Read Mixed User Reviews for Pan

5

TokyochuchuNov 8, 2015

Pan is an oddly boring take on the Peter Pan story. The only fun things about the movie were Hugh Jackman, some fun vocal versions of famous songs (though I suspect Kurt Kobain is writhing in his grave) and Smee. Otherwise, Pan is prettyPan is an oddly boring take on the Peter Pan story. The only fun things about the movie were Hugh Jackman, some fun vocal versions of famous songs (though I suspect Kurt Kobain is writhing in his grave) and Smee. Otherwise, Pan is pretty generic from start to finish.… Expand

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

6

BrianMcCriticDec 24, 2015

While this is not one of the best films in the Peter Pan series it is however not a disaster. I admit that when I first heard the use of Nirvana and The Ramones, I had very little in the way of happy thoughts. In the end I accepted thoseWhile this is not one of the best films in the Peter Pan series it is however not a disaster. I admit that when I first heard the use of Nirvana and The Ramones, I had very little in the way of happy thoughts. In the end I accepted those things as minor in an overall middle of the road film. I've seen worse. B-… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

6

YellowKirbyOct 30, 2015

To be honest, Pan surprised me greatly.

Going into the movie, I wasn't expecting much... in fact, I was expecting it to be crap! I only went in because of curiosity. However, although it had many irritating problems and not the mostTo be honest, Pan surprised me greatly.

Going into the movie, I wasn't expecting much... in fact, I was expecting it to be crap! I only went in because of curiosity. However, although it had many irritating problems and not the most original storyline, it was an enjoyable film all in all. Not a movie I'd see over and over again, but would recommend to anyone who's into this kind of flick.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

4

TVJerryOct 22, 2015

This Peter Pan prequel starts with the boy as an orphan who's whisked away by pirates in a flying ship to Neverland, where he encounters the major characters that make up the myth: Tiger Lily (Rooney Mara), James Hook (Garrett Hedlund) andThis Peter Pan prequel starts with the boy as an orphan who's whisked away by pirates in a flying ship to Neverland, where he encounters the major characters that make up the myth: Tiger Lily (Rooney Mara), James Hook (Garrett Hedlund) and Blackbeard (Hugh Jackman). We've become so enamored of dazzling special effects that the visuals here, even though beautifully designed, never capture the imagination. The continuous action is energetic, but not really exciting and the performances vary from weird (Jackman) to downright hammy (Hedlund). Dramatic director Joe Wright is literally out of his element with this big adventure. The most compelling moments are the early orphanage scenes. Otherwise, it's launches like big-budget, but never realizes the flight of fantasy.… Expand

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

6

quincytheodoreOct 9, 2015

Cruising through gorgeous visual and beautiful shanties, but unfortunately also on shallow narrative.

Pan bears a lot of similarities to other adventure films, family animation and even role-playing games. It packs myriad of visual anticsCruising through gorgeous visual and beautiful shanties, but unfortunately also on shallow narrative.

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.… Expand

5 of 8 users found this helpful53

All this user's reviews

4

CineAutoctonoDec 24, 2015

" Pan " it was not entirely wonderful film for two reasons :
One: The Distributor assumes that the characters of Peter Pan and Disney were not of Warner.
Two : The film at first said that history ofa child who would not grow , a country" Pan " it was not entirely wonderful film for two reasons :
One: The Distributor assumes that the characters of Peter Pan and Disney were not of Warner.
Two : The film at first said that history ofa child who would not grow , a country where there are crocodiles , mermaids and fairies are counted , but worse part where Hook friend turned enemy is there , but throughout the film only were friends , maybe we demand a sequel.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

5

TrillcosbeyOct 12, 2015

Pan,
Had its major issues yes, I don't think its a good children's film, although the violence is not gore it is still pretty jarring. Not slap stick jackie chan or even johhny dep pirates but sorta dark and disturbing.People beingPan,
Had its major issues yes, I don't think its a good children's film, although the violence is not gore it is still pretty jarring. Not slap stick jackie chan or even johhny dep pirates but sorta dark and disturbing.People being dispatched and rather than gore they turn into puffs of smoke is still dead sorta obfuscating genocide, probably not great that you cast tiger lilly as a white actress.
If they would have just committed to being a musical and going into a wild pop up book story , with song and dance and wacky violence were people get punched and battered but no one dies, but no they wanted to be a grimms meets classic modern musical meets john wayne meets a pirate movie.
Other wise a chance to turn off the old brain and watch a show.… Expand

3 of 9 users found this helpful36

All this user's reviews

4

papermandaDec 12, 2015

Fun at first until you understand that it's not true to the books, but borrows from Hook. There is a scene where the cast sings a Nirvana song, yet the movie is set in WWII, while the play and book were written in 1904 and 1911 respectively.Fun at first until you understand that it's not true to the books, but borrows from Hook. There is a scene where the cast sings a Nirvana song, yet the movie is set in WWII, while the play and book were written in 1904 and 1911 respectively. Basically none of it makes any sense. There was also a white girl cast as a native. The whole thing was a big mess, but looked cool.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

5

Stargirl04May 15, 2016

This rendition is decent, there has just been so many Pan movies that I am kind of over it. I found that I wasn't paying all that much attention when the kids were watching it. I liked it enough though.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

LeZeeJan 14, 2016

Its when Peter stepped into the Neverland for the first time.

Usually everyone loved growing up watching the various film adaptations of original work by JM Barrie's a century old creation, 'Peter Pan'. There are plenty of unofficialIts when Peter stepped into the Neverland for the first time.

Usually everyone loved growing up watching the various film adaptations of original work by JM Barrie's a century old creation, 'Peter Pan'. There are plenty of unofficial prequels and sequels were also made and met success. Yet this prequel with high budget and modern technology, but not a Disney film, generated some expectations with stars like Hugh Jackman and Rooney Mara in it.

The box office was not as expected, and the movie was also just above average, but I liked the performances and visuals. The story is about an orphan Peter who becomes a Pan, a leader to 'the lost boys'. The opening line goes like this: 'Sometimes friends begin as enemies and enemies as friends' and that's what the rest of the movie evolves.

I don't think I liked this story. In all the prequels, I loved the Nick Willing's 'Neverland' who is a master of prequels to all the greatest fairytales. I disappointed with this only because of lack of the depth in narration, short storyline and quick scenes, other than that it was not a bad flick to me. The main relief was, it was not like the recent 'Alice in Wonderland' style movie with the weird costumes, makeups and the character physiques.

Despite all the negative feedback for this flick, I feel it won't hurt for a one time watch. My eye is now on its sequel, because before the Wendy's introduction there's another story is to be told and that is between Peter and Hook. But now it's on doubt over the result of this movie. Anyway, I'm on for it and hope it only gets better than the original.

6/10… Expand