Peter Pan - From Literature to Screen

This article is a brief analysis of the intertextual relationship between Paul J. Hogan’s 2003 film Peter Pan and its hypotext, James Matthew Barrie’s 1904 play Peter Pan; or, The Boy Who Would Not Grow Up (i). (For my review of the film, click here). The terminology used is taken from Julie Sanders’ Adaptation and Appropriation (ii).

Hogan’s Peter Pan shares a number of intertextual relationships with its hypotext. Perhaps most tangibly, it is a generical transposition of J.M. Barrie’s original play. Also, and partially related to this, it incorporates a number of elements of approximation from the original which can not entirely be understood as products of a generical transposition. Finally, the hypertext forms a bricolage of analogies to other, though arguably less prominently treated, hypotexts. This bricolage can, for obvious reasons, not be seen as a replication of a similar bricolage in Barrie’s original as will be shown below.


J.M. Barrie

Hogan’s film is an obvious transposition in terms of genre. Although Peter Pan appeared as both novel and a variety of plays in Barrie’s lifetime, the original Peter Pan is a dramatic one. Thus, the transposition from one dramatic genre to another should be a comparatively easy one. This, of course, is belied by the several editorial choices Hogan would have to make. Which dramatic elements in the hypotext are so central that they should be received in the new genre and which can be excluded? As the next paragraphs will show, the simultaneous process of approximation would necessarily interfere in this process of transposition.

Both Barrie’s continually revised versions of the play and the arguably most defining dramatic representation of these, the 1953 Disney version, are indicative of the constant need of approximating elements in the hypotext. So too with Hogan’s film. Characters, visual representation, plotlines and social relationships are updated with the aim of courting not only a modern audience but also a teenage one.


The Wendy character becomes more central as more time is allotted for her characterisation before Peter’s appearance and this process of making her more active and decisive is an approximation of gender roles. The Peter Pan character in appearance and personality represents a return to those of the hypotext after the moderation of the Disney version (iii). He appears older than in the hypotext; while he frequently describes himself as very young in the play and “has all his baby teeth”, he is played by a 14-year-old with a breaking voice in the film (iv). This is probably a move to make the character more relevant to a teenage audience. The Hook character appears more sinister, which partially is a similar return to the hypotext after Disney’s moderation, though Hogan’s Hook surpasses the original in cruelty. This may be due to changing tolerance for violence in the audience. Finally, the Aunt Millicent character is interpolated by Hogan to take on the disagreeable aspects of the parents, especially the father’s authoritative qualities. This process of making the parents more appealing might be in order to further emphasise the conflict between child- and adulthood so prevalent in the target audience.



Hook and Wendy

Similarly, a light hue following Peter and the changing light reflecting Peter’s state of mind might be a more extensive approximation of the stage lights which would have been used in a staging of the original play (v). This and the increased use of digital animation caters for an audience accustomed to modern standards. It also helps reflect social relationships. The very vague romantic connection between Peter and Wendy in the play becomes a prominent feature in the film. Accompanied by romantic images and light their relationship receives a dimension which caters for teenage sexual tension (vi). Furthermore, the interpolated plotline of the kiss becomes a tool of approximation used to achieve this end.

Seeing as almost a century passed between the publication of the play and the release of the film it was inevitable that other cultural products would influence the film. The term bricolage, as defined by Julie Sanders, means a compilation of different hypotexts or allusions in a hypertext (vii). In Hogan’s film, the representation of pirates seem to allude to that of Robert Louis Stevenson’s Treasure Island, perpetuated visually through scores of pirate-themed films throughout the 20th century. This echoes a motif which is also present in the Barrie’s play. Additionally, of course, the film clearly echoes the Disney version at several junctures, but also Hook (1991) which was produced by Dodi Al-Fayed (to whom Hogan’s film is dedicated) and which features a “proto-Hook” to Hogan’s. Finally, although the lost boys have similarities to those in the Disney version, they also owe a lot to the characters of William Golding’s Lord of the Flies. This novel was published after both Barrie’s play and the Disney film and must have affected the non-animated representation in Hogan’s film.

Paul J. Hogan’s Peter Pan’s adaptive relationship to Barrie’s play is a complex one which has yet to be adequately discussed. The above paragraphs have shown how the editorial choices associated with the change of genre was determined by several processes of approximation. Hogan’s film appears more adapted to an pre-teen/ teenage audience with more romantic, sinister and violent features than the hypotext. Furthermore, technological advances has allowed Hogan to overcome some of the limitations of the stage, which must have influenced Barrie, but also retain and improve some of the features from the hypotext. Finally, the hypertext does draw on other sources than just the hypotext. As with Barrie’s protagonist, the representation of characters alludes to defining cultural products within particular areas, such as Stevenson’s Treasure Island.

Endnotes
(i) Hogan, P.J.; Peter Pan, 2003 (DVD). James Matthew Barrie;Peter Pan; or, The Boy Who Would Not Grow Up in James Matthew Barrie; Peter Pan and Other Plays, Oxford 2008.
(ii) Julie Sanders; Adaptation and Appropriation, London 2006
(iii) See Deborah Cartmell’s essay in Deborah Cartmell and Imelda Whelahan (eds.); The Cambridge Companion to Literature on Screen, Cambridge 2007: 167-180 for more on this.
(iv) Barrie 2008: 123, 145. In fact, in the novel Peter and Wendy Barrie also frequently draws attention to Pan’s “first teeth”.
(v) Hogan 2003: 1.23.00-1.33.00
(vi) Ibid: 53.00-56.00
(vii) Sanders 2006: 4
Pictures: 1, 2

Bibliography
Literature:
Barrie, James Matthew; Peter Pan; or, The Boy Who Would Not Grow Up in James Matthew Barrie; Peter Pan and Other Plays, Oxford 2008
Cartmell, Deborah and Whelahan, Imelda (eds.); The Cambridge Companion to Literature on Screen, Cambridge 2007
Sanders, Julie: Adaptation and Appropriation, London, 2006
Film:
Hogan, P.J.; Peter Pan 2003 (DVD)

Paul Hogan's Peter Pan

“All children grow up except one”. Paul Hogan’s 2003 film Peter Pan re-envisages J.M. Barrie’s classic play about a boy who do not want to grow up and retrieves the story from the Disney universe. In the first film in several years retelling the story Hogan updates its visual representation not only using all the tools modern animation can provide, but also maintaining a darker atmosphere than that presented in the previous, Disney version. This combines to make Peter Pan one of the most enjoyable and refreshing films in a year dominated by Disney films like Finding Nemo and Pirates of the Caribbean.

Peter Pan Poster

As in the original play the Darling children, Michael, John and most significantly Wendy flies with Peter Pan from their nursery window to Neverland, leaving their parents, the dog Nana and their Aunt Millicent behind to despair. Neverland, an island populated by Indians, pirates, fairies, mermaids and crocodiles, turns out to be every child’s dream. On the island, the Darling children are constantly amazed by all its wonders and have many adventures most of which arise in dealing with Peter Pan’s nemesis, Captain Hook. 

The film has all the original characters, and then some. Peter Pan, played by Jeremy Sumpter and the pirate captain Hook, excellently portrayed by Jason Isaacs are still at odds just like Peter’s fairy companion Tinker Bell, played by Ludivine Sagnier and just referred to as Tink, is consumed by jealousy towards the debuting Rachel Hurd-Wood’s Wendy. The crocodile, which was somewhat scary in the original play and a source of comedy in the Disney film, has become a 25 metre animated monster, a nightmarish dinosaur always looming below the surface. The feared Hook’s fear of this grim force of nature would render the audience almost sympathetic to him, had it not been for Smee’ contribution of disarming comic relief. In addition, whereas the original Mr. and Mrs. Darling were somewhat ludicrous in their fussy maturity this has been transferred to the newly introduced Aunt Millicent whose wish for Wendy to become a woman must be the primary motivation for her and her siblings to join Peter on his trip back to Neverland.

A subtle difference

The introduction of Aunt Millicent and the magnification of the crocodile is, however, not the only aspects of the characters Hogan has changed. Whereas the sinister side of Hook was toned down by the Disney version, it has been reinstated with a vengeance here. A cruelly malevolent, though suave, nature, a sickly complexion, an array of vicious looking hooks and a callous attitude towards murder makes Hogan’s Hook a far cry from the comical Disney version as he kills off crew members left and right in his hunt for Peter Pan. The brilliance of Jason Isaacs’ portrayal is, of course further bolstered by his portrayal of the harmless and whimsical Mr. Darling who traditionally has been played or voiced by the same actor.

Jason Isaacs as Mr. Darling and Captain Hook

In addition, Hogan introduces a sexual tension between Peter and Wendy. Previous versions have shown no more than a faint suggestion of romance, whereas Hogan makes this a central element to the plot. Sumpter, dressed in a revealing attire appropriate for a character named Pan, and Hurd-Wood as 14- and 13-year-olds brilliantly portray the conflicting and yet enthralling feelings of young teen. After all, who would have thought that a kiss could be that important?

The sexual tension and the cruelty of Hook works together with a stylistic modernising of the story to make it available to an older and more modern audience. The animation of flying, of crocodiles and islands, of fairies and weather maintains makes the film visually appealing while still maintaining the aura of fantasy. The appeal of the Peter Pan story has always been the opportunity to lose oneself in role play and make-believe and this, in combination with more grown-up elements such as the above mentioned sex and violence, should cater for the interests of an audience between child- and adulthood.

The score, made by James Newton Howard, is also updated and very much in a fitting genre. Its upbeat tracks resemble the music from young adult films of the 90’s. In addition, the influence of the score of the two years older Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone is apparent. The music serves to enter the film into a new generation of fantasy, adventure and animated films, which is further emphasised in the tracks borrowed from other films to accompany the trailer. While meant to resemble the film’s future score, the tracks from Muppet Treasure Island (1996) and Chicken Run(2000) further underlines Hogan’s intention to appeal to a specific audience.

There is, however, two elements that somewhat lessens my enjoyment of this film. First of all, the twelve minute intro, consisting of some familiar but several new plot elements, establishes Wendy’s significance but delays Peter Pan’s entrance. Impatient cinema goers like myself would find this tedious and unnecessary. Hogan’s target audience is not watching the film for drawn out descriptions of Mr. Darling’s social awkwardness or Aunt Millicent’s folly. They want to see flying, swordplay, crocodiles and romance. Similarly, the Tink character is given too many comical aspects. In a film where several characters are given added traits and consequence, Tink is just not central enough to merit the role she is given in the film. Originally intended to be fully digitally animated, she here becomes a mere nuisance and a diversion from more compelling characters.

The success of Hogan’s Peter Pan resides much in its vivid characters and modern use of camera and animation. The type casting of Jason Isaacs (from the Harry Potter movies) and  the always comical Richard Briers as Smee helps modernise and enter the story into a new generation of films. Although the film did not achieve the credit it was due on release, following blockbusters like Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King and Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl, the story of the playful child in opposition to boring, foolish or evil adults has been given new and compelling garbs which make it a film well worth watching. 

Update: The entire film can be found here (choose the following parts to the right).
Another update: This is my article on the relationship between the film and the original play.

Sources: 1, 2, 3 or as given