User reviews

The visuals are stunning. Hugh Jackman is just great, clearly relishing his role. His performance alone makes the film worth a watch. The story is capable of dragging you in. You have to forget your Peter Pan pre-conceptions and accept that this is different. Be prepared to go with the flow.

Sassy British descendant of Time Lord Cosette and Thumbelina's Prince Cornelius is orphaned with his flute necklace and surrounded by ninja-kicking nuns who sell children on the black market. After being abducted by Jean Valjean the Nirvana-loving dictator, he befriends Indiana Jones, who falls in love with Emily Blunt's Native American alter ego. He is then saved from flying crocodiles by the Cara Delevingne mermaid quadruplets (with glowing Rapunzel hair) who live in a sea of memories. He proceeds to discover he has the force, pixie-edition, and saves Atlantis the lost fairy-kingdom empire, adopting the title of "The Chosen One". And after all of this, we still don't find out what caused the proverbial bad blood between Peter Flute and Captain Indiana Hook. So there's that.

Despite all of this (or maybe because of it), I actually did enjoy the movie quite a bit. Even if the singing of Smells Like Teen Spirit left me confused and thinking of Moulin Rouge.

Pan bears a lot of similarities to other adventure films, family animation and even role-playing games. It packs myriad of visual antics across the journey of self-discovery. However, it's also painfully one dimensional and predictable, using the "chosen one" plot to a fault. While it's admittedly aesthetically pleasing, this is not the innovative origin story it's advertised to be.

In a world tormented by pirates, one child must discover his destiny. You've seen this before. Some angles have been changed, but this is typical Peter's adventure to Neverland. It's so overused, one might find half the script in Final Fantasy games. Not to mention it's riddled with fantasy genre cliché and uninspiring romance subplot.

To their credit, the actors do a fine job. Hugh Jackman as Blackbeard is a good antagonist, he looks the part by carrying the character with ominous charisma, either it's by his flamboyant dialogues or even timely singing. He can appear funny yet still threatening. Well, as threatening as a villain in family flick can be.

While Blackbeard looks fit for Hook's replacement, Hook himself is played by Garrett Hedlund, who ironically tries too hard to be young Hugh Jackman. His delivery is forced to create a suave persona, but most of the times he just looks out of place. Levi Miller as Peter handles himself pretty well. The story focuses heavily on this boy's fate, and although he can seem rough at some scenes, he brings a commendable performance as the lead.

Graphical prowess plays important role, almost too much, and on its better parts Pan definitely has the stylish charm of fantasy vista. Setting is filled with colorful designs and details, although CGI takes the helm on most cases. Its soundtracks are splendid, it simply doesn't let go. From subtle chimes, loud symphony and even shanty version of popular songs, the audio is brilliant.

Pan would've been great if it didn't copy so many elements from other movies. In nearly every scene, there's a hint of Pirates of Caribbean, Mad Max and multitude of classic Disney flicks. The straightforward plot doesn't help either, it's tedious to see the predictable developments ahead. Ancient prophecies, letter from the past and hidden power manifestation are tired gimmicks. Please, you know he's gonna fly at some point.

For a movie that looks so appealing, Pan never really takes flight. One might find happy thoughts on the visual and songs, but the CGI charm and adventure gimmicks will not last through its boring plot.

I had low expectations for this movie seeing the low review scores but I just saw Pan and really enjoyed it. It was above all a visual stunning movie. We saw it in 3d and Neverland really came alive. The story is thin but OK enough to keep the movie going. It reminded me in a way of Mad max. Also visual stunning, lost of action, with duels, fighting, etc but with a razor thin story line. Above all my kids of 6 and 7 enjoyed it very much. It was kind of the first time that they saw such an action movie. It can be a little bit frightening sometimes for kids but not too much.

I would recommend seeing the movie with your family. If you are a real movie buff you better skip it.

As an adventure story there is quite a lot of action and battles in grand and magical looking landscapes. There is a journey from orphanage to fairy land. The movie is entertaining enough and doesn't deserve to flop even though there are some faults. The story has too much repetitive fighting against Blackbeard and not enough use of the prequel to establish the main characters of Peter Pan like how Captain Hook got the way he did, Wendy, Tinkerbell etc. Compared to another prequel "Maleficent", this suffers in comparison because the characters and plot seem tangential. Even with a lot of ships flying around and stuff the first half is a bit boring. Things pick up when Rooney Mara comes in and she is a lovely Tiger Lily. Amanda Seyfried could have been shown more in realistic imagery and not so blurry. The boy who plays Peter, Levi Miller is endearing. Hugh Jackman is good Blackbeard.

Worth one watch.

Going into this movie, I knew it wouldn't do well at the box office. Unfortunately, that is true, due to the negativity surrounding it. It did indeed bomb at the box office... By default, does that mean it's a bad film? Absolutely not. As a matter of fact, I found it a ton of fun to watch!

The biggest problem the movie has is there are quite a few scenes that seem to rush themselves. Aside from that, the characters are a sheer delight to watch; all the cast members were clearly having a ton of fun in their respective roles and one can't help but feel that when watching. The music is absolutely enchanting and the visual effects are gorgeous; one scene in particular, though barely a minute long, has a beautiful combination of music, cinematography, and character intensity.

Fans of the source material may not like the changes they made, but try to watch this movie with the unbridled ambition of a child's imagination and judge the movie as a movie on its own merits first... and who knows? You may enjoy it too!

Like the recent "The Force Awakens," this is a movie that should really only be seen in 3D on a 100-foot screen and all-around loudspeakers. Why? Because where it excels is in its visual and audio presentation, which is simply superlative. As a viewer, you need to be captivated by this aspect of the cinematography because, in all other respects, it's a so-so film.

To be fair, it's decently acted, although perhaps not outstandingly so. None of the acting performances stank, but the actors weren't given a lot to work with so far as character depth was concerned. Some of the parts were played for laughs which, of course, is fair enough in a film of this genre. The part of Hook was ambiguous -- we all know that Hook turns out to be a villain, so it isn't clear why he's a good guy (and a rather insipid one) here. Still, perhaps the film-makers are already planning a sequel that will do for Hook with "Revenge of the Sith" did for Darth Vader?

In the end, what lets Pan down is the storytelling. If this were a children's book, rather than a blockbuster movie, by about page ten you'd be wondering what the heck was going on. So much of the plot makes no sense. Why is it such a big deal that Peter can fly? What does it prove if he can? The fantasy world is full of ships that fly about with no visible means of support, so clearly magical flight is unremarkable. Why do the characters keep bursting into song? It's not a musical, right? The characters in the original book have a certain amount of depth, and as a reader you can't help wondering what their back-stories are (which, of course, is a hallmark of great character writing). Pan ought to answer that question, but it doesn't -- we don't really learn anything about why Peter, Tiger Lily, Smee, et al., are who they are.

You can have the original Peter Pan performed on a packing-crate stage by high school kids, and it can still be magical. But if you take all the high-tech whizzbangery away from Pan, I wonder what is left? Not a great deal, I suspect.

For all that, worth watching in the right environment.

If there was a more awkward movie than Pan released in the last few years I'd certainly like to know about it as Joe Wright's big budgeted wannabe franchise starter is a lavishly coloured and extravagant picture that lacks knowledge of what it actually wants to be or who in fact it's aimed at and judging by the films flopping at the box office the world over, it seems as though audiences too struggled to figure out who should be watching this revamping of J.M Barrie's classic material or why they should be watching it.

Tonally all over the place and with a story that seems to meander about the motions until a highly lacking finale and lack of answers regarding certain story questions (a glaring one being how Hook and Pan in fact become enemies as they are adventures together here), for the first time in his quietly impressive directing career Wright seems completely lost within his narrative and fails to liven up proceedings despite throwing every known colour onto the screen, plopping in Nirvana songs and letting many of his actors ham it up to level 11 to try and cover up the fact Pan's story is actually rather dull in a world that should be anything but.

Our Pan here is played by newcomer Levi Miller and the poor young performer labours in his first major turn injecting Peter with neither the charm, smarts nor emotion that was needed for the role. When you consider however how his cast alongside a horribly miscast double act of Garrett Hedlund (who continues to frustrate as a lead actor) and the beyond bad Rooney Mara, the child performer didn't really stand much of a chance. The films only saving grace acting wise is Hugh Jackman who has a blast playing Blackbeard the fearsome pirate who will stop at nothing to collect that sought after pixie dust but while he has fun it still doesn't make a whole lot of sense having Blackbeard in this beloved tale.

Whilst normally it would not be something called out for by the masses it would've actually been nice for Pan to stick more closely to the original Peter Pan story that has enchanted readers and viewers for decades upon decades and while its commendable for a big budget film to take such a risk on a new take on a well-trod property, Pan is a stinging reminder of what can go wrong when money is thrown all over the place and scripts seem doctored to tick off as many set piece wish lists as possible and for the first time in his career Joe Wright has crafted an almost irredeemably bad piece of cinematic entertainment.

All those seeking a Peter Pan fix are much better off seeking out a copy of Disney's beloved animated take or even the similarly styled Steven Spielberg event Hook.

1 ½ awkwardly used Nirvana song out of 5

Robbie K here bringing you another review on the latest movies to hit the theater. This weekend we start off with another iteration about the famous boy who flies, fights off pirates, and flirts with mermaids. That's right I'm talking about Peter Pan. Over the decades we've experienced numerous spins on the tale, and yet I can't recall too many films portraying Peter's origins. Well hold on to your hats folks, because director Joe Wright has brought his tale to the silver screen entitled Pan.

Let's start with the story. We know all the classic elements of Peter Pan, but perhaps you have questioned the origins of our title character. Pan's tale dives into the impoverished England, once more strolling down the Oliver Twist orphan path as the opening of Peter's tale. The origin lacks much in terms of originality, but bypasses gross details to get to the meat of the story. Once Peter is abducted to the ageless Neverland, the tale begins to liven up. Pan forgoes a lot of the character development and emotional buildup for superficial thrills. Peter's relationship with a lot of characters evolves rapidly, from simple hellos to becoming their wards. Fans will certainly not suffer a drawn out plot, but may not like the rapid and abrupt scene transitions. I give Wright his props for adding some darker moments while maintaining the kid friendly environment, but I felt he was a little to ADD in organizing the story. Peter's journey reaches many impasses, however they blow over without much struggle with our good guys able to overpower their oppressors with ease.

The characters that are part of this plot were also lacking. Acting wise I give them a round of applause, each member certainly doing their best to breathe life into their characters. Hugh Jackman as Blackbeard has the gruff and ruthlessness of a pirate Captain, but soon becomes annoying with his constant screaming and pompous braggart. I did enjoy the use of metal songs as his anthem, a nice touch of modern metal. Garrett Hedlund as Hook captures the classic voice, but his look and presence comes off more Midwestern desperado than future pirate. Levi Miller plays the adolescent Peter quite well, nailing the devious, adventurous, and vulnerable sides of Pan while keeping everything balanced. However it is Rooney Mara who takes first place, bringing a nice balance of wonder, courage, and emotion as the warrior princess Tiger Lily, minus a few flat moments.

Simplistic story and characters aside, Pan's action is surprisingly higher intensity than I expected. The opening chase between pirate ship and plane is quite exhilarating with all the stunts, explosions, and elements of a World War II movie. From there the action remains dynamic as our characters navigate the various hazards of the world, interjecting combat and comedy to keep it entertaining. Again these conflicts sometimes end without much of a struggle, and a bit anticlimactic at times. Still I appreciate Wright slightly breaking the PG mold and adding some quality edge to the mix. I warn parents there are a few moments that might seem a tad too mature (i.e. executions), so evaluate your children's psyche before attending this film.

Finally the best quality of Pan for me was the setting. Wright's team designed a world that is majestic enough to have you say "Holy Pudding". The jungle is ominous, filled with deep foliage that offers shelter from the pirates, while also concealing ominous predators. Pirate ships are decorated to mirror their "helmsmen", such as Blackbeard's ship being cold and lifeless to personify the merciless man he is. And mermaid lagoon, while not as passive as it was in the cartoon, still held the serenity, especially once the gorgeous glowing, (CGI enhanced) mermaids who glow showed up. Even the costumes help pull you into the moment, the pirates having styles that span from traditional buccaneers to more formal, butler ware…okay not everything makes sense. Fortunately the tribal people bring about the hunter atmosphere, blending multiple cultures into their attire and dwellings. While certainly not the most impressive, Pan's world has the color, whimsy, and magic that captured all our hearts years ago.

Overall Pan is not the best movie to "soar" into theaters. However, it offers a good, kid friendly movie to entertain until the holiday season arrives. It's a fun thrilling ride for all ages that lays foundation for other movies, (either existing or new), while recapturing the moments you grew up with. Unfortunately the story just wasn't as put together as I hoped it would be, or as thrilling as the trailers made it out to be. Worth a trip to theater? Only for the special effects and setting can I say it is worth a theater trip, but your money is best saved for other films.

My scores are: Adventure/Family/Fantasy: 7.0 Movie Overall: 6.0

"Sometimes, friends begin as enemies. And sometimes, enemies begin as friends. Sometimes, in order to truly know how things end, we must first know how they begin." As the quote implied, the movie Pan is ultimately a prequel to any Peter Pan movie.

Peter, who is played by Levi Miller, lives out his life in an oppressive London orphanage. This twelve year old finds himself and the rest of the orphanage in a strange and beautiful world of Neverland. It's here, in mine run by child laborers, which he is swept into an ancient prophesy. Chased by the pirate captain Blackbeard, played by Hugh Jackman, Peter finds new friends Hook, played by Garrett Hedlund, and Tiger Lily, played by Rooney Mara and answers about his family.

As the movie ends several different questions are left up in the air. I'm still a little unsure which friend was now an enemy. I can figure from previous movies that Pan and Hook become enemies but it isn't directly stated. In fact it's quite the opposite. So I'm thinking there is at least one movie in the works as a sequel.

To get one thing straight, there is no pleasure taken panning this film. Being someone who has liked some of Joe Wright's previous work (especially 'Pride and Prejudice', 'Atonement' and 'Hanna'), who likes Hugh Jackman and adores the source material that 'Pan takes inspiration from.

Although it is not a film without redeeming merits, 'Pan' was hugely disappointing. It starts promisingly but then stumbles downhill once we get to Neverland and apart from the odd bright spot doesn't properly get back up again. As an origin story inspired by J.M. Barrie's magnificent story with its complex themes and rich characters, to say that it disrespects the source material is being kind to the word disrespect. But it is very underwhelming on its own merits too, while 'Anna Karenina' didn't do much for me 'Pan' is the one time where Joe Wright has come close to hitting rock bottom.

'Pan' starts off really promisingly, with a real sense of threat and false security. A lot of effort went into the production values, and there are frequent points where it does show, especially in the visually dazzling scene where the children are stolen, the whole film is exquisitely photographed, the set design is very colourful and eye-poppingly vivid with a wondrous-looking Neverland and lavish costumes apart from the ridiculously gaudy ones for the Indians. The incidental score has the right amount of whimsy and rousing energy. There is one good performance, that of Hugh Jackman who is clearly enjoying himself with glee as campy, energetic but sinister Blackbeard.

Not all the visuals work. There are so many special effects that it does start feeling too much and making the spectacle take over the story. Apart from the ships, the scene where the children are stolen and to a lesser extent the translucent mermaids, the effects are less than special, very amateurish-looking digital doubles, skeleton birds that look worse than a low budget video game from 15-20 years ago and very over-sized crocodiles that make them seem more goofy than threatening. Equally, there is a lot of spectacle, but they are very mixed when it comes to execution. Sometimes the spectacle dazzles, but at other times they're little more than nauseating kitsch. It does seem that all Wright's efforts went into the visuals and spectacle but he completely forgets telling a story and making the characters interesting, for Wright this is pretty inept.

Apart from Jackman, the rest of the cast struggle. Well actually Nonso Anoozie is pretty good, just that his screen time isn't enough to shine. Amanda Seyfried is suitably compassionate, but again very little to do. Levi Miller does do his best as Peter, he's suitably perky, has charisma and is cute as a button, but his character doesn't ever really go anywhere and he doesn't give as much charm and emotion as he should have done, Peter's trademark mischievous side is more cocky and desperate. Garrett Hedlund overacts dreadfully as a wannabe Indianna Jones/Han Solo and Brendan Fraser-esque-hero sort of Hook, constantly speaking in a way that seems to impersonate James Stewart and John Huston and very poorly, that he becomes very annoying with no foreshadowing whatsoever of the dark and complex character Hook as we know him would become. In a controversial piece of casting, Rooney Mara looks completely bored and miserable. Cara Delevigne is a pretty pallid presence though is disadvantaged by throwaway writing, and Adeel Akhtar gives a performance so stereotypical it might cause offence. None of the characters are interesting or colourful enough, although Jackman gives it everything even he can't disguise that Blackbeard's motivations and such are paper thin.

On top of the spectacle, 'Pan' also includes musical numbers. These musical numbers manage to be even more memorable than the incidental score, and that is not a good thing. Although spiritedly performed, they are not only jarringly anachronistic in style, but they are also out of place, too randomly thrown in and almost like Wright was trying to be a wannabe Baz Luhrmann, which doesn't suit Wright at all (was taken right out of the film once the characters started singing Nirvana). The script is also prone to anachronisms and often sounds completely stupid and too heavy in the cheese and schmaltz factor. There isn't really much of a story, and what there is of it is executed poorly with very little new to say, most of it not even trying to make sense to the point of being incomprehensible. There are some good ideas here but they are badly rushed through, the whole children as slaves idea was the one strand that was properly elaborated upon and had some emotional impact of some kind. Consequently, the whole point of the story is completely lost in translation, and not only was the whole Peter and Hook as friends poorly developed, plus they didn't seem believable as friends (Peter seemed as annoyed with Hook as much as those watching the film were), but there is next to no foreshadowing of them as enemies either which would have made Hook much more interesting. Most of the story is basically an excuse to include as many set pieces and musical numbers as possible, regardless of whether they were important and of good-quality or not.

Overall, a big disappointment. A few good things here and there, but this "untold" story should have stayed untold. 3/10 Bethany Cox

Greetings again from the darkness. Writer J.M. Barre first introduced the world to Peter Pan just after the turn of the twentieth century. Children and adults alike were enamored with "the boy who wouldn't grow up". The stories were filled with the mischief created by Peter and his Lost Boys buddies from their Neverland home, and although there existed elements of danger (Captain Hook), Barre's story was mostly about holding on to the joy and carefree world of childhood.

Sadly, these days we don't encourage kids to be kids. Instead, we push them to take on responsibility and act 'grown up' … heck, most kids today never really experience free play time with their friends. Everything is organized and scheduled (just check the calendar on the fridge). Writer Jason Fuchs and director Joe Wright (Atonement, Hanna) have created a Peter Pan "origin" story that lacks any touch of whimsy or enchantment from the original books or the numerous film adaptations: the 1953 Disney animated classic, the 1991 Steven Spielberg/Robin Williams/Dustin Hoffman vehicle, the underrated 2003 live action version from director P.J. Hogan, or even last year's Live TV broadcast featuring Allison Williams as Peter.

This one begins with a talented Parkour-enabled Mother (Amanda Seyfried) dropping off her infant son on the steps of an orphanage. She leaves only a note and a pan flute medallion. Flash forward twelve years and Peter (Levi Miller) is questioning the mysterious disappearance of kids from an environment straight out of a Dickens novel, as well as the hoarding talents of the evil Mother Superior (Kathy Burke). Soon enough Peter finds himself, along with scores of other youngsters, slaving in the fairy dust mines belonging to Blackbeard (Hugh Jackman). Are you depressed yet? Things only get bleaker as Peter escapes with his new friend James Hook (the name is no coincidence). They soon encounter the tribe that protects the Fairy Kingdom and the fairy dust that Blackbeard so values. Part of the tribe is Tiger Lilly (Rooney Mara) who believes that Peter is "the chosen one" who has come to lead and protect them. Lots of fighting ensues, plus some soaring giant crocodiles, flying pirate ships, and a trio of mermaids (all played by supermodel Cara Delevingne).

Re-imagining the classics is about the closest thing we get to creativity in Hollywood these days, so it's not the idea of the project that so bothers, but rather the approach. Where is the fun? Where is the sense of wonderment? In fact, young Peter's destiny seems to be an urgency to assume more responsibility as a leader … not live the carefree days of fun and games that Mr. Barre had set out.

Newcomer Levi, who plays Peter, ranks right there with director Joe Wright's previous discovery of Saoirse Ronan, as child actors with big time screen presence. Young Mr. Miller has a grasp of the script and character and is the best part of the film. Hugh Jackman plays Blackbeard, but can never really reach the necessary level of intimidation or theatricality. For some reason Garrett Hedlund plays Hook as if he is imitating Christian Slater who is imitating Jack Nicholson playing Indiana Jones. It's so over-the-top that we must assume Hedlund was directed to bring some comic relief to the bleak environment. Much has already been written about the casting of ultra-Caucasian Rooney Mara in the role of Tiger Lilly, though she performs the role quite well (avoiding the screeching of her lines in the manner of Jackman and Hedlund). Rounding out the cast is Adeel Axhtar as Smiegel/Smee.

Some of Wright's action sequences and CGI are quite impressive, though it's difficult to overlook the obvious influences of Terry Gilliam, Baz Luhrman, and even George Lucas and James Cameron. Particularly painful and out of place are the Luhrman-influenced musical interludes of Nirvana's "Smells Like Teen Spirit" and The Ramone's "Blitkrieg Bop". Even the pixie dust effect reminds of Dorian Gray, though Jackman only gets one brief scene in which to capitalize.

Devotees of the J.M. Barre source material will be no doubt disappointed and confused, but the theatre was filled with youngsters who couldn't seem to care less that Joe Wright had taken a classic story in the opposite direction. They enjoyed the visual effects as evidenced by the numerous "oohs" and "ahhs". So let's allow that reaction to speak for itself, rather than saying this version just didn't pan out.

If you loved Peter Pan as a kid this movie is probably the worst of all time.

When this was first announced they sold it as being different and man the tone of the early trailers just really made me feel like they were going to go deep and abstract. The trailer song made me shiver. My dumb ass thought it might even be something like "The adventures of Baron Munchausen" full of metaphors and abstractions like "What dreams may come". Like it was going tell a more emotional story about the relationship of the main actors.

Nope boring run of the mill peter pan adaptation with a couple characters swapped to claim uniqueness. Damn I just rewatched the first trailer and it totally sold me on a different story.

What makes matters worse is the world is very well designed and there's several hints at what could have been a really trippy adventure, but for some reason they went incredibly cheap on the CGI which in several spots is just unbearably bad.

The story doesn't really make any sense. "chosen one"? For what? and what exactly does he provide? He can control fairies? but the fairies were perfectly capable of throwing a couple pirates around. The relationship between Blackbeard and his mother was really dumb and illogical, there's so much more they could have done with that. In general it just felt crap and plodded along and then just rolled over at the end.

Man I'm just so angry. I would have killed to have Terry Gilliam to do this, or David fincher, Darren Aronofsky. It sucks because Hugh Jackman was wasted. Thats the one thing they got right. The design and portrayal of Blackbeard was cool, but his story was so Blasé. I liked the inclusion of modern music but instead of making it a theme with a story nope you get one cool song and then generic music for the rest of the film.(I know there was another one but it sucked)

Damn you Warner Bros for greenlighting this garbage.

Im giving this a 1/10 because of how insultingly wasteful they were with such a great idea. I've seen better execution of concepts like this out of 50k indie movies. When we talk about twist of fairy tale concepts I have to give the nod to Maleficent. Again the trailer was chilling and though the movie had innumerable flaws it was the mature emotional experience we were looking for. Guess now were just going to have to wait for the Fables trilogy they'll inevitably screw up.

I took my nephew and niece to see this movie this past week, and one thing was clearly noticeable. The movie is a bit to overwhelming for small kids.

However, if you don't go to this movie to see a funny and uplifting 'Hook' remake, but instead go to see a more deep and thrilling retelling of a childhood tale, you will be most pleasantly surprised. The movie, from this point of view, is fantastic.

I feel bad that it has received such harsh reviews from parents that apparently took their small kids to a movie without first at least watching the trailer. Its a bit darker then its predecessors, but is clearly shown that way through the trailer.

Let me put it this way, if the trailer looks like a movie you want to see, you will not be disappointed here.

Just watched this with my movie theatre-working friend, who had seen this before and enjoyed it. I did too. This was quite an enjoyable early story of Peter Pan and his then-friendship with James Hook as well as Tiger Lilly. And then there's the villain of Blackbeard who's perfectly portrayed by Hugh Jackman. I especially liked it when he did his version of the Nirvana song. We saw this in 3-D which was pretty impressive though it would have been just as enjoyable in the regular format. Good humor and plenty of awesome action sequences abounded. Part of me did wonder how Hook and Pan would eventually be enemies but since this isn't cannon with the other Pan movies, I wasn't too concerned. Really, I'll just now say I highly recommend Pan.

I won tickets to the movie premiere in London. The movie is good. But I am glad I had free tickets, because I would not have wanted to pay so much to see it (movie tickets in London are generally quite expensive, around £14 per ticket)! But if you're in America and can get a ticket for $5, then I would probably do that, otherwise I'd wait to rent it on a rainy day.

Hugh Jackman was amazing as Captain Blackbeard, he's a great actor. Even the kid who plays Pan, Levi Miller, did a very good job (he was a better actor in Pan than Daniel Radcliffe was in the early Harry Potter movies, if that comparison helps). Garrett Hedlund's acting seemed a bit over-the-top, but I am not sure if that's what he was aiming for because he thought that it fit with the character's personality? Or if that's just his acting style? His acting reminded me of Brendan Fraser's acting in The Mummy. Rooney Mara was believable as Tiger Lilly.

Plot was good, cinematography and movie sets were great. But the action sequences at times felt a bit too long and drawn out. Didn't find many of the jokes funny at all, but perhaps kids would enjoy them. All in all, a nice family movie that's good to rent on a rainy day.