
There isn’t much
going on throughout the runtime but the brief glimpses of some production
design appear to be the only standout. And while this is true, Pan is truly
beautiful at times, what does beauty mean if it represents a hollow shell of a
movie?
Acting wise, the
film isn’t terrible, but certainly not great either. Hugh Jackman is extremely
over the top, almost as if he were performing on stage instead of the screen.
Levi Miller is decent as Peter, but that’s all he brings, being decent. Rooney Mara, probably the whitest woman they could find, is miscast as the Native
American princess Tigerlily. And finally we have Garrett Hedlund as the young
James Hook. His strange accent gets in the way of an already strange
performance as the future dastardly pirate Captain Hook.
The true failures
of the film boil down to poor direction from Joe Wright. The pace is often
jumpy and off-kilter, while possessing little in terms of anything new or
unique. The dialogue from screenwriter Jason Fuchs certainly doesn’t help, with
so many nudge-nudge moments it becomes tiresome.
Overall Pan is a disaster
and should certainly be a lesson that not every classic tale deserves an origin
story. The direction is awful with no help from a poorly written script and the
acting seems like a Broadway performance rather than something that was
supposed to be put to film. The only saving grace Pan possesses is some slivers
of beauty with the crafting of Neverland, but while time may not move in Neverland, it may just
move slower when you sit down to watch Pan. (2.5/10)
So what did you think of Pan? Have you seen it, what did you think about it, and how much better is Hook than this? Comment below and let me know and as always return to I Am Sam for weekly reviews.
No comments :
Post a Comment