with you Disney won't listen nor would they use anything close to what I said. I'm not the only one, others have story ideas some better than mine. It's sad when all of the fan fiction is better than what the professionals (URRRP Gack, cough cough blurp shazbot argh) Sorry technical difficulty but I had a bucket nearby. I should know better than to have what Critical Drinker is drinking. Last time I did I grabbed Doomcock's helmet. Now I'm not allowed back to the center of the Earth. As I was saying sad day when fan fiction is better. All fan fiction for this story. Once more thank you and I hope we hear from others and their ideas.
I thoroughly recommend the 2003 live action Peter Pan. Jason Isaacs plays Hook wonderfully (not to mention his happy thoughts that allow him to fly are brilliant).
This discussion of adding back story reminds me of a discussion I heard about magic in stories. If you start to add rules or specific spells etc ala Harry Potter for instance, then you have to stick to those rules and all of the implications that come from them. If you're a bit more vague about it and use it sparingly ala LOTR, then it's easier to believe whatever you decide to do with it in the plot and move on.
It's interesting that you say that because I think Tolkien himself had a very different view. One of my favourite quotes of his refers to greatest god Iluvatar as "that one ever-present Person who is never absent and never named". And I think as a deeply devout person he means that quite earnestly and you can see it if you read the text with that in mind. To Tolkien, there was LOTS of interference by Iluvatar CONSTANTLY throughout. Things that just 'go right', 'coincidences' that happen. This is, I think, how he conceives of magick in his story and you can see that through the elves, who don't even refer to what they are doing as magick even though everyone else does. Ropes that just untie themselves when they need to and boats that know to stay afloat and to keep to the best parts of the river. Dirt that is just good for growing and food that is just good to eat. The TRUE magick is a kind of underlying structure that makes things fit together and it's both completely invisible if you don't know to look for it and completely obvious if you do. Flashy fireballs and glowy swords are just amateurish effects that TRUE magick has no need of. I think a good analogy would be the difference between a master chef and an amateur cook. The amateur probably has a recipe that he has to follow letter by letter, like a Harry Potter spell. You MUST turn the oven to 350 and you MUST mix the flour and sugar first before you add the eggs, but if you do everything exactly as the recipe says you magickally turn inedible ingredients into a yummy cake. Yay! But a master chef has moved entirely BEYOND the recipe. He'll throw things together often without the use of measuring tools at all, because he knows what it's supposed to look like and how it's supposed to feel. He might add completely different ingredients depending on what's in the fridge or what the temperature is outside. To you or I this would seem like chaos. But the results are almost anything he wants. We could say that the master chef doesn't really know 'magick' because he has no formula... but really it is the person reciting words on the page who doesn't know magick and can only do what he is told. I am reminded also of Aristotle. Probably not a surprise since he was a major authority for early Christianity. But he, too, had a view of the universe which saw it as a divinely created machine with all the parts intended to work together to inevitably produce a result which made everyone and everything better. A nice belief to have, if you can support it.
Fantasy author Brandon Sanderson has his rules of magic in fiction. Rule #1: The author's ability to use magic to solve problems in the plot is directly proportional to the reader's understanding of how the magic system works. Basically, if you want the heroes to be saved by some kind of magic, they need to understand how and why, and what limitations there are that prevent it being used to save them all the time.
@@TheNoonish Reminds me of a recent movie where they wanted a lot of magick, but they felt that they had to work hard to explain why magick couldn't just solve all problems. Too much magick can become a kind of anti-plot mechanism, and a good understanding of how magick works can counteract that. One of my absolute favourite books is 'Master of Five Magics' by Lyndon Hardy, which did go through five very detailed magick systems, each with its own advantages and limitations, and none of which could be used to solve all problems even though they were all very handy at times.
Holy crap I didn’t know this went streaming but this is probably the best panel I’ve ever seen. You finally got baggage claim on there. She is freaking amazing!
To be fair, Peter Pan was always a psycho in the original…but so was Hook. They’ve just ditched Peter being a child so effectively innocently cruel. Hook was always well educated and evil cruel.
Drunk Scottish Peter Pan where everybody is just a good old Scottish lad who's had a few drinks would be fucking hilarious. Especially if Tinkerbell and Wendy are both played by the hairiest manliest Scots they could drag out of the highlands and everyone plays it straight.
The original story (and the 2003 adaptation), Tink didn't just _betray_ the others, she straight up tried to get Wendy _killed_ by ordering the Lost Boys to shoot her down when she arrived and got separated from her brothers and Peter.
What I notice. Is they can't write a real hero. They always begin with offensive behaviour. Wendy throws her brothers under the bus. She hulk is right out the gate, bitchy towards Banner. Rose's first act is to electrocute Finn like a psycho. Rey attacks Finn. This is how they meet! The Willow princess acts exactly like Wendy. Bitchy towards her mom. Holdo's first act is to insult her junior officers. It's unprofessional. These are their first acts as characters with each other. Who begins friendships like this???
It's not about money. It's about sending a message. They dont want us to have families. They want you to be alone isolated climbing the corporate ladder, paying taxes until you die. All in the name of sticking it to the patriarchy. Slay queen. Slay.
Giving Captain Hook a tragic backstory completely misses the point. Everything in Neverland is supposed to be something that could be conjured by the imagination of a child. That's why Hook is a simplistic villain. It's by design.
The thing with classical literature still popular decades or even centuries later is, that it's not just imaginative and well-written, there usually is something more about them, that makes them timeless classics to this day. We don't just read them out of "cultural habit", they didn't just become popular and then people kinda sorta kept reading them. They stood the test of time and usually, that's a lot thanks to important themes or even philosophical ideas in those books. Peter Pan isn't just a story about a boy that never grows old, that lives on some imaginary adventure island, it's a story about growing up and what that means to a person. It's something that resounds with the readers, younger ones that might be curious but also a bit scared, those that are in the process of growing up who can relate and lastly grown-ups, that are reminded of their own experiences growing up. As such, you can read that book three times in your life and get completely different thing out of it on different levels. Current Disney writers couldn't put content and ideas of this magnitude in their movies to save their lives. It seems they can only do very shallow storylines with skin-deep messages, that are oftentimes vapidly presented or completely dysfunctional. Like in this new adaptation. Victorian era Wendy doesn't want to go to College, then there's something that Disney thinks is female empowerment and breaking societies misogynistic boundaries... but it falls entirely flat when you realize that Wendy going to college is actually breaking the Victorian mold and her resistance to do so makes no sense. Kinda like the live-action Mulan, that had some utterly bizarre attempt to combine (badly told) Western ideas of emancipation and empowerment with Chinese traditional (and utterly un-emancipated) family values. It's a shame, modern writers lack the ability to write subtle and thought-provoking storylines and characters, all they can do is bonk you over the head with a simplified and oftentimes poorly thought-out superficial political idea, that's then entirely relying on strawmen arguments. Handing over classic literature to those people will always lead to desaster and the sooner Disneydrones realize it, the better.
@@derkeheath5172 Keyword: sane. The woke are not. They don't live in the real world - it's reality that's 'wrong', not them - hence the constant striving to re-arrange and invert reality. And, kind of by definition, the woke can't possibly be wrong, ever, so they'll just keep doubling down. We keep seeing precisely this pattern play out, do we not?
Barrie's "Novelization"? Barrie's "Version"? Barrie's version is The Version, it's the original, not a novelization. Apart from that I agree with everything that was said.
Why would she even fantasize about her own death when looking into her future? No one wants to see that. Her not wanting children is one thing because she is selfish but why no husband? A good man would do nothing but enhance her life and not require pampering like a child. So in the entire world, in her own FANTASY, no man was good enough for her?? And no friends by her side either. She is totally alone, not even a pet goldfish. The only reason you could possibly justify that fantasy is if she just hated men. Did none of these hollywood writers have fathers? Were they all raised in single mother homes by a mom that swiped left on every decent guy on tinder until she got to the top 5% guy and thought yeah this guy with the shirtless gym selfie will stick around? It's just sad. In HER OWN FANTASY she sees herself not only dying but dying sad and alone with no friends, no family and nothing but a life of ego driven sludge chasing after the praise and approval of the very people she hates.
I scrolled through the comments on a Facebook ad for this movie and I had to go SO far to find the comments that weren’t some variation of “loved it” 🤔
When writers hate the source material and try to "fix" it for pat on back from "critics" you get such soul less gobble of garbage . And then they fans are toxic
An interesting tidbit about captain hook, is that in the script of the play, he is supposed to be played by the same actor who plays Mr Darling. My old theatre teacher pointed out to me, captain hook is very likely what Mr Darling would be without his wife’s influence. In any case, it does invite some interesting speculation.
ngl this whole video without the audio is similar to an online university lecture with the professer and the students with drinker being the obedient one with his camera on while all the others are just their for attendance.😂
I loved the part where Wendy said to Captain Hook "And this is to go... even further beyond! HAAAAA!" and then she had glowing rainbow hair and tattoos all over he body and Elsa from frozen confessed that she loved her after they defeated Captain Jack Sparrow and Wendy became the new Pan.
Satan has tricked women so thoroughly that he made them think they're empowered by giving up the one superpower they have: to give birth to a new life...
I liked Jude Law's new's Hook so much compared to Peter that I thought the same when I heard his backstory, I trhought "man, peter is a fecking psycho in this..."
i certainly would be on hooks side in this story. peter was always an effing psycho though. in the book it was only mention in one line, in the movie it was just mentioned briefly. sadly, we dont really get a sense that he's capable of that. He doesn't seem dangerous at all in the movie. but for him to reconcile with hook is ridiculous. i dont think that thats even a good message. lol its supposed to be good to use words and feel your feelings instead of kill each other but i think the time for talking was past. like maiming your girlfriend like throwing acid on her face because she wants to leave you then you 2 getting back together in the future. WTF?
Ha-ha! I never noticed before, but the "The Little Platoon's" cartoon avatar is actually live and his lips move when he talks and his eyes blink and move around when he sits there and listens...
When Wendy teamed up with Haakon Sigurdsson, Cleopatra and Ann Boleyn to blow up the Death Star, after winning the Infinity Gauntlet from Voldemort’s ‘Fight Club’ and rescuing The Shire, I was shaken to my core.
My favorite part was when it was revealed, that she had the Infinity Stones the entire time, when she said; “I am Iron-Wendy” and snapped Darth Vader out of existence, it was riveting and moving film making at it’s finest.
FYI SuperMario score on IMDB is only .4 pts higher than Rings of Power, it was much higher but IMDB brought it down, its now lower than Dungeons and Dragons, this is fascinating.
Do people really not remember that Tinkerbell's an antagonist? If not a straight up villain depending on how you feel about the fae. Girl bossing Wendy's pretty sad too, even if she did invent airplanes a few decades early. Neutering Peter Pan's even worse. I'd say I'm disappointed, but I'm not. To be disappointed you have to be let down in some way, and this is pretty much the slop I expect from Disney.
Yeah, that was definitely the worst Peter Pan movie I've ever seen, and I've seen most of them. EDIT: I do however need to play devil's advocate about the flying thing. Peter Pan isn't set in the Victorian era, it's apparently set in 1902. Which means, barring accidents/murder etc, Wendy would live through both world wars, and there were documented female fighter pilots in both. So it isn't QUITE far fetched for her to fly a plane.
The best live version is the 1960 recording with Mary Martin This is a color version of the 1956 stage show, which was also televised live. Most of the original cast is in this special and it’s very good
I'm sure I saw the 1953 movie at some point but I never thought about all these nuances of the story before hearing this analysis. Now I want to see the animated film again.
Today's feminists think the only wany to compare male and female is to show girls can do anything boys can do (but better) rather than highlighting the things that makewomen special. I think this is shown in this movie more than most. Instead of Wendy being a mother figures she has to be the better sword fighter etc...
My favorite part was when, after Peter and Wendy defeats Hook, Peter picks up his detached hook and says “This hook is literal perfection”. To which Wendy snatches it away from him and says, “It will be….once it fits a woman!” Riveting.
Sadly I can't tell if you're trolling or not 😅
Stunning if ture
I liked when Tiger Lily took her tomahawk and smashed open a Horcrux, destroying a piece of Voldemort's soul, that will be a precious cinematic moment I can carry with me forever.
Maybe one of her 'toys' when she grows up :P
@@kipolem53 you can thank Jennifer Lawrence for paving the way for such strong female characters!
As someone else pointed out, I love how Wendy dreamed of flying a WWI-style airplane... when those airplanes didn't exist when she was a child. *sigh* Disney truly doesn't care about history anymore.
She did though because after the events of Endgame was over Antman popped back into the time machine with a spare suit so Wendy could be whisked forward to 1917 to meet Manfred von Richthofen who actually gave her a few flying lessons in his favourite triplane.However because his English wasn’t so good he ended up with an embarrassing smack on the cheek when he offerd to Fokker!
Did you honestly expect the writers doing _research_ on the time period this is supposed to be set in?
There is no history, only an endless present in which the Party is always right...🤔
I'm doing my best to save information on the current state of the world so future generations know what's happening. But that may be a bit optimistic since there may be no future generations.
@@lullaby218 And that's a _good_ thing
Lara, the Critical Doggo, had the best take on Wendy and Patel Pan.
She was incredibly concise and insightful. I hope she stays as a permanent host for The Open Bar.
this is the only reason I watch these open bars :D
She definitely illustrated a winning strategy in how to deal with the "Peter Pan and Wendy" movie.
Ignore it, and enjoy your life.
She definitely comes out Top Dog in this discussion. No bones about it, she did not take her analysis lying down. Best of all, she focused on the parts of the film that were important. One might describe her as a good girl for this.
I was blown away at her points. Such insight, such wisdom! Currently shaken to my core
I found her comments to be ruff at times but commend her for never rolling over. She had a bone to pick, didnt hesitate to scratch at the buried truths and overall it was just a treat to watch.
Dying old and alone on a couch with no friends, family or kids around is the 2023 idea of being a proper feminist. The future of the human race looks dim.
It’s definitely a good example of where our society is headed
Genuinely no idea what they were thinking having that anywhere in the movie.
@@axiss5840 What?
@@MegaSpideyman It's a scene in the movie.
@@axiss5840 What do they say exactly?
It makes me appreciate Hook so much more and realize even more that Spielberg understood the lore. Peter’s happy thought was his children. He realized that it wasn’t even his love for Moira that made leave neverland, but the vision he had of himself being a father.
Hook is a classic and Robin Williams was amazing as Peter along with Dustin Hoffman as Hook
Hoffman as Captain Hook is a classic.
“Don’t try to stop me Smee. I’m going to do it. Don’t you dare try to stop me. Smee. Try and stop me! SMEE!
Never scare me like that again.”
Well, there it is, see. Good husbands and fathers who are actually present are poison to modern writers.
This was my childhood Peter Pan movie and honestly it’s a great movie.
Fatherhood as an aspiration is the very antithesis of everything Disney believes in.
A 15% audience score on Rotten Tomatoes. And here I thought this movie was for modern audiences...
"It's not for YOUR modern audience"
And that's after they spent so much effort to make it hard to vote down movies but easy to vote up movies.
They’re grooming a modern audience.
Modern audiences = lesbians and blacks.
1% and 13% US population. 😂😂
Modern audiences hate s**t for modern audiences.
Remember how Peter was chasing his shadow as part of his introduction as a character? Metaphor of the endless child who refuses to grow up. I love that. 😊
I mean this seriously and without hyperbole: This video is the best for both describing how badly the producers&writers gutted this story and how, in a global sense, these writers simply don't have the emotional life experience to write anything with character depth. Ever. Sincerely I say, this video should be distributed to every so-called film and screen-writing school across the country. It's a lesson on so many levels of what makes a story work - and what is trite and soulless. I'm going to save the URL and just use this from now on to send to people.
These writers never grew up so they CAN'T write a story about the conflict between needing to grow up and the desire to retain the innocence and security of childhood.
You don't have to have life experience. But these awful juvenile writers write as if they never read any BOOKS. They simply don't understand classic ways to make literature work, and have no experience of complex plots and characters that don't fit some contemporary ideology. Ideology makes for BAD art.
@@JOHN----DOE You're sorta right. Experience in a story isn't necessary, otherwise only astronauts, killers, detectives, fairies, etc would be able to write. Which hits on the larger side of your point...
These people have No Imagination. Their Inner Life is void of Truth or humanity.
They have Little to No Talent, which is why they've been hired.
They don't have much in the way of Skill, either. Their abilities are below entry level.
You see, Imagination, Talent, and Skills aren't what's being sold. It's socio-political ideology. And as college graduates, these companies once thought they were getting a "fresh, new, young, modern" perspective.
Until they realized that these college grads had Nothing to say, Nothing to write about, and Nothing to offer.
But, by the time they figured this out -- which they should have known by looking at their portfolios -- the shift had taken place, and none of these attributes were needed because What became the goal of the corporate middlemen was Changing the culture by changing its stories.
So, the franchises were bought and targeted. And when the fans rebelled, they excused it as bigotry against [Enter Group Here].
Just watch Disney's videos on the writing roundtable for Star Wars. The only thing they discuss is how to insert their ideologies. Not once do they discuss the original stories, legacy, or improving anything.
It's been about one thing and one thing only. Search for that video. It's very interesting
I’m rooting for the alligator in this movie
The alligator should have killed everyone
Crocodile. 😉😉😉
@@pittland44 are Alligators not allowed to play Crocodiles in movies now? Freakin Hollyweird Idiots ruin everything.
@@Torgonius The fucker straight up assumed its species.
@@Torgonius That was the funniest thing I've read in a while. You win the internet for today my friend.
So, here's my biggest question:
If Hook was found and taken in by the pirates, and eventually rose through the ranks to command them... well, they said in this video the pirates are basically Hook's "found family". Found families breed happy memories. Even if they were evil pirates, Hook bonded with them enough to, even as captain, stick around rather than leave to find his actual family. So how is it possible that such a character with such a backstory would not have a single positive memory? They don't even have to be morally good. Hook just has to acknowledge them as positive to him.
The 2003 adaptation has a bit of fun with that concept.
In that movie's finale, Hook evens the playing field by getting some fairy dust as well. When he then notices he's floating right above the crocodile he desparately starts rattling down _his_ happy thoughts to not fall down.
Which include gems like "kittens on spikes".
@@EvilDoresh That film's a bit of a forgotten gem.
Peter: "Just think happy thoughts, positive memories! You'll be able to fly!"
Hook: [starts flying]
Peter: "Awesome, how'd you do it? What's your happy thought?"
Hook: "Well, that one time, we caught a Lost Boy and fired him from our main canon. His head made such a funny noise hitting the rocks near the beach."
Peter: "Yo, that's ... fucked up!"
Hook: "Innit, hee hee" [flies even higher]
Pillage, plunder, singing drunk at beach parties, sexual debauchery!
My personal surprise is that they kept the Native American character despite the fact she's a literal stereotype of the Noble Savage gimmick
The supposed anti-racists are the worst racists of the lot. They even have her speaking in her native language which nobody else can understand. Why would anyone do this? It's just a display at that point.
I am no longer surprised by anything that makes peoples of Christian/Pagan and/or European ancestry look bad in film/media anymore. Just as a thought experiment[, and proof of concept], watch TV/movies from the last ... oh maybe 50 years, and as you do so, try and estimate the % of villains who were played by actors pretending to be characters of a certain ethno-cultural, geographical-background shall-we-say, and you will see what i mean. I warn you though, once you start noticing it you may have difficulty ever ceasing to notice it.
[P.S. Rant incoming:
Sorry for being somewhat cryptic about exactly what i mean here, but i'm sure enough of you can figure out what i mean, if you care to do so, and i prefer to be as "polite" as possible when putting things up online (since anything that goes online apparently does so permanently and privacy is rapidly becoming either impossible or nearly-so).
[Even though freedom of speech is the foundation that all decent social systems are built upon, and one of the first targets of tyranny and authoritarian-takeover... even scarier are those who seem to agree that freedom of speech isn't more important than "not offending anyone". NEWSFLASH that may be fine and well on a personal, small-scale level among friends, family, village etc... but it, like many other things do not scale up well or safely, to the level of larger numbers of people; when people can no longer know each other personally. This is also why socialism looks fine on paper and sounds great... might even work on a small scale, but it fails in the most horrific way imaginable every time it's tried on state or larger scale. But i digress.
if people aren't allowed to communicate openly, they will not learn, nor will anyone else know just how messed up they/others are, and so it leaves us all vulnerable to the only alternative there is to talking... action.]
/end-of-rant]
She didn’t talk in the original movie at all, but she did “nose kiss“ Peter Pan.
I’m surprised she wasn’t blue with a tail!
Also considering they put a warning disclaimer on Peter Pan because of that entire scene too lol
I'm so impressed with the panels' research and analysis of this great story. You all put in more work than the entire writing staff at Disney, clearly.
My favorite was when some dude chugged a Bud Light and magically transformed into Peter Pan.
There was a 🌈 coming out of his bum.
Tinkerbell more like
Neverembracerealityland.
@@alsmith9853 yeah
Imagine adapting Peter Pan and leaving out the feelings between Peter and Wendy. Like, what's next, Romeo and Juliet, but without romance?
Mate, I genuinely wouldn’t be surprised at all, and it would have Romeo *self deleting* and Juliet realising she is actually perfect and can get on in life without a man. I’m 100% serious.
Romeo and Juliet, but romeo is her sterotypical 90's sitcom gay best friend who talks about boy trouble with her
Juliet: to be or not to be.. *Blows up building* not to be 😂
Good stories tell the truth about the characters. Bad stories tell the truth about the authors.
🤯
I loved when Wendy looked at her mother and stated "There is a tempest within me."
That an animated pony named Tempest Shadow is more compelling that anything coming out of Disney nowadays is hilarious to me.
I could listen to Platoon speaking about Peter Pan for hours.
I think they should have been a bit more honest and titled the movie "Wendy and it doesn't matter what his name is because he's male, so he's useless and unimportant compared to how brave and wonderful Wendy is."
That seems to be the way they feel over in Hollywood.
I'd have called it *"Wendy: The Savior of The Lost Non-Gender-Specific Kids of Neverland."*
I would have called it, "Excuse me, sir, this is a Wendy's", because I'm in it for the memes.
@@HerculesBallsInc "...because I'm FRESH, NOT FROZEN!"
I got chills at when Peter said "These magic powers are perfection" and Wendy went "They will be when they are on a girl."
She actually does when she declares something like "This is not male magic."
Culturally appropriating fairy magic, what a botch.
You go girl!!
Is batwoman officially the worst series with the best memes?
In terms of audience approval, this flick is heading towards Velma levels (IOW, single digits).
If _Peter Pandering and Mary Sue_ was any more of a dog it’d have fleas.
I always like how BaggageClaim manages to tie characters to symbolism (e.g. Tinkerbell as a fantasy vs Wendy as a real woman) and it makes me wonder why I didn't think of that myself
Curiously, one aspect they completely eliminated - and the 1953 Pan obscured - is that in the book it is TINKERBELL who is originally the 'mother' to the Lost Boys, even to the extent of playing aspects of motherhood such as tucking the boys in and making them take their (fake) medicine. This is why she is so insanely jealous of Peter allowing Wendy to show up and be the 'mother'. And, as mentioned, she actually is a better 'mother' in a real sense, even wanting to return the boys to the real world and adopt them because that's what would actually be better for them. In the book, Tinkerbell in no way cooperates so they have to sail Hook's ship back to England.
When 1953 Disney updated things for modern audiences, they were actually catering to audiences, not trying to indoctrinate them.
That Tinkerbell is a fantasy is a idea that Jordan Peterson has also put forward.
The whole "The pirates are Lost boys who Peter got rid of" is a really old tumblr headcanon that has never actually sat right with me. No one in Neverland grows up, sure, Peter could have thrown his 'toys' out of the pram, but they would still be young children, they wouldn't just immediately grow through puberty and become pirates.
Butt pirates maybe.
Indeed! It doesn't really make sense. Though, how are Hook and co adults in other versions?
It makes the most sense, to me, if they're as eternal as Neverland. Everything there is as it always has been, as a child imagines it must be.
@@MegaSpideymanI thought that they were just Neverland entities like the mermaids and natives. They don’t get any older than they already are and they play the role of the antagonist for the lost boys to fight against.
The original Peter pan literally explains there only being lost boys with the line "There are no "lost girls" because, as Peter explains, girls are far too clever to fall out of their prams"
So for the remake they technically made girls a lot stupider than the original for "teh holey inclusion".
SJWs don't read books but somehow the ignorant are the others
The counter I've heard for Wendy's "happy thoughts" of dying alone is that not everyone wants/needs a family to be happy.
First off, again, nixing the motherly aspect of Wendy is nixing a core part of her character.
Secondly, I haven't seen the movie, but I've seen a clip that flashes through her happy thoughts. Unless that clip portrayed it wrong, she was alone on her couch. When you've accomplished something, family or no, parent or no, the people you've effected will remember you fondly and celebrate what you've done. *Why didn't they show **_that?!_* I'm not talking about showing funeral, but even just a plaque on a building acknowledging the good she's done or and some adult reading it to their kid or _something._
Its true that not everyone wants or needs a family to be happy, but that "not everyone" represents a miniscule fraction of the entire human race. The vast, vast, vast majority of us _do_ want or need it. That argument sounds very much like a first-world self-insert (and particularly feminist) cope tactic doesnt it? Lol.
‘Hook’ was the only live action Peter Pan movie we ever needed and will never be topped, RIP Robin Williams.
Someone brings up the problem of creating backstory for everyone as a problem. But I think the real issue with Hook is not that they gave him a backstory. It's that the backstory they gave him fit this pattern from so many modern movies where the villain HAS to have an intimate personal connection to the main character.
Peter and Hook can't just hate one another because they represent these polar opposite ends of male childhood and adulthood. They have to have the long, drawn out, personal connection that explains their every interaction in intimate detail.
Very few of these big budget movie writers seem to believe in the less-is-more concept anymore. Tell only what you need to make the conflict believable, and then STOP.
Said this below under another video.. making everyone related is a cheap trick to add some 'depth' to characters' relationships. We know that Hook is a pirate, which is quite enough, just like the sheriff being a sheriff in Robin Hood.
@williet.3058 The Sheriff bring corrupt*
If he was just a sheriff, Robin would be the villain protagonist.
@@KopperNeoman I don't mean to say that every sheriff at that time was a villain, but we don't really need to know about this one's childhood traumas, or his entire backstory, to understand that he is not a good man. A few words about his 'deeds' are just enough for the story.
Regardless of your favorite version, no wardrobe will ever beat the OG Tinkerbell… (but Ludivine Sagnier was fire in the 2003 version)
OG Tinkerbell is still awesome
I do owe one thing to this remake - it's made me realize (by listening to the discussions around it) just how layered and nuanced and profound JM Barry's original story is.
It really is! There's so much in there about the nature of growing up and what it means to be an eternal child, among so many other profound themes. If you would like to see an actually good interpretation of the source material, definitely take a look at the 2003 live action film. You can tell that the makers really understood the book's subtext and tried to bring it out in the film. It's an adult version of the Peter Pan story without being drab or colourless, the actors are all having so much fun and the visual design of Neverland is pleasantly stylised. The film also has a very cool psychological trick up its sleeve where Hook and Mr Darling are played by the same actor (Jason Isaacs), as he traditionally was in the original stage version.
And the great thing is you probably picked up on all these ideas and subconsciously consumed them. That's the difference between past writers and modern ones. If they wanted to inject politics into stuff they used to do it in a much more nuanced and subtle way. Theres so much older content i love that didnt resonate with my belief system but it was presented in a good way that it wasnt problematic as a viewer to enjoy.
I've bought into the theory that the Girlboss is a body-snatching demon that travels from universe to universe, and whichever universe she travels to and possesses someone, she ruins it and moves onto the next.
In the Director's Cut, Wendy pegs Peter Pan. He concedes his manhood to her after enjoying it.
While not wanting to be a mother as a woman is not a bad thing at all (not every man wants to be a father either), robbing Wendy of her motherly nature was just a horrible idea. It added so much to her character and was also the reason Peter brought her along: to be their mother.
Peter pan from Hook: my happy thought is being a father
Wendy from this film: my happy thought I'd being a feminist
What a fitting update for modern audiences™
It is interesting looking back at the gyrations of feminism over time. In my youth 'macho' behavior was mocked and feminists insisted that less aggressive female behavior was superior. Nowadays, macho behavior is feminine behavior.
Why do you think that is?
@@MegaSpideyman
Over the decades the feminist movement devolved from something reasonable to hateful nihilism.
Freud said it best : Penis envy
What could be more depressing than looking to your future-dying alone - & unloved.
At this point it’s more entertaining to watch Disney burn their money and get humiliated than to watch their actual movies
The scene where Arnold shouts "GET TO DA CHOPPA", really gave me goosebumps!
When I saw the chopper's name was 'Pixie Dust', I knew the writers truly understood the original story.
I stood up and applauded when Wendy called Captain Hook one ugly mother fuckr.
I knew this movie was for modern audiences when Wendy said to Peter to ‘grow up into a sexual Tyrannosaurus, just like me’
Damnation, but TheLittlePlatoon is just so well thought and spake; always a pleasure listening to his thoughts and analyses. I'm so glad chaps like you guys are inspiring more of each other to have a voice. If memory serves: Mauler inspired you (Drinker) who inspired Platoon, and I just love all 3 of your opinions, personalities, and senses of humor -the type of mentally-functional good 'ol boys I'd most likely spend my time with given my druthers.
16:11
Peter grabs Hook and tells him to "think happy thoughts" to be able to fly.
Hook looks at him and says, "All I have are negative thoughts."
This video helped bring together what I have been thinking about for the past few months. For a change I can boil it down to two main point. Please, do not hesitate on exchanging your own thoughts. Here goes nothing.
POINT ONE: It seems writers of these movies have not bothered to study the tale their story is based on. They took the name, read a review and/ or comments then wrote. They were never made to dissect stories in English class in high school. They never learned to break down what the author tried to write. It's like they don't understand the elements of crafting words. IE; motivation, story arc and characters development. Yes, I meant characters as in more than one. You can't have one character growing in a story. In addition, Rather than retelling the story you make your own. The ideas in Peter Pan redone as a whole new story. Captain Hook in my opinion would have been wonderful addition if done right. Hook use to be Peter's best friend. When he returns, he is an adult matured and leader of the pirates, who were evil toward the lost boys. Hook extends the hand of friendship and wishes to seal the gulf between the two. Peter, still a young lad feels betrayed and fights Captain Hook, cuts off his hand, which flies into the mouth of the hungry crocodile. Just one example of the multiple things that could improve the movie, in my opinion.
POINT TWO: Please please please Hollywood stop with the woke or whatever any of what you want to call it. Yes, almost every story tries to teach or expand on the writer's personal belief. But stop pushing it down our throat. You want to show Wendy as a female is as good as any male don't make her a Mary Sue. Show her sword fighting with her brothers, but not winning. Maybe even getting hurt. But when she comes to Never Never Land she learns from the female leader of the lost girls. Yes, the lost girls. Why boys and girls. They are children and I remember my childhood 58 years ago. (Yes, I am 64) Us boys knew girls had cooties. I even called two gargoyles. (They became in a way my adopted sisters, never a romantic relationship. The only thing worse than a girl with cooties is a female gargoyle with cooties) In the climax the two lost groups combine forces and defeat the pirates. Wendy's training pays off and her and Peter fight back-to-back protecting each other, and Peter discovers Wendy does not have cooties. You have shown a woman can be just as good as a man, even the hero can make evil mistakes and both genders together can overcome anything.
I hope I got my point across and not to many people want to chase me down and take my computer away. Most likely the extreme feminist on the left and the extreme conservatives on the right hate me. You can't please them unless you 100% repeat what they believe. Thank you for reading to the end. I know I have a tendency for long posts, so I appreciate anyone who reads to the end. Now your turn to comment, maybe even write something better than what I just wrote. It won't be that hard to be better.
Great story. Disney won't listen though
@@TiagrajI Thank you for the compliment. I have to agree with you Disney won't listen nor would they use anything close to what I said. I'm not the only one, others have story ideas some better than mine. It's sad when all of the fan fiction is better than what the professionals (URRRP Gack, cough cough blurp shazbot argh) Sorry technical difficulty but I had a bucket nearby. I should know better than to have what Critical Drinker is drinking. Last time I did I grabbed Doomcock's helmet. Now I'm not allowed back to the center of the Earth. As I was saying sad day when fan fiction is better. All fan fiction for this story. Once more thank you and I hope we hear from others and their ideas.
I'd like to see a grimdark reimaging where Peter is a villain, the Lost Boys suffer from Stockholm Syndrome, and Hook is the hero.
I thoroughly recommend the 2003 live action Peter Pan. Jason Isaacs plays Hook wonderfully (not to mention his happy thoughts that allow him to fly are brilliant).
The critical doggo’s reaction to the audience score for PP&W was perfect.
Modern writers are endlessly funny to me. "We hate men, so let's write our women with all the traits of men that we hate so much!"
Brilliant.
This discussion of adding back story reminds me of a discussion I heard about magic in stories. If you start to add rules or specific spells etc ala Harry Potter for instance, then you have to stick to those rules and all of the implications that come from them. If you're a bit more vague about it and use it sparingly ala LOTR, then it's easier to believe whatever you decide to do with it in the plot and move on.
It's interesting that you say that because I think Tolkien himself had a very different view.
One of my favourite quotes of his refers to greatest god Iluvatar as "that one ever-present Person who is never absent and never named". And I think as a deeply devout person he means that quite earnestly and you can see it if you read the text with that in mind. To Tolkien, there was LOTS of interference by Iluvatar CONSTANTLY throughout. Things that just 'go right', 'coincidences' that happen. This is, I think, how he conceives of magick in his story and you can see that through the elves, who don't even refer to what they are doing as magick even though everyone else does. Ropes that just untie themselves when they need to and boats that know to stay afloat and to keep to the best parts of the river. Dirt that is just good for growing and food that is just good to eat. The TRUE magick is a kind of underlying structure that makes things fit together and it's both completely invisible if you don't know to look for it and completely obvious if you do. Flashy fireballs and glowy swords are just amateurish effects that TRUE magick has no need of.
I think a good analogy would be the difference between a master chef and an amateur cook. The amateur probably has a recipe that he has to follow letter by letter, like a Harry Potter spell. You MUST turn the oven to 350 and you MUST mix the flour and sugar first before you add the eggs, but if you do everything exactly as the recipe says you magickally turn inedible ingredients into a yummy cake. Yay! But a master chef has moved entirely BEYOND the recipe. He'll throw things together often without the use of measuring tools at all, because he knows what it's supposed to look like and how it's supposed to feel. He might add completely different ingredients depending on what's in the fridge or what the temperature is outside. To you or I this would seem like chaos. But the results are almost anything he wants. We could say that the master chef doesn't really know 'magick' because he has no formula... but really it is the person reciting words on the page who doesn't know magick and can only do what he is told.
I am reminded also of Aristotle. Probably not a surprise since he was a major authority for early Christianity. But he, too, had a view of the universe which saw it as a divinely created machine with all the parts intended to work together to inevitably produce a result which made everyone and everything better. A nice belief to have, if you can support it.
Fantasy author Brandon Sanderson has his rules of magic in fiction. Rule #1: The author's ability to use magic to solve problems in the plot is directly proportional to the reader's understanding of how the magic system works.
Basically, if you want the heroes to be saved by some kind of magic, they need to understand how and why, and what limitations there are that prevent it being used to save them all the time.
@@TheNoonish Reminds me of a recent movie where they wanted a lot of magick, but they felt that they had to work hard to explain why magick couldn't just solve all problems. Too much magick can become a kind of anti-plot mechanism, and a good understanding of how magick works can counteract that.
One of my absolute favourite books is 'Master of Five Magics' by Lyndon Hardy, which did go through five very detailed magick systems, each with its own advantages and limitations, and none of which could be used to solve all problems even though they were all very handy at times.
Holy crap I didn’t know this went streaming but this is probably the best panel I’ve ever seen. You finally got baggage claim on there. She is freaking amazing!
To be fair, Peter Pan was always a psycho in the original…but so was Hook.
They’ve just ditched Peter being a child so effectively innocently cruel. Hook was always well educated and evil cruel.
I watched this live and it was pretty enjoyable, I liked each of your views on this.
Peter Pan (2003) will forever remain the Gold standard of Modern Peter Pan adaptations to me.
It's genuinely crazy how in this time men have basically become more motherly than some women. This is just getting too ridiculous
No joke but Drinker would actually make a kick ass Captain Hook even if the script is shit.
Drunk Scottish Peter Pan where everybody is just a good old Scottish lad who's had a few drinks would be fucking hilarious. Especially if Tinkerbell and Wendy are both played by the hairiest manliest Scots they could drag out of the highlands and everyone plays it straight.
The original story (and the 2003 adaptation), Tink didn't just _betray_ the others, she straight up tried to get Wendy _killed_ by ordering the Lost Boys to shoot her down when she arrived and got separated from her brothers and Peter.
What I notice. Is they can't write a real hero. They always begin with offensive behaviour.
Wendy throws her brothers under the bus.
She hulk is right out the gate, bitchy towards Banner.
Rose's first act is to electrocute Finn like a psycho.
Rey attacks Finn. This is how they meet!
The Willow princess acts exactly like Wendy. Bitchy towards her mom.
Holdo's first act is to insult her junior officers. It's unprofessional.
These are their first acts as characters with each other.
Who begins friendships like this???
The actor who plays Peter is actually older than the actor who plays Wendy. Had to look it up and still don’t believe it.
It's not about money. It's about sending a message. They dont want us to have families. They want you to be alone isolated climbing the corporate ladder, paying taxes until you die. All in the name of sticking it to the patriarchy. Slay queen. Slay.
The colour in this movie was so melancholic, I kept on expecting it to take a twist into something like War Horse or 1917
Giving Captain Hook a tragic backstory completely misses the point. Everything in Neverland is supposed to be something that could be conjured by the imagination of a child. That's why Hook is a simplistic villain. It's by design.
Peter Pan and Wendy are better as peanut butter and a square hamburger.
The thing with classical literature still popular decades or even centuries later is, that it's not just imaginative and well-written, there usually is something more about them, that makes them timeless classics to this day.
We don't just read them out of "cultural habit", they didn't just become popular and then people kinda sorta kept reading them. They stood the test of time and usually, that's a lot thanks to important themes or even philosophical ideas in those books.
Peter Pan isn't just a story about a boy that never grows old, that lives on some imaginary adventure island, it's a story about growing up and what that means to a person. It's something that resounds with the readers, younger ones that might be curious but also a bit scared, those that are in the process of growing up who can relate and lastly grown-ups, that are reminded of their own experiences growing up. As such, you can read that book three times in your life and get completely different thing out of it on different levels.
Current Disney writers couldn't put content and ideas of this magnitude in their movies to save their lives. It seems they can only do very shallow storylines with skin-deep messages, that are oftentimes vapidly presented or completely dysfunctional.
Like in this new adaptation. Victorian era Wendy doesn't want to go to College, then there's something that Disney thinks is female empowerment and breaking societies misogynistic boundaries... but it falls entirely flat when you realize that Wendy going to college is actually breaking the Victorian mold and her resistance to do so makes no sense.
Kinda like the live-action Mulan, that had some utterly bizarre attempt to combine (badly told) Western ideas of emancipation and empowerment with Chinese traditional (and utterly un-emancipated) family values.
It's a shame, modern writers lack the ability to write subtle and thought-provoking storylines and characters, all they can do is bonk you over the head with a simplified and oftentimes poorly thought-out superficial political idea, that's then entirely relying on strawmen arguments.
Handing over classic literature to those people will always lead to desaster and the sooner Disneydrones realize it, the better.
Wendy, Featuring a Special Guest Appearance by Someone Claiming to be Peter Pan.
Wokeness is a fad now. Most of these kids will move on from it when they reach adulthood.
I like your optimism. I'll leave it at that.
We ALL get our asses handed to us by the real world eventually. The sane ones are humbled by it.
@@derkeheath5172 amen
@@derkeheath5172 Keyword: sane. The woke are not. They don't live in the real world - it's reality that's 'wrong', not them - hence the constant striving to re-arrange and invert reality. And, kind of by definition, the woke can't possibly be wrong, ever, so they'll just keep doubling down. We keep seeing precisely this pattern play out, do we not?
Barrie's "Novelization"? Barrie's "Version"? Barrie's version is The Version, it's the original, not a novelization. Apart from that I agree with everything that was said.
I’ll just rewatch Hook and avoid this garbage.
I love the part when Wendy revealed to Peter that she was his father.
Why would she even fantasize about her own death when looking into her future? No one wants to see that. Her not wanting children is one thing because she is selfish but why no husband? A good man would do nothing but enhance her life and not require pampering like a child. So in the entire world, in her own FANTASY, no man was good enough for her?? And no friends by her side either. She is totally alone, not even a pet goldfish. The only reason you could possibly justify that fantasy is if she just hated men. Did none of these hollywood writers have fathers? Were they all raised in single mother homes by a mom that swiped left on every decent guy on tinder until she got to the top 5% guy and thought yeah this guy with the shirtless gym selfie will stick around? It's just sad. In HER OWN FANTASY she sees herself not only dying but dying sad and alone with no friends, no family and nothing but a life of ego driven sludge chasing after the praise and approval of the very people she hates.
I scrolled through the comments on a Facebook ad for this movie and I had to go SO far to find the comments that weren’t some variation of “loved it” 🤔
I’m shocked they did not push any underlining themes of “MAPism” in this. I 100% believe that young boy love is their long term goal.
My guy turn Peter pan into an eldritch horror and I promise you MILLIONS AND A TRILOGY
There is such a big devious force driving these things in the background.
It wasn’t a crocodile,it was an alligator identifying as a crocodile.
When writers hate the source material and try to "fix" it for pat on back from "critics" you get such soul less gobble of garbage . And then they fans are toxic
An interesting tidbit about captain hook, is that in the script of the play, he is supposed to be played by the same actor who plays Mr Darling. My old theatre teacher pointed out to me, captain hook is very likely what Mr Darling would be without his wife’s influence. In any case, it does invite some interesting speculation.
ngl this whole video without the audio is similar to an online university lecture with the professer and the students with drinker being the obedient one with his camera on while all the others are just their for attendance.😂
I’m just surprised they didn’t have Wendy & Tiger Lily falling in love, for the L’s, B’s & G’s, of course
15:14 Drinker was about to say "Netherealm" 😂😂
I loved the part where Wendy said to Captain Hook "And this is to go... even further beyond! HAAAAA!" and then she had glowing rainbow hair and tattoos all over he body and Elsa from frozen confessed that she loved her after they defeated Captain Jack Sparrow and Wendy became the new Pan.
I’m happy I got a chance to grow up with a loving mother todays society pushes for men to be loving but woman to not be it’s fucking weird
Satan has tricked women so thoroughly that he made them think they're empowered by giving up the one superpower they have: to give birth to a new life...
I liked Jude Law's new's Hook so much compared to Peter that I thought the same when I heard his backstory, I trhought "man, peter is a fecking psycho in this..."
i certainly would be on hooks side in this story. peter was always an effing psycho though. in the book it was only mention in one line, in the movie it was just mentioned briefly. sadly, we dont really get a sense that he's capable of that. He doesn't seem dangerous at all in the movie. but for him to reconcile with hook is ridiculous. i dont think that thats even a good message. lol its supposed to be good to use words and feel your feelings instead of kill each other but i think the time for talking was past. like maiming your girlfriend like throwing acid on her face because she wants to leave you then you 2 getting back together in the future. WTF?
Drinker's review video have 1.4 Millions views in 2 days !!!! .... (14 times more .. than the movie he review) ...
Marvelous deconstruction of Peter Pan and Wendy. It is always great to hear the thoughtful discussion of this group.
Can’t believe Jude Law sullied his name with this atrocity
He's just not the type for Hook and should have picked another role
Ha-ha! I never noticed before, but the "The Little Platoon's" cartoon avatar is actually live and his lips move when he talks and his eyes blink and move around when he sits there and listens...
When Wendy teamed up with Haakon Sigurdsson, Cleopatra and Ann Boleyn to blow up the Death Star, after winning the Infinity Gauntlet from Voldemort’s ‘Fight Club’ and rescuing The Shire, I was shaken to my core.
Also evil does exist sadly in this world and there is evil that just cannot be explained away with glib muh broken childhood backstories.
It had audiences? Really?
It had people watch the first 10 minutes then give up and jump online to warn others.
If anyone wants a good alternative, I'd recommend the Peter Pan Goes Wrong play
My favorite part is when Wendy said "It's Wendin' Time."
What? Too lame of a meme reference?
My favorite part was when it was revealed, that she had the Infinity Stones the entire time, when she said; “I am Iron-Wendy” and snapped Darth Vader out of existence, it was riveting and moving film making at it’s finest.
FYI SuperMario score on IMDB is only .4 pts higher than Rings of Power, it was much higher but IMDB brought it down, its now lower than Dungeons and Dragons, this is fascinating.
Do people really not remember that Tinkerbell's an antagonist? If not a straight up villain depending on how you feel about the fae. Girl bossing Wendy's pretty sad too, even if she did invent airplanes a few decades early. Neutering Peter Pan's even worse.
I'd say I'm disappointed, but I'm not. To be disappointed you have to be let down in some way, and this is pretty much the slop I expect from Disney.
Yeah, that was definitely the worst Peter Pan movie I've ever seen, and I've seen most of them.
EDIT: I do however need to play devil's advocate about the flying thing. Peter Pan isn't set in the Victorian era, it's apparently set in 1902. Which means, barring accidents/murder etc, Wendy would live through both world wars, and there were documented female fighter pilots in both. So it isn't QUITE far fetched for her to fly a plane.
Just go rewatch Hook
Having her dream about being a pilot a year before the first flight at Kitty Hawk (Dec, 1903) is a bit of a stretch.
She's flying a 'modern' plane, so this is really just a flash forward
In most versions the father and Captain Hook are played by the same actor. This always implied the view of parents and adulthood by children
Peter Pansexual
Peter Pandering
They did to Peter Pan what Amazon did to Galadriel - made the hero the ultimate villain of the story!
The best live version is the 1960 recording with Mary Martin This is a color version of the 1956 stage show, which was also televised live. Most of the original cast is in this special and it’s very good
DOGGY ❤
Judging by your pfp, I am very impressed that a German shepherd figured out how to post comments and what not.
You go good doggo!
Original wendy, leader, carer, respectable.
Modern Wendy, Not a leader, not caring, rude.
hmmmm, what happened to those old family values?
So Wendy's happy place is the sweet embrace of death?
I'm sure I saw the 1953 movie at some point but I never thought about all these nuances of the story before hearing this analysis. Now I want to see the animated film again.
Today's feminists think the only wany to compare male and female is to show girls can do anything boys can do (but better) rather than highlighting the things that makewomen special. I think this is shown in this movie more than most. Instead of Wendy being a mother figures she has to be the better sword fighter etc...
I love how Hollywood’s answer to rid women of “toxic masculinity” is simply to portray them with the same masculinity instead. Truly genius.