Neverland (2011)

After two other SyFy mini-series seen in the last years, "Tin Man" and "Alice", variations of "The Wizard of Oz", respectively (and obviously) "Alice in Wonderland", I had serious doubts about giving a chance to "Peter Pan". Especially since the director and the screenwriter was the same, a certain Nick Willing who seems to build a career in this genre. As I said when I've seen the previous, these were barely saved by the story that had sufficiently solid variations so it didn't end up in a total failure. "Neverland" is not far, but as "Alice" compared to "Tin Man" is a step in front so you won't say that you lost almost three hours for nothing.

If in the previous cases we had a sequel to the classic story, here we have a prequel. I think it's the most interesting of the three, and I could start from the fact that it gives a sufficiently enough credibility (to be read: non-hilarious) in the area of the stories that connect a fantastic realm to the nearby street. I've always rolled my eyes when I've seen transitions like the train from "Harry Potter", the wardrobe from "Narnia", or others that make the rabbit hole from "Alice", or even the hurricane going to Oz (since we have both of them close) to look like rocket science compared to making paper planes (in the original versions, "Alice" actually explains itself coherent enough through a dream, and some magic shoes with teleporting power to the "Land of Oz" are at least more stylish than a train or a wardrobe + I guess they have some background in the oriental fairy tales). But to come back to "Neverland", which in the current movie is nothing else then a planet in a different galaxy, habitable and to which you can travel a la Stargate, only that this time through an orb. Well .. there would be some more details, and more exactly what's already known from the classic story = the residents that get there do not age + the indigen alien race = a sort of small winged creatures (Tinkerbell species in brief - not to get ridiculous with trying to describe it at late night hours). As the ending, or better said the sequel written long ago by J.M. Barrie is already known it doesn't make sense to give much more details about how it's getting there, but still I cannot jump completely over a key character, even if it will give some spoilers ...

Hook. James Hook. Although this variation changes some of the base story, Hook's origins in this version make some justice (sort of speaking) to the character. I'll limit myself to the beginning which presents Hook as lord fallen into disgrace from London's high society and who manages the activity of a pickpocket gange formed by kids he picked up after being abandoned or from orphanages = Peter Pan & the company. Despite the image created for one second, it's nothing like a Dickensian nightmare which the poor kids have to endure. Hook seems to be a guy who actually cares about them. How the situation evolves and how we get to the well known rivalry, this will be told by the movie. To notice though the part made by Rhys Ifans who, despite some overacting, makes the best Hook I've ever seen on screen, and without any exageration (of course helped by the story) one of the most complex negative characters that I've seen in a while.

Unfortunately, as the others, the movie suffers terribly from the direction. It's clear that we hav something of TV budget here, because it's a made-for-TV production, but there are plenty of series which you could say that are shot for the big screen. Here you have the impression that we have soap-opera direction, not one for a fantasy. To complete a schedule change verdict for outside the prime time for any station that would buy the movie, the effects are sometimes very lame. But well .. we can't have a Peter Pan without seeing him flying, so some hilarious result might be better than missing it completely. Something else, to get the critiques to extreme :), even if we have a much more complex Hook than other versions have, he still seems "unexplored" at the maximum. Even so, it's a definite good reason to watch the movie.

Rating: 3 out of 5