>>Well, I said I wouldn't set out to post every day during Three Weeks for DW, but then I immediately found something else that I wanted to post about, so here we are two days in a row!<<
Hee!
>>its Peter Pan remake, Peter Pan & Wendy, has also just dropped.<<
Peter Pan has a deep history of live action. Early on it was quite popular as a stageplay, although ironically Peter was often played by a girl or young woman.
>>the 2003 live-action Peter Pan, starring Jeremy Sumpter and Rachel Hurd-Wood.<<
>>I even have a dedicated Peter Pan section of my bookshelf with a Peter Pan bookstop :D (It only has a handful of books, but still).<<
That is beautiful.
>> Contrast that with Peter Pan & Wendy, where they apparently decided not to make Tinkerbell glow because "a viewer would be uncertain of where the light originates". <<
O_O FAAAAIIIIIL!
>> (And I mean, films with talking lions and a magic genie and mermaids are also not meant to be realistic). <<
True, but in those cases, attention to realism of surrounding details makes the phantasmagoric aspects more plausible. I do a lot with that in my work.
>>Anyway, I want to channel some of this grumpy energy into spite-creating fanworks for the 2003 film, but I don't have any specific ideas at the moment (prompts are welcome!).<<
Well, my money's the "Lost Boys" actually being a mixed-gender group with tomboys and genderqueer kids, who are exactly the kind of outcasts Pan would pick up.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
Thoughts
Date: 2023-05-01 06:50 pm (UTC)Hee!
>>its Peter Pan remake, Peter Pan & Wendy, has also just dropped.<<
Peter Pan has a deep history of live action. Early on it was quite popular as a stageplay, although ironically Peter was often played by a girl or young woman.
>>the 2003 live-action Peter Pan, starring Jeremy Sumpter and Rachel Hurd-Wood.<<
I really liked Hook with Robin Williams.
>>I even have a dedicated Peter Pan section of my bookshelf with a Peter Pan bookstop :D (It only has a handful of books, but still).<<
That is beautiful.
>> Contrast that with Peter Pan & Wendy, where they apparently decided not to make Tinkerbell glow because "a viewer would be uncertain of where the light originates". <<
O_O FAAAAIIIIIL!
>> (And I mean, films with talking lions and a magic genie and mermaids are also not meant to be realistic). <<
True, but in those cases, attention to realism of surrounding details makes the phantasmagoric aspects more plausible. I do a lot with that in my work.
>>Anyway, I want to channel some of this grumpy energy into spite-creating fanworks for the 2003 film, but I don't have any specific ideas at the moment (prompts are welcome!).<<
Well, my money's the "Lost Boys" actually being a mixed-gender group with tomboys and genderqueer kids, who are exactly the kind of outcasts Pan would pick up.