"Hook"...do you like it?

[RoJoHen]

And I LOATHED Tinkerbell. That whole B-story struck me as very stupid. To me it seemed like an excuse to make Julia Roberts normal size and show off her "beauty."

I could be wrong, but I think that plot stems directly from the original novel.

 

[Sakrysta]

^Well if that's the case, I guess that just adds to my overall dislike for the Peter Pan fairy tale.

 

[Deckerd]

I didn't care much for it myself. Spielberg can't resist sentimental twaddle and one striking thing about the original book/play is the lack of sentimentality. I understand why he does it, though, since his home audience love that sort of thing so much.

 

[agordy85]

I've loved Hook since I was a kid and I still love it to this day. I also believe that 2003's Peter Pan was an excellent companion piece to this movie. I love the fact that in Hook, you have Robin Williams, comedian that is unbelievable as Peter Banning, but then when you actually watch the movie he is totally believable and his transformation into Peter Pan is a joy to watch because he pulls it off so well. Also some pretty kick ass sword fights!

 

[Takeru]

I could be wrong, but I think that plot stems directly from the original novel.

No, she's very close to Peter and jealous of Wendy and tries to get her killed, but she never grows.

Everyone should watch the 2003 version of Peter Pan, it's a wonderful movie and very close to the original story.

 

[Sakrysta]

No, she's very close to Peter and jealous of Wendy and tries to get her killed, but she never grows.

Now see, that I can understand. Peter is Tink's best friend, so naturally when he finds a new friend, she's jealous. This is the eternal childhood aspect of the story, and on that level, it works. Having Tink be an adult fairy with grown-up feelings for Peter was a choice that had none of the charm of the original Peter/Tinkerbell relationship as I understood it.

Speaking of Peter Pan & Tinkerbell, as a side note, I wish the whole fad of putting Tinkerbell on every single purse and t-shirt would just die already. Tinkerbell is childlike and mischievous, but not flirty or some kind of sex symbol as she has come to be depicted.

 

[Honorable Ensign]

I fall into the "love it" age range and I loved it when I saw it (it was popular with all the kids, I remember; we were playing it on the playground) and still like it. I have it on VHS and the soundtrack (which is excellent.)

It seems a pity critics ravaged it, especially for behind-the-scenes stuff that shouldn't matter. It doesn't effect what's on screen. I don't think it's a perfect movie, but I still think it is really good and enjoyable.

For the record, I've seen the 2003 Peter Pan too and I thought it was okay, if a bit too heavily pushing the romance for my liking. But I like Hook more, maybe because it's its own story and I was never horribly fond of the original Peter Pan story. I also like its vision of Neverland.

 

[Gaith]

Speaking of Peter Pan & Tinkerbell, as a side note, I wish the whole fad of putting Tinkerbell on every single purse and t-shirt would just die already. Tinkerbell is childlike and mischievous, but not flirty or some kind of sex symbol as she has come to be depicted.

I seem to recall a pretty funny reference to that sort of thing in Hook, when Banning calls her "some kind of Freudian hallucination... I'm not sure why you have wings."

Six inches or not, Julia Roberts' Tink was pretty sexy. That said, I could do without the sexification of animated figures/CG in general.

 

[zakkrusz]

In childrens' stuff, yes, I'd agree.

However, animation isn't just for the kiddies. It can be about anything, in a multitude of genres, from action or comedy to violent horror or even a heavy romantic soap opera. Point is some genres benefits from a little sexification.

 

[Gaith]

Retouched photos of human women are troublesome enough... I certainly inveigh against ogling any 2D figures that were never photographs at all.

Putting some wings and flesh-toned rags on Julia Roberts, on the other hand, gets a green light. :-P

 

[acappellasaurus]

I loved this movie once upon a time, as did my wife, and my kids love it now. Wife and I are 31 and the kids are 4 and 2.

 

[zakkrusz]

Retouched photos of human women are troublesome enough... I certainly inveigh against ogling any 2D figures that were never photographs at all.

Putting some wings and flesh-toned rags on Julia Roberts, on the other hand, gets a green light. :-P

True fake alterations are just cheating. Now whether a drawing or animated character could turn one on is all a matter of psychological mindset or imagination. Works for some, but not for others.

 

[Supervisor 194]

I'm 37 and saw it in the theater upon its initial release. I love the concept, but felt the film itself was very lacking. I enjoyed Hoffman's Captain Hook, but thought Williams never really connected with his role. I never saw him become the character (either the weary middle-aged version or the revived Pan): he was always just Robin Williams. I also thought that Tink didn't really work in the story, especially with her very adult feelings for Peter--and Roberts didn't really do anything to elevate the role.

I'd love to see someone take a pass at the general concept again, though.

 

[Sagart]

I'm 37 and I saw it in the cinema at the time of its release.

Hated it then.
Hate it now.

1991 was a bad movie year for me. My 2 favourite directors at the time dropped the ball in highly anticipated films, Spielberg with Hook and Scorcese with Cape Fear.