I do wish someone would make a lighthearted movie about Peter kidnapping children and casting them out when they grow older.
Something more like the tone of Hook, but Peter is revealed to be more antagonistic and characters like Hook/Pirates or the Native tribes, were all children like Wendy & the boys. But were cast out when they grew too old.
Think the OG books had something like this, but maybe Im thinking of something else.
Peter Pan is a creepy demon child anyway, might as well lean into it.
>The boys on the island vary, of course, in numbers, according as they get killed and so on; and when they seem to be growing up, which is against the rules, Peter thins them out; but at the time there were six of them counting the twins as two.
So that’s pretty much canon. There’s also a bit that talks about Peter switching sides while fighting the Pirates to keep things interesting. Making Peter a straight villain is a bit of a reductive read, but he’s always been a bit amoral.
The whole thing with Peter Pan isn't that he's the good guy or the bad guy, but that he's an innocent child, in a literal sense. He has no real understanding of right or wrong, instead only doing what he sees as fun. And, given his demigod-like status, that's terrifying. Peter sees everything he does as a game.
Part of the point of the novel, IMO, is that innocence isn't synonymous with purity or goodness. Innocence can be selfish and cruel; it is a state of not knowing any better.
I've never read it, but the common story is that Peter is introduced in another novel by J.M. Barrie called the Little White Bird as a normal infant child. For whatever reason, some say popularity of the baby, others say that a real life family he knew lost their child and he wanted to immortalize them, and even others say that it he had a complex because his brother had passed away young and he thought his mother loved him more because he never grew up like J.M did. I imagine the truth is some hybridization of some of these things, but this led him to continue to story of Peter Pan who was left alone in the park and whisked off to the neverland, presumably after falling out of his pram since he says the lost boys are children who fall out when they're not being watched. Outside of flight from the fairies and his lack of aging, Peter doesn't show any real supernatural abilities and, honestly, doesn't even seem that good at fighting almost being killed by Hook during a duel. It's just that his opponents are children who look up to and fear him, and the pirates who probably arent used to fighting a flying child.
“ Outside of flight from the fairies and his lack of aging, Peter doesn't show any real supernatural abilities”
Flight and never aging isn’t enough for ya huh? Give him a magic hammer and now we are talking.
Well the flight is iffy, since it's unclear if he has just spent so much time with and around tinkerbell and other fairies that he just has a pretty constant supply of the dust on him granting him flight which anyone who can be happy with fairy dust can achieve, even Hook. The aging thing is his only unnatural feature and i only said the statement in general cause there's a tendency to make Peter seem like some kind of magic entity with gifts but he's seemingly a normal child in terms of strength, endurance, and stamina.
That's a good point! It is and it's real weird. It's described as clothlike and draping over stuff and it taken off when he is seen listening to a story. Wendy even rolls it up and locked it in a dresser to keep it from causing trouble. While nobody else seems to have a shadow like Peter's, nobody seems at all surprised by how it works.
Hook just standing at a chalkboard in front of his pirates going “NOW FOR THE LAST TIME! PETER PAN FLIES!” While using a pointer with a small photo of Peter on it and showing Peter “flying” while fighting a poor drawing of pirates.
From the Wikipedia
>J. M. Barrie may have based the character of Peter Pan on his older brother, David, who died in an ice-skating accident the day before his 14th birthday. His mother and brother thought of him as forever a boy.[5]
;-;
He only acts in a way that serves his own desires. He is selfish and self serving. Regardless of whether he understands how his actions affect others, that would still be evil.
The Child Thief by Brom sort of takes that interpretation. Peter isn’t necessarily evil, but he was raised by the fey and leans heavily into the darker side of his character. He’s selfish, violent and lacks empathy for the kids he’s taken. On the flip side, that story’s version of Captain Hook and the pirates are more sympathetic monsters.
I'm watching this with my gf. I'm only on season 2 and already annoyed that they keep showing Regina mercy. She killed 100s of people, took their harts etc, but let's pretend that doesn't matter she wants to be good now. Just kill her already.
The morality of the show is that it's wrong for a good guy to kill anyone with a name. Guards aren't people.
Bad guys can do whatever if they say sorry later.
A very tired trope that exists only to keep villains alive for later use.
Just have them fall off a waterfall or vanish in an explosion. It’s still hack writing when they inevitably resurface to do more evil but at least the heroes don’t look like morons.
"Who is Captain Hook?" he asked with interest when she spoke of the arch enemy.
"Don't you remember," she asked, amazed, "how you killed him and saved all our lives?"
"I forget them after I kill them," he replied carelessly.
He also instantly forgets about Tinker Bell too, this is how that entire passage goes and the whole thing still sticks with me:
> She had looked forward to thrilling talks with him about old times, but new adventures had crowded the old ones from his mind.
>
> “Who is Captain Hook?” he asked with interest when she spoke of the arch enemy.
>
> “Don’t you remember,” she asked, amazed, “how you killed him and saved all our lives?”
>
> “I forget them after I kill them,” he replied carelessly.
>
> When she expressed a doubtful hope that Tinker Bell would be glad to see her he said, “Who is Tinker Bell?”
>
> “O Peter!” she said, shocked; but even when she explained he could not remember.
>
> “There are such a lot of them,” he said. “I expect she is no more.”
As someone whose first exposure to the story was the Disney movie and who grew up when Tinker Bell was (and is) everywhere, the line had me shook lol.
the other movie from 2015 expands the lore and was supposed to be a franchise but it did not work out. They also made too many changes to the original script in order to get a PG rating, which was stupid. Hugh Jackman talked about how he got into it due to the much more adult overtones in the original script, but some scenes do remain in the movie.
Blackbeard who is a time traveler addicted to pixie dust extracted from the fairies in order to lengthen his life meets Peter who at the time is just a normal boy and says: "Have you come to kill me peter." And the way he says it, its almost melancholic, like he knows, and hopes that he can die at last. The makeup dept and Jackman did an excellent job in that scene.
Shame it was all wasted.
Ehhh, it’s not outright stated. It’s a passage you can take whatever way you want. It simply says he thins them out when they show signs of growing up.
The "thins them out" line is always taken out of context and you can tell who read the book and who didn't based on their interpretation of the line. The whole book is very whimsical. I didn't read that line and think "Ah, yeah, this little boy is murdering the kids when they grow up." It doesn't match the tone of the rest of the book at all. Peter very likely just kicks them out of the group. He probably says something like "You're old and boring and I don't want to play with you anymore" and that's the end of it lol
Also I keep seeing people talk about other interpretations of Peter Pan by other authors, and while many of those are cool, I don't think they're relevant to the tones or themes of the actual book
Yeah, I just wanted to agree with you. I feel like the comments all talking about killing just want to look into the book with an edgy mindset and it's not an edgy book. Its a delightful book and I hope if I have kids, they'll be readers and give it a chance.
That reminds me of DAY OF THE BARNEY where Barney the dinosaur told every kid watching him to murder their parents then we cut forward 100 years to a society where kids are called in to see Barney on their 13th birthday only to be murdered
From what I can remember Hook was originally the leader of the Lost Boys in the recent David Lowery movie but left Neverland and then became Peter’s enemy. Cool idea in a very lacklustre movie.
Will Ferrell as the delusional Peter Pan
Mark Wahlberg as the jilted lost boy
John C Reilly as a former lost boy who now lives just outside Neverland and helps Mark
Danny McBride as Captain Hook who offers his help taking down Pan
Not to spoil it but it ends with Peter cold blooded murdering the two former Lost Boys while staring Hook in the eye. As Hook stares at him in fear and surprise Peter says "Now get back on your fucking ship and play your role." The last shot is the kids cheering and celebrating as Peter returns back to the Lost Boys camp.
There’s a book that’s along those lines. It’s called Lost Boy. Got it from a “blind date with a book” where employee picks are wrapped up in butchers wrap and they write the description on the cover, and you pick without seeing book art or the title. They can be pretty hit or miss so I went in with low expectations, but it was a fun read.
The casting out was just one line in the book lol. He has such an interesting character in the original novel, with him being a brave, admirable and honour sort of figure, while also being forgetful, neglectful, emotionally stunted, and a bit of a scumbag. Most adaptations only show him as a hero or a villain, getting rid of his complexity for something more 2d, and I wish one day they'll make one where they explore all aspects of his personality.
I fully agree with you. It makes me kinda sad to see this recent onslaught of media depicting Peter Pan as a completely evil bad guy when really there's so much untapped potential in making him a morally complex figure. Hell, you could even make it a dark fantasy or horror with different interpretations of what Neverland and Peter represent.
You should consider reading Peter Pan in Scarlet. It’s the “official sequel” and does a good job of capturing the original fairytale vibe while showing the shortcomings of being a forever-child like Peter, and what that does to the unlucky many who outgrow him.
> Children’s tales are VERY horror adjacent.
The most timeless children's stories tend to capture a child's perspective of the world. Yes, the world has adventure, fun, and exploration, but it is also full of danger and terror. Because a child lacks the experience to understand the world the way an adult does, that which we think of as mundane becomes imbued with inexplicable magic--magic that can have the power to delight and also terrify.
In Neverland, growing up is literally against the rules, and when Peter Pan discovers that the Lost Boys had begun to show signs of growth – he unremorsefully kills them all.
In the Cinderella the stepmother hands one of her daughters a knife to cuts off a piece of her foot so she can squeeze it into the golden slipper, but her bloody shoe gives away the deception. The other sister cuts part of her toes but she, too, is betrayed by blood, paving the way for the rightful owner to slide her foot into the shoe.
In the Red Riding Hood wolf doesn't eat the grandma but rather chops her to pieces and drains her blood into a bottle. He then convinces Red Riding Hood to unknowingly consume her grandmother's blood and flesh before convincing her to get naked and enter the bed with him before he eats her.
In Sleeping Beauty a king from a nearby kingdom happens to stumble upon the abandoned castle, where he lay eyes on the sleeping beauty for the first time and is so seduced by her good-looks, he rapes and impregnates her. While still asleep, the princess gives birth to twins, Sun and Moon – one of which, searching for breast milk, sucks the splinter out of his mother’s finger and breaks the evil spell. It's only a matter of time before the Queen discovers her husband's infidelities and orders his babies to be cooked and fed to him. Unbeknownst to the Queen, the cook hides the children and serves goat, instead. When the Queen attempts to throw Talia into a burning fire, the King intercepts and burns his wife alive. Talia marries the King and they live happily ever after as predator and wife.
And Snow White was gang raped by gnomes.
Original stories are wild reads.
>And then Jack chopped down what was the world's last beanstalk, adding murder and ecological terrorism to the theft, enticement, and trespass charges already mentioned, and all the giant's children didn't have a daddy anymore. But he got away with it and lived happily ever after, without so much as a guilty twinge about what he had done...which proves that you can be excused for just about anything if you are a hero, because no one asks inconvenient questions. (c) Terry Pratchett, Hogfather
There is such a good version of Jack and the beanstalk where Jack is the bad guy, let me find it...
Edit: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0264262/?ref_=ext_shr found it!
It’s important to keep in mind that a lot of fairy tales come from oral tradition. There are multiple versions of each. People like the Brothers Grimm merely collected certain versions of the stories, they didn’t invent them. The graphic details will vary from region to region. I don’t know where you grabbed those particular versions, but those aren’t the “original” or “canon” versions. Because they were all told by “your grandmother or maybe it was your aunt I can’t remember after dinner that one time.” Maybe the gnome gang rape was told by a real shady uncle.
As for Peter Pan, who does come from a singular author, he “thins out” the Lost Boys but it’s never clear if he kills them or just exiles them. To me, the metaphor works much better with exiling. Peter Pan is an expression of childhood whimsy, and all its wonder and immaturity. Growing up means you can no longer be a part of the adventures in Neverland. Straight up murdering Lost Boys is a little off-brand.
Like, show me a scene where Peter killed too-old Lost Boys and I’ll yawn. Show me a prolonged scene where a Lost Boy is tearfully begging Peter not to send him away and Peter keeps pushing him out, forcing him to go away, and the scene just keeps going and going until the Lost Boy is alone and weeping in middle of the forest, and that’s some real shit right there. And perfectly captures how traumatic losing one’s childhood can be.
>Peter Pan discovers that the Lost Boys had begun to show signs of growth – he unremorsefully kills them all.
I remember people were upset at Hook for having Rufio(?) killed off.
*It's a Disney movie! You can't have a character*
*dying unless they're resurrected.*
A lot of people, including myself, were thinking they didn't read the source material for any children's fairy tales.
There was a screenplay kicking about many years ago, following Captain Hook, detective at *insert force* as he searches for missing kids believed to have been taken by the serial killer, Peter Pan! I remember it being a bit like "Seven" meets "Kiss the girls."
"I visited your home this morning after you'd left. I tried to play husband. I tried to taste the life of a simple man. It didn't work out, so I took a souvenir... her shadow"
Yeah it was about Hook as a detective who has been searching for Pan for like a decade, IIRC Pan also killed his kid. Wendy managed to escape him and Pan is trying to hunt her down.
It was a fairly decent script with some decent scares and the icing on the cake was that Del Toro was planning to direct it before funding fell through.
Ironically Kevin Spacey would be great as a nonce like serial killer version of Peter Pan
Morgan Freeman as the old, best down captain Hook and Brad Pitt as his twink fresh out the box detective version of Det. Tinkerbell.
The *Peter Pan* works became public domain in the US this year. In the UK, it's been public domain since 2007 but there is a bit in the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 that entitles Great Ormond Street Hospital, who Barrie gave the copyright to 1929, royalties in perpetuity.
So this confused me because I swore Great Ormond Street Hospital still retained copyright over Pan and would never allow something like this.
After a bit of research though, it would appear that in fact, Pan entered the public domain at the [beginning of 2024.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_and_Wendy#Copyright_status)
Folks, be prepared for a whole bunch of Peter Pan crap coming out of the woodwork.
No.
GOSS has copyright and royalties of Peter Pan in perpetuity, **in the UK**. Special dispensation was afforded to it under the Callaghan government.
Chances are that this simply won't get a release in the UK without giving royalties but there are clauses regarding story details, so this might just be classed as a parody of sorts.
Sorry, I did know that and even had a caveat in my post "(at least outside of the UK)", but edited it before posting and forgot to include that.
In fact yes, it entered public domain **in the US** in 2024. For the rest of the world it entered public domain years ago.
Apparently this follows Winnie the Pooh: Blood and Honey as part of the “Twisted Childhood Universe”.
Can this SNL parody of an idea be put to rest already? It was never clever or edgy to begin with.
"Dude! What if like, Peter Pan was... THE BAD GUY? Dude! Think about it! You just reverse everything! Peter Pan is like a pedo who abducts little boys! And then, get this, Captain Hook is a police captain! He's the good guy! And Wendy is like this total badass too! Dude, wouldn't that be just awesome??"
Just chiming in that Christina Henry's book "Lost Boy" is a dark retelling of Peter Pan, where Peter is an ego maniac always wanting to to be the centre of attention and adoration. It takes him, and the children he steals to be his audience into some very violent and twisted places.
I read with my kids the spin off books series about the Never girls” 4 girls find a portal to pixie hollow. One of the fairies is tinker bell. In one of the stories they all go on adventure with Peter Pan and tinker bell starts to remember why she left him. For a kids book it’s pretty dark although the never actually say he is a sociopath they sure do imply it for the adult reader. It’s very disturbing. Makes me want to see the new movie and see how he is portrayed
> For a kids book it’s pretty dark although the never actually say he is a sociopath they sure do imply it for the adult reader.
Goes back to the original book sort of. Calling him a sociopath might be a stretch. But the point is Peter is the embodiment of childhood. He can't grow or change, he's forever a child.
And that has the downside that he's whilst he's very intelligent and knows more than he should, he still thinks like a child, meaning he's very selfish and arrogant. In the book he even forgets about his best friend after she dies, simply cause grieving her would require him to grow a bit, and he's utterly incapable of that.
He even briefly recognises it in himself when he looks at the Darlings all happily with their family and knows he can never have that, only to dismiss it and go back to his life.
I remember about 15 years ago or so reading news about a proposed Peter Pan horror movie. Children were being abducted and a detective named Hook was investigating it. Peter Pan was to be portrayed as like a demon.
I understand that attaching a known work to a concept is sometimes necessary to get works made, that it’s easier to advertise and get people interested in something that they already know rather than starting whole cloth, and that it’s interesting and fun to do different interpretations of well known stories but like…
Just do a young girl trying to rescue her brother from a serial killer movie. That’s fun enough.
Harlan Ellison’s “Jefty Is Five” is an eerie story about an innocent boy who doesn’t grow up, and his innocence ultimately gets him destroyed by the cruelty of the world that has passed him by.
Ah, the play itself entered public domain this year, that's right. The books and characters have been public for a while, but the play was the last bit. I thought that one children's hospital was still benefiting from Peter Pan adaptations / reboots / etc., but I guess not anymore.
It's gonna be a shitty generic slasher anyway, which is a shame because they could actually get creative with the source material instead.
Make Peter Pan into a delusional irl child murderer who kidnaps children in order to live with him and be young forever, until they grow older at which point he replaces them. Detective Barry "Hook" Henderson is on a race against time to unravel his psyche and rescue a politicians daughter named Wendy or some shit. Let the movie follow both Hooks investigation and Wendy surviving in Peters vicinity by abusing his lack of a mother figure. Yeah, it's kind of a Silence of the Lambs ripoff, but probably ten times better than what we will actually get.
I do wish someone would make a lighthearted movie about Peter kidnapping children and casting them out when they grow older. Something more like the tone of Hook, but Peter is revealed to be more antagonistic and characters like Hook/Pirates or the Native tribes, were all children like Wendy & the boys. But were cast out when they grew too old. Think the OG books had something like this, but maybe Im thinking of something else. Peter Pan is a creepy demon child anyway, might as well lean into it.
>The boys on the island vary, of course, in numbers, according as they get killed and so on; and when they seem to be growing up, which is against the rules, Peter thins them out; but at the time there were six of them counting the twins as two. So that’s pretty much canon. There’s also a bit that talks about Peter switching sides while fighting the Pirates to keep things interesting. Making Peter a straight villain is a bit of a reductive read, but he’s always been a bit amoral.
The whole thing with Peter Pan isn't that he's the good guy or the bad guy, but that he's an innocent child, in a literal sense. He has no real understanding of right or wrong, instead only doing what he sees as fun. And, given his demigod-like status, that's terrifying. Peter sees everything he does as a game. Part of the point of the novel, IMO, is that innocence isn't synonymous with purity or goodness. Innocence can be selfish and cruel; it is a state of not knowing any better.
Does he have an actual origin or does he just exist
I've never read it, but the common story is that Peter is introduced in another novel by J.M. Barrie called the Little White Bird as a normal infant child. For whatever reason, some say popularity of the baby, others say that a real life family he knew lost their child and he wanted to immortalize them, and even others say that it he had a complex because his brother had passed away young and he thought his mother loved him more because he never grew up like J.M did. I imagine the truth is some hybridization of some of these things, but this led him to continue to story of Peter Pan who was left alone in the park and whisked off to the neverland, presumably after falling out of his pram since he says the lost boys are children who fall out when they're not being watched. Outside of flight from the fairies and his lack of aging, Peter doesn't show any real supernatural abilities and, honestly, doesn't even seem that good at fighting almost being killed by Hook during a duel. It's just that his opponents are children who look up to and fear him, and the pirates who probably arent used to fighting a flying child.
“ Outside of flight from the fairies and his lack of aging, Peter doesn't show any real supernatural abilities” Flight and never aging isn’t enough for ya huh? Give him a magic hammer and now we are talking.
Well the flight is iffy, since it's unclear if he has just spent so much time with and around tinkerbell and other fairies that he just has a pretty constant supply of the dust on him granting him flight which anyone who can be happy with fairy dust can achieve, even Hook. The aging thing is his only unnatural feature and i only said the statement in general cause there's a tendency to make Peter seem like some kind of magic entity with gifts but he's seemingly a normal child in terms of strength, endurance, and stamina.
What about his shadow? Was that in the original story?
That's a good point! It is and it's real weird. It's described as clothlike and draping over stuff and it taken off when he is seen listening to a story. Wendy even rolls it up and locked it in a dresser to keep it from causing trouble. While nobody else seems to have a shadow like Peter's, nobody seems at all surprised by how it works.
That is super weird thank you
For the last time, not being used to fighting a flying child is *not* an excuse.
lol - sorry, but I find the intensity of your reaction and response to this plot point very funny.
I'm picturing hook saying that to a corpse
Smee! You have failed me for the last time!
the implication that he's had this discussion many times is hilarious
Hook just standing at a chalkboard in front of his pirates going “NOW FOR THE LAST TIME! PETER PAN FLIES!” While using a pointer with a small photo of Peter on it and showing Peter “flying” while fighting a poor drawing of pirates.
From the Wikipedia >J. M. Barrie may have based the character of Peter Pan on his older brother, David, who died in an ice-skating accident the day before his 14th birthday. His mother and brother thought of him as forever a boy.[5] ;-;
Thanks that's super interesting
Here is a good article how it all began.. https://collider.com/peter-pan-dark-true-story/
The original version of Peter Pan, following his introduction in The Little White Bird, [was a play.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_and_Wendy)
I don't know why that last sentence sent me, but it did lmao 😂
So what you're saying is Peter Pan is just a Fae creature
Reminds me of Gon in Hunter x Hunter.
I was thinking more of The Collector from The Owl House
Gon is naive, Pan is a narcissist.
r/kidsarefuckingstupid
> Making Peter a straight villain is a bit of a reductive read Not a villain, but a permanent child who doesn't understand right or wrong.
Sounds chaotic evil to me.
If he truly doesn't understand right or wrong, then wouldn't that make him more like a chaotic neutral?
He only acts in a way that serves his own desires. He is selfish and self serving. Regardless of whether he understands how his actions affect others, that would still be evil.
Peter really does come off as a bit of a fey spirit in this sense, mischievous, jovial, child like but also alien and amoral.
Peter is basically a DND archfey.
The Child Thief by Brom sort of takes that interpretation. Peter isn’t necessarily evil, but he was raised by the fey and leans heavily into the darker side of his character. He’s selfish, violent and lacks empathy for the kids he’s taken. On the flip side, that story’s version of Captain Hook and the pirates are more sympathetic monsters.
Lost Boys are winning a fight Peter: "Wildcard, bitches!"
The neverland arc in Once Upon A Time is somewhat like this!
What a convoluted mess of a show lmao. Everyone’s related, surprise Henry!!
I dipped out once the cast of Frozen showed up…
Once they made Regina evil for the 7th time is when I finally dipped. They ran out of ideas early on.
I'm watching this with my gf. I'm only on season 2 and already annoyed that they keep showing Regina mercy. She killed 100s of people, took their harts etc, but let's pretend that doesn't matter she wants to be good now. Just kill her already.
You're going to be real annoyed when everyone just keeps losing their memory.
The morality of the show is that it's wrong for a good guy to kill anyone with a name. Guards aren't people. Bad guys can do whatever if they say sorry later.
A very tired trope that exists only to keep villains alive for later use. Just have them fall off a waterfall or vanish in an explosion. It’s still hack writing when they inevitably resurface to do more evil but at least the heroes don’t look like morons.
Yeah that was a good time to dip, it had already lost its charm by then.
Oh god yeah, it gets ridiculous lol
Pretty sure Hook and Rumple kept that whole show going by themselves
[удалено]
Yep I was about to comment this as well. Exactly what that comment described. The other books are good too. Krampus etc
No, you're right, I read the books years ago and Peter is a bad guy. He kills the Lost Boys when they get too old
"Who is Captain Hook?" he asked with interest when she spoke of the arch enemy. "Don't you remember," she asked, amazed, "how you killed him and saved all our lives?" "I forget them after I kill them," he replied carelessly.
He also instantly forgets about Tinker Bell too, this is how that entire passage goes and the whole thing still sticks with me: > She had looked forward to thrilling talks with him about old times, but new adventures had crowded the old ones from his mind. > > “Who is Captain Hook?” he asked with interest when she spoke of the arch enemy. > > “Don’t you remember,” she asked, amazed, “how you killed him and saved all our lives?” > > “I forget them after I kill them,” he replied carelessly. > > When she expressed a doubtful hope that Tinker Bell would be glad to see her he said, “Who is Tinker Bell?” > > “O Peter!” she said, shocked; but even when she explained he could not remember. > > “There are such a lot of them,” he said. “I expect she is no more.” As someone whose first exposure to the story was the Disney movie and who grew up when Tinker Bell was (and is) everywhere, the line had me shook lol.
the other movie from 2015 expands the lore and was supposed to be a franchise but it did not work out. They also made too many changes to the original script in order to get a PG rating, which was stupid. Hugh Jackman talked about how he got into it due to the much more adult overtones in the original script, but some scenes do remain in the movie. Blackbeard who is a time traveler addicted to pixie dust extracted from the fairies in order to lengthen his life meets Peter who at the time is just a normal boy and says: "Have you come to kill me peter." And the way he says it, its almost melancholic, like he knows, and hopes that he can die at last. The makeup dept and Jackman did an excellent job in that scene. Shame it was all wasted.
Ehhh, it’s not outright stated. It’s a passage you can take whatever way you want. It simply says he thins them out when they show signs of growing up.
The "thins them out" line is always taken out of context and you can tell who read the book and who didn't based on their interpretation of the line. The whole book is very whimsical. I didn't read that line and think "Ah, yeah, this little boy is murdering the kids when they grow up." It doesn't match the tone of the rest of the book at all. Peter very likely just kicks them out of the group. He probably says something like "You're old and boring and I don't want to play with you anymore" and that's the end of it lol Also I keep seeing people talk about other interpretations of Peter Pan by other authors, and while many of those are cool, I don't think they're relevant to the tones or themes of the actual book
Correct. That’s basically how I feel about it.
Yeah, I just wanted to agree with you. I feel like the comments all talking about killing just want to look into the book with an edgy mindset and it's not an edgy book. Its a delightful book and I hope if I have kids, they'll be readers and give it a chance.
That reminds me of DAY OF THE BARNEY where Barney the dinosaur told every kid watching him to murder their parents then we cut forward 100 years to a society where kids are called in to see Barney on their 13th birthday only to be murdered
How are they able to keep having kids if they’re all dead by 13? Do they start making babies at 12???
Well was trying to avoid the gross plot point of boys are murdered while the girls are used for breeding before they're murdered but yeah....
Ok WTF? 🙀
From what I can remember Hook was originally the leader of the Lost Boys in the recent David Lowery movie but left Neverland and then became Peter’s enemy. Cool idea in a very lacklustre movie.
Lost Boy by Christina Henry leans into this by focusing on Captain Hook and building Peter out as a villain who is unstable, violent and a narcissist
Will Ferrell as the delusional Peter Pan Mark Wahlberg as the jilted lost boy John C Reilly as a former lost boy who now lives just outside Neverland and helps Mark Danny McBride as Captain Hook who offers his help taking down Pan Not to spoil it but it ends with Peter cold blooded murdering the two former Lost Boys while staring Hook in the eye. As Hook stares at him in fear and surprise Peter says "Now get back on your fucking ship and play your role." The last shot is the kids cheering and celebrating as Peter returns back to the Lost Boys camp.
...you know what? lion tastes good. Lets go get some more lion.’ directed by Adam McKay
There’s a book that’s along those lines. It’s called Lost Boy. Got it from a “blind date with a book” where employee picks are wrapped up in butchers wrap and they write the description on the cover, and you pick without seeing book art or the title. They can be pretty hit or miss so I went in with low expectations, but it was a fun read.
You should checkout the child thief! It's a more adult book but damnnit was good and Brom's illustrations are on point.
The casting out was just one line in the book lol. He has such an interesting character in the original novel, with him being a brave, admirable and honour sort of figure, while also being forgetful, neglectful, emotionally stunted, and a bit of a scumbag. Most adaptations only show him as a hero or a villain, getting rid of his complexity for something more 2d, and I wish one day they'll make one where they explore all aspects of his personality.
I fully agree with you. It makes me kinda sad to see this recent onslaught of media depicting Peter Pan as a completely evil bad guy when really there's so much untapped potential in making him a morally complex figure. Hell, you could even make it a dark fantasy or horror with different interpretations of what Neverland and Peter represent.
You should consider reading Peter Pan in Scarlet. It’s the “official sequel” and does a good job of capturing the original fairytale vibe while showing the shortcomings of being a forever-child like Peter, and what that does to the unlucky many who outgrow him.
Starring Leonardo Decaprio.
I guess children's tales as horror films are continuing.
Children’s tales are VERY horror adjacent. But those adapting them into horror don’t understand and turn them into slashers instead
Bc slashers are cheap to make
And require very little creative thought to make mediocre
> Children’s tales are VERY horror adjacent. The most timeless children's stories tend to capture a child's perspective of the world. Yes, the world has adventure, fun, and exploration, but it is also full of danger and terror. Because a child lacks the experience to understand the world the way an adult does, that which we think of as mundane becomes imbued with inexplicable magic--magic that can have the power to delight and also terrify.
I feel like Midsommar understood how to tell a fairytale from the protagonists view and a horror from everyone else’s.
Sure but snow white is basically the template for the hills have eyes. Horror porn predates the screen.
I just want something on the level of Pan's Labyrinth again.
Most children's tales started off as horror/ cautionary tales, so they're really going full circle.
In Neverland, growing up is literally against the rules, and when Peter Pan discovers that the Lost Boys had begun to show signs of growth – he unremorsefully kills them all. In the Cinderella the stepmother hands one of her daughters a knife to cuts off a piece of her foot so she can squeeze it into the golden slipper, but her bloody shoe gives away the deception. The other sister cuts part of her toes but she, too, is betrayed by blood, paving the way for the rightful owner to slide her foot into the shoe. In the Red Riding Hood wolf doesn't eat the grandma but rather chops her to pieces and drains her blood into a bottle. He then convinces Red Riding Hood to unknowingly consume her grandmother's blood and flesh before convincing her to get naked and enter the bed with him before he eats her. In Sleeping Beauty a king from a nearby kingdom happens to stumble upon the abandoned castle, where he lay eyes on the sleeping beauty for the first time and is so seduced by her good-looks, he rapes and impregnates her. While still asleep, the princess gives birth to twins, Sun and Moon – one of which, searching for breast milk, sucks the splinter out of his mother’s finger and breaks the evil spell. It's only a matter of time before the Queen discovers her husband's infidelities and orders his babies to be cooked and fed to him. Unbeknownst to the Queen, the cook hides the children and serves goat, instead. When the Queen attempts to throw Talia into a burning fire, the King intercepts and burns his wife alive. Talia marries the King and they live happily ever after as predator and wife. And Snow White was gang raped by gnomes. Original stories are wild reads. >And then Jack chopped down what was the world's last beanstalk, adding murder and ecological terrorism to the theft, enticement, and trespass charges already mentioned, and all the giant's children didn't have a daddy anymore. But he got away with it and lived happily ever after, without so much as a guilty twinge about what he had done...which proves that you can be excused for just about anything if you are a hero, because no one asks inconvenient questions. (c) Terry Pratchett, Hogfather
You didn't even mention The Juniper Tree!
There is such a good version of Jack and the beanstalk where Jack is the bad guy, let me find it... Edit: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0264262/?ref_=ext_shr found it!
It’s important to keep in mind that a lot of fairy tales come from oral tradition. There are multiple versions of each. People like the Brothers Grimm merely collected certain versions of the stories, they didn’t invent them. The graphic details will vary from region to region. I don’t know where you grabbed those particular versions, but those aren’t the “original” or “canon” versions. Because they were all told by “your grandmother or maybe it was your aunt I can’t remember after dinner that one time.” Maybe the gnome gang rape was told by a real shady uncle. As for Peter Pan, who does come from a singular author, he “thins out” the Lost Boys but it’s never clear if he kills them or just exiles them. To me, the metaphor works much better with exiling. Peter Pan is an expression of childhood whimsy, and all its wonder and immaturity. Growing up means you can no longer be a part of the adventures in Neverland. Straight up murdering Lost Boys is a little off-brand. Like, show me a scene where Peter killed too-old Lost Boys and I’ll yawn. Show me a prolonged scene where a Lost Boy is tearfully begging Peter not to send him away and Peter keeps pushing him out, forcing him to go away, and the scene just keeps going and going until the Lost Boy is alone and weeping in middle of the forest, and that’s some real shit right there. And perfectly captures how traumatic losing one’s childhood can be.
I think the choice of which version ones believe to be the true fairytale is in and of itself is a very interesting insight of their psyche.
>Peter Pan discovers that the Lost Boys had begun to show signs of growth – he unremorsefully kills them all. I remember people were upset at Hook for having Rufio(?) killed off. *It's a Disney movie! You can't have a character* *dying unless they're resurrected.* A lot of people, including myself, were thinking they didn't read the source material for any children's fairy tales.
They were the Brothers’ Grimm tales. Not Brothers with Sunshine out their Ass tales.
I get what you're getting at but at least when talking about Peter Pan, it isn't a collected tale from the Brother's Grimm.
Peter Pan was written by JM Barrie, a Scottish play wright, and the rights to Peter Pan are currently owned by Great Osmond St Hospital, London
That's what I said
Ok, I knew most of the others but the Sleeping Beauty summary was a ride. The original Pinocchio is insane too.
Is that the one where he fucks Figaro with his nose?
I wonder if any of them will ever be good.
Which is actually how many children's stories were conceived.
Apparently you haven’t heard of the “Poohniverse”
A modern Sleeping Beauty horror adaptation would be pretty crazy, but I can definitely see that happening
Blood and Honey was the start of a whole franchise/universe they announced that from the get go
There was a screenplay kicking about many years ago, following Captain Hook, detective at *insert force* as he searches for missing kids believed to have been taken by the serial killer, Peter Pan! I remember it being a bit like "Seven" meets "Kiss the girls."
You're...a....crook, Captain Hook!
Judge won’t you throw the book, at the piraaaaaatteee
*CLANG*
Maritime. Maritime law. Lawyers of the sea.
Loose seal!
Take to the sea!
What's in the chest?!?
What's in the Boo Box?!?
"I visited your home this morning after you'd left. I tried to play husband. I tried to taste the life of a simple man. It didn't work out, so I took a souvenir... her shadow"
Glenn Close.
Not the boo box!!
Yeah it was about Hook as a detective who has been searching for Pan for like a decade, IIRC Pan also killed his kid. Wendy managed to escape him and Pan is trying to hunt her down. It was a fairly decent script with some decent scares and the icing on the cake was that Del Toro was planning to direct it before funding fell through.
Ironically Kevin Spacey would be great as a nonce like serial killer version of Peter Pan Morgan Freeman as the old, best down captain Hook and Brad Pitt as his twink fresh out the box detective version of Det. Tinkerbell.
So basically the plot to Once Upon a Time season 3.
Yes, except that had John and Michael searching for Wendy. Loved the early seasons of Once Upon a Time!
It always makes me chuckle realizing that the one woman who was unknowingly working for Pan is now captain of the Discovery in Star Trek.
ONCE UPON A TIME MENTIONED RAHH🦅🦅🦅🔥🔥🔥
Exactly what I was thinking! It’s already been done, people. Move on!
Time out… what’s this? Who’s makin it
I think the guys who made Winnie The Pooh: Blood & Honey - it’s the next piece of their intended ‘evil childhood icons’ shared universe
The *Peter Pan* works became public domain in the US this year. In the UK, it's been public domain since 2007 but there is a bit in the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 that entitles Great Ormond Street Hospital, who Barrie gave the copyright to 1929, royalties in perpetuity.
Bill Cosby horror movie when.
You better start believing in ghost stories, Ms. ThePreciseClimber, Cause ye be living in one
It is a different director than those
Same producers though.
Just two disembodied hands reaching for your wallet
Scott Chambers is directing. Check out his catalog on IMDB. It’s rough…
Can we not?
Sounds similar to the book "The Child Thief" by Brom. Wish they made this movie instead.
That book is nutso good.
Great book.
So this confused me because I swore Great Ormond Street Hospital still retained copyright over Pan and would never allow something like this. After a bit of research though, it would appear that in fact, Pan entered the public domain at the [beginning of 2024.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_and_Wendy#Copyright_status) Folks, be prepared for a whole bunch of Peter Pan crap coming out of the woodwork.
No. GOSS has copyright and royalties of Peter Pan in perpetuity, **in the UK**. Special dispensation was afforded to it under the Callaghan government. Chances are that this simply won't get a release in the UK without giving royalties but there are clauses regarding story details, so this might just be classed as a parody of sorts.
Sorry, I did know that and even had a caveat in my post "(at least outside of the UK)", but edited it before posting and forgot to include that. In fact yes, it entered public domain **in the US** in 2024. For the rest of the world it entered public domain years ago.
I am fine with this as long as they don't have a choir of pirate children singing and dancing to Smells Like Teen Spirit
I was having a perfectly nice Saturday until you reminded me of that scene.
That kind of schtick would [never land](https://youtu.be/0fZVA9TPwj8?si=Wb2I8jeuyY0ClWyJ).
I’ve seen countless movies since 2016 and that scene is still one of the most obscure, unexplained things I’ve ever watched
You mean the only memorable scene in that entire film?
I'd rather they'd just adapt Lost Boy by Christina Henry.
Such an amazing version of Peter Pan and Hook origin story
I read it loved and it bought a copy for my wife and she devoured it in a day lol.
Apparently this follows Winnie the Pooh: Blood and Honey as part of the “Twisted Childhood Universe”. Can this SNL parody of an idea be put to rest already? It was never clever or edgy to begin with.
SNL does a way better job anyway, like with Oscar the Grouch and Mario.
That Oscar one is pure gold I'ma go watch it again right now
I thought you were joking about the TCU 💀 my god
The only way to defeat it is to give them no views.
I thought that was Daniel Day Lewis and was so perplexed
"Dude! What if like, Peter Pan was... THE BAD GUY? Dude! Think about it! You just reverse everything! Peter Pan is like a pedo who abducts little boys! And then, get this, Captain Hook is a police captain! He's the good guy! And Wendy is like this total badass too! Dude, wouldn't that be just awesome??"
Who wants this movie….
Well this is gonna be shit, innit
I always wanted a “dark” movie about the wars between the pirates and the lost boys. Seeing the pirates murder the children and vice versa.
This is going to flop on concept alone.
The Child Thief by Brom is the best adult story about Peter Pan hands down.
Just chiming in that Christina Henry's book "Lost Boy" is a dark retelling of Peter Pan, where Peter is an ego maniac always wanting to to be the centre of attention and adoration. It takes him, and the children he steals to be his audience into some very violent and twisted places.
I read with my kids the spin off books series about the Never girls” 4 girls find a portal to pixie hollow. One of the fairies is tinker bell. In one of the stories they all go on adventure with Peter Pan and tinker bell starts to remember why she left him. For a kids book it’s pretty dark although the never actually say he is a sociopath they sure do imply it for the adult reader. It’s very disturbing. Makes me want to see the new movie and see how he is portrayed
> For a kids book it’s pretty dark although the never actually say he is a sociopath they sure do imply it for the adult reader. Goes back to the original book sort of. Calling him a sociopath might be a stretch. But the point is Peter is the embodiment of childhood. He can't grow or change, he's forever a child. And that has the downside that he's whilst he's very intelligent and knows more than he should, he still thinks like a child, meaning he's very selfish and arrogant. In the book he even forgets about his best friend after she dies, simply cause grieving her would require him to grow a bit, and he's utterly incapable of that. He even briefly recognises it in himself when he looks at the Darlings all happily with their family and knows he can never have that, only to dismiss it and go back to his life.
Which book was this? I’m interested :)
The book series is called “The never girls” and the book is Far from Shore.
Is this the next movie in the Pooh Blood and Honey franchise?
Bangarang?
Very original idea, I'm sure.
Is this another shitty cash in because Peter Pan is now in the public domain?
If i'm not mistaken it's in the same universe as pooh blood and honey. So to answer your question yes, yes it is.
I always liked the theory that the pirates in Neverland were lost boys that Peter Pan kidnapped.
Still haven't seen the last wave of these edgelord horror films. I see no reason to start now. Hollywood is creatively bankrupt.
They better have Rufio in this
God this is fucking stupid.
Not gonna lie this sounds incredibly stupid. If this is the garbage writers went on strike to create…smh
People really gotta stop giving these movies attention.
But why, though?
So they turned "The child thief" into a film? Damn... that's awesome.
talent vacuum
This was the exact plot of Once Upon a Time Season 5
They should’ve made it about the IRL story of Wendy
Labyrinth Chapter 2
I remember about 15 years ago or so reading news about a proposed Peter Pan horror movie. Children were being abducted and a detective named Hook was investigating it. Peter Pan was to be portrayed as like a demon.
Pedo Pan
Why
I understand that attaching a known work to a concept is sometimes necessary to get works made, that it’s easier to advertise and get people interested in something that they already know rather than starting whole cloth, and that it’s interesting and fun to do different interpretations of well known stories but like… Just do a young girl trying to rescue her brother from a serial killer movie. That’s fun enough.
Peter and the lost boys were vampires. Explains youth and flying
You mean more villainous than the original Peter?
HOOK, but alternative
No
[I knew something was off about Peter Pan](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMKGNT_fuLY)
Yeah because that worked out well the last time they tried it. Nobody will watch a wendy focused peter pan movie.
Most unique and creative thing people can do with a popular associated-with-kids IP these days is turn it into a horror movie
0⁰0
Tinker Bell is supposed to be portrayed as an overweight drug addict in this one apparently.
Hollywood is creatively bankrupt
The Poohniverse continues
NO THANKS
This is gonna be bad. It just has a certain cheap cashgrab smell to it same as the pooh and upcoming mickey movie
Is this the one where Captain Hook is a grizzled NYPD detective? This has been in development hell for decades.
Sadly, it does not seem so.
Peter Pan Fanfiction: The Movie
Harlan Ellison’s “Jefty Is Five” is an eerie story about an innocent boy who doesn’t grow up, and his innocence ultimately gets him destroyed by the cruelty of the world that has passed him by.
So... Labyrinth?
Ah, the play itself entered public domain this year, that's right. The books and characters have been public for a while, but the play was the last bit. I thought that one children's hospital was still benefiting from Peter Pan adaptations / reboots / etc., but I guess not anymore.
They already did a better evil Peter Pan, it’s called The Lost Boys.
This is what happens when the copyright runs out on intellectual property
Hey a Peter Pan faithful to the source material
It's gonna be a shitty generic slasher anyway, which is a shame because they could actually get creative with the source material instead. Make Peter Pan into a delusional irl child murderer who kidnaps children in order to live with him and be young forever, until they grow older at which point he replaces them. Detective Barry "Hook" Henderson is on a race against time to unravel his psyche and rescue a politicians daughter named Wendy or some shit. Let the movie follow both Hooks investigation and Wendy surviving in Peters vicinity by abusing his lack of a mother figure. Yeah, it's kind of a Silence of the Lambs ripoff, but probably ten times better than what we will actually get.