Disney Preparing Live-Action Peter Pan with Pete’s Dragon Director

[The Lochness Monsta]

Unfortunately, for Disney's live action studios, their remakes and sequels are better than their original content, which is usually trying to convert a popular kids' or young adult book into a movie.

Yeah, that's true. But I haven't liked most of what they've been doing Post "Coco". No matter what category it fits in, for the most part it's been pretty bad since 2017.

I guess that's what happens when you go with the wrong people to steer the ship.

 

[PrinceCharming617]

I'm just happy Will Smith turned down the role of Captain Hook. Who knows what damage he could have caused to Chris Rock with a hook on his hand.

 

[Rambozo]

I'm just happy Will Smith turned down the role of Captain Hook. Who knows what damage he could have caused to Chris Rock with a hook on his hand.

I've heard the Will Smith rumor too, he seems like someone Disney would go with. He would have been an awful choice for the role.

Besides he's already played the Genie (badly), they want him to ruin Hook as well. Biggest overactor in the business, besides Jim Carrey (but it works for comedy).

Laaaazy!

 

[MisterPenguin]

Yeah, that's true. But I haven't liked most of what they've been doing Post "Coco". No matter what category it fits in, for the most part it's been pretty bad since 2017.

Disney live studios didn't put out Coco.

 

[The Lochness Monsta]

Disney live studios didn't put out Coco.

I'm talking about all of Disney, not just the live action films.

 

[The Great Gonzo]

I'm sure they are all fine young actors and being Jewish I know how important diversity is in films. But it's hard to suspend my belief and think I'm looking at Peter Pan and Tinkerbell. When they obviously look nothing like the characters.

It would be much better if they got their own characters. That we can love and believe them as. Instead of going the unnatural path and ruining movies and shows from the get go.

 

[lazyboy97o]

It's still so jarring watching the animated Peter Pan because Disney unnaturally gender swapped the main actor.

 

[The Great Gonzo]

It's still so jarring watching the animated Peter Pan because Disney unnaturally gender swapped the main actor.

LOL, he should have never been female either.

I guess they wanted to have an adult play the role back then and females looked the most boyish. Pretty stupid when you look at it with todays eyes though.

 

[Californian Elitist]

LOL, he should have never been female either.

I guess they wanted to have an adult play the role back then and females looked the most boyish. Pretty stupid when you look at it with todays eyes though.

How is that stupid?

 

[Magenta Panther]

LOL, he should have never been female either.

I guess they wanted to have an adult play the role back then and females looked the most boyish. Pretty stupid when you look at it with todays eyes though.

James Barrie, the author of Peter Pan, never wanted Peter to be played by a female (for obvious reasons). But the producer of the play wanted to build up the career of one of his contract actresses, so she got the part.

I remember seeing a video of the Peter Pan TV special from the 1960's, starring Mary Martin. I was a kid then, and thought it very weird that a lady was playing a boy. But the rest of the play - the flying, the pixie dust, Peter battling Captain Hook - made up for it. A lot.

 

[GimpYancIent]

If the concept is to have some kind of manufactured controversy about a female playing (portraying) the character Peter Pan, well sorry / not sorry, there have been 15 females that have portrayed Peter Pan beginning in 1904. Nothing new nor controversial but rather old history. History can be very revealing if actual research was done. By all means look it up.

 

[GimpYancIent]

James Barrie, the author of Peter Pan, never wanted Peter to be played by a female (for obvious reasons). But the producer of the play wanted to build up the career of one of his contract actresses, so she got the part.

I remember seeing a video of the Peter Pan TV special from the 1960's, starring Mary Martin. I was a kid then, and thought it very weird that a lady was playing a boy. But the rest of the play - the flying, the pixie dust, Peter battling Captain Hook - made up for it. A lot.

Yes! Sandy Duncan too!

 

[lazyboy97o]

James Barrie, the author of Peter Pan, never wanted Peter to be played by a female (for obvious reasons). But the producer of the play wanted to build up the career of one of his contract actresses, so she got the part.

I remember seeing a video of the Peter Pan TV special from the 1960's, starring Mary Martin. I was a kid then, and thought it very weird that a lady was playing a boy. But the rest of the play - the flying, the pixie dust, Peter battling Captain Hook - made up for it. A lot.

Do you have a source for the objection to the pantomime tradition of the Principle Boy being carried over?

 

[Phroobar]

That kid (Alexander Molony) would make great Miguel for the Coco live action version.

 

[Snow Queen 83]

It actually looks pretty good, I’m just sick of these remakes.

Plus it seems like lately they usually make the females overpowered and overly smart in Disney owned movies. There’s not enough struggle for them. In one scene in the trailer Wendy is taking on 3 pirates in a sword fight and manages to throw them all backwards. One of them was no where near her, but he flew back as well.

 

[Frankenstein79]

It seems like Disney is unable to make a good new story (Strange World, Lightyear, Turning Red) or remake (Pinocchio, Aladdin, Maleficent). The main reason is they've got a bunch of idiots running the show. Who couldn't come up with a good idea, if someone handed them one.

They probably spend more time trying to figure out how they can fit in their agendas and opinions.

 

[MickeyMouse10]

The main reason Peter Pan is often played by a female in "Plays" is simple... their voices. For "Plays" you can't cast a 13 year old boy, because his voice will drastically change as he gets older. With an adult female it stays relatively the same, thus they feel they fit the part more.

For "Movies" however it is different. It doesn't make sense to cast a female because you only need the character for a limited time. So you might as well be as loyal to the source as possible.

 

[lazyboy97o]

The main reason Peter Pan is often played by a female in "Plays" is simple... their voices. For "Plays" you can't cast a 13 year old boy, because his voice will drastically change as he gets older. With an adult female it stays relatively the same, thus they feel they fit the part more.

That is not the reason for the Principle Boy tradition.

 

[MickeyMouse10]

That is not the reason for the Principle Boy tradition.

Maybe it wasn't the original idea for plays in the 1700's or whatever.

But in more modern times actors became more known Worldwide and had to remain in the roles. Getting a 13 year old Male to play Peter for 5 years wouldn't work. Especially because he's not supposed to age or have an adult voice.

 

[oogie boogie man]

I would rather see Princess and the Frog be made into a live action. I think Peter Pan is played out because it's in the public domain.

At least with Princess and the Frog, it's their own unique version of The Frog Prince. With an actual P.O.C., whose a strong character. Since she had to work to get what she wanted and wasn't just handed things. A very important character for the P.O.C., and she's even more relevant because of her new attraction.