If you don't like this, we can't be friends.

Gripping story with well-crafted characters

The film creates a perfect balance between action and depth of basic needs, in the midst of an infertile atmosphere.

It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

I have never seen any other Peter Pan films or the plays so I don't have much to compare to, but I really enjoyed this! The story is simple but nice, and the concept of not wanting to grow up is relatable. The acting is great and it has a satisfying ending.

I've grew up watching this film and watching it again just gives me so much emotions, it brings back my childhood. I didn't see Peter Pan's point why he didn't want to leave neverland back then because it seems to me that it's sad he doesn't have parents and he just lives alone with a tiny girl called "tinker bell" but now I know exactly why he doesn't want to grow up, I now know why he doesn't want to leave neverland because if I was him I would probably do the same. I thought growing up was fun and adventurous, maybe it is in some kind of way but it's still scary. If everyone has a chance to go to neverland I'm pretty sure the world is empty right now like who wants to get old, get wrinkled face and grey hair nowadays, right?

Peter Pan has been adapted into a theatrical live action movie multiple times, but would you believe that this is the first one where the titular role is played by an actual young boy? Early stage versions of the story started a tradition where the character was played by a woman, mostly to give the actor enough experience while still retaining the look. Theatre world is weird like that.Nevertheless, this is the first one, so how does it hold up next to its kin? Well, it's a mixed package. The young man they got to play the part of Pan, Jeremy Sumpter, certainly has the look down pat. He's an imp, quick and agile, with a devil may care grin always on his face, and those attributes transfer to his performance as well. He embodies the cockiness and infallibility of the boy who never grew up, certainly bringing to mind the mythological Pan after which the character is named. Jason Isaacs is also magnificent in his dual role of both Mr. Darling and Captain Hook - another theatre tradition, but one which I heartily approve. Isaacs is easily the best Hook I've seen so far, and also one of the better pirate characters in general. Dark, menacing, hiding behind the veneer of a gentleman, while plotting his nefarious schemes to bring down the one he hates above all else.The rest of the cast is unfortunately merely okay or even slightly below average. The Lost Boys and the Darlings are played by child actors, making their acting rather wooden most of the times, though Wendy's actress Rachel Hurd-Wood at least manages to have some chemistry with Sumpter. They also added in a new character in Aunt Millicent (Lynn Redgrave) who, while played by a talented actress, brings nothing to the plot, making her completely pointless.I also detest the use of CGI in this film. Though to be fair, most every movie in the 00s was doing this, but it has not aged well. Not at all. It's overly bright, often rather rubbery or sleek, and you can spot its fakeness miles away. And it is everywhere. It's like they shot the film and decided to colour saturate every single frame using computers. It looks hideous. And it glitters, making me feel like I've walked into a store for five-year-old girls. Perhaps some would say that's a valid art style for a Peter Pan film, but personally I think it makes the whole film look artificial.The actual plot is captivating, closely mirroring the original play by J. M. Barrie. No complaints there, and if you can stomach the visual style of the film, it is a very good adaptation to check out for all fans of the original tale. My personal pet peeves keep me from appreciating it more, but don't let that keep you from experiencing its upsides.

This was the first movie i ever saw at the cinema. I was 7 years old,well, quite close to 8. So obviously, it has a very special place in my heart. I bought the VHS tape afterwards and watched it many times.Don't think i ever really watched the cartoon version and if i did,i was probably not a big fan cause i don't remember it. But i saw the cartoon not too long ago now, but prefer this 2003 version so much more. I'll blame it a bit on nostalgia.No but seriously, i have watched this version many times now that i'm older and i think it means more to me now than it did then. Now, i finally understand the whole not wanting to grow up thing. I didn't take that part too seriously as a kid. I focused more on the rest of the film. Now, i'd give anything to be peter pan.Jeremy Sumpter is perfect as peter pan. Playful, adventurous, typical slightly annoying boy and cute. Cartoon-peter felt more like an adult to be honest. Rachel Hurd-Wood is a great Wendy. She feels innocent, but still like a young woman ready to grow up. Jason Isaacs great as Hook and boring dad. I honestly didn't' even notice he was the same person when i was a kid.And let's not forget one of the most important parts of the entire movie. The music. It's as magical as it can get and it is without a doubt one of my top 5 fave movie soundtracks. I think it might be 3rd place behind the Homeward bound-movies and Jurassic park. My favourite song is "Flying". After all my nostalgic rambling, i just want to say that it's a magical movie that means a lot to me. Way better than the cartoon if you ask me.