Peter Pan Live! (2014 TV Movie) User Reviews

Wanted to like this more than I did

[TumnusFalls · 5/10 · 17 March 2015]

We watched this with great expectation of a good to great show. How could it not be great? Christopher Walken as Hook. A live production! Christian Borle from SMASH. Kellie O'Hara. I was even interested in Allison Williams.

But starting from the beginning it seemed as if it just didn't quite jell. "Peter Pan" didn't quite hit the mark when he shows up. Not bad. Just a bit too rushed or nervous sounding. The kids were fine, the mom and dad were fine.

Then we get to Neverland, and "Hook" shows up. Or maybe, just walks on as if exerting energy in the part would be to go against the director's expressed wishes.

I thought from the reviews that people were being unfair to Walken, but no, they were not unfair. Unfortunately, Walken pulled the whole show down. The pirates, for example, were campy and energetic and and clearly trying to have a good time. But Walken in the middle of them all? Scene after scene just sinks. It might be that he's tired, or that he doesn't care, or that he is just horribly miscast. Whatever the reason, he was completely wrong and spoiled the production. (Even the previews of the production show him as giving way less than 100% in rehearsal--which is disastrous for any production--a professional *must* be at 100% at *every* rehearsal and production.

Other people were fine. I wasn't overly impressed with the choreography, but it was fine. The sets weren't distracting--it's a representation of a live show, and so the sets are larger than life like they would be for a Broadway show.

I liked some of the new songs they inserted (one of them was from the 1954 production, if I understand correctly), and I thought the music was great--great production values.

All in all, given anyone else as "Hook," this would have been a good-to-great production. Give a fantastic "Hook," it would have been fantastic.

But with Walken, it was just a so-so production.

Five stars. Good enough to maybe watch again with your kids or grandkids, but not something you'd watch again on your own.

fun song and dance, rest is tedious

[clearthinkernow · 5/10 · 5 December 2014]

Fell asleep twice last night watching this. Now, having spent several painful hours forcing myself to get through it all, I understand why I couldn't force myself to fight the sleep. Ms. Williams turns out to be an excellent singer, but she doesn't know what to do with her hands while she's singing and so keeps repeating the same motions over and over. It was so annoying. Walken is fine, perhaps a bit disappointing. Was this production meant to be seen by adults only? I have to wonder why it was shown on a school night and starting so late at 8 pm at that. Three hours is way too long for this. It was too long between songs and I saw no acting worth watching. I believe I was actually in pain, forcing myself to see it through to the end. One more complaint: why, on earth was the child, Wendy's, gown untied to show just a bit of pubescent cleavage? Remember her father saying she was almost grown-up? Why purposely present children this way? A disgrace for certain.

Poor Allison Williams

[Hitchcoc · 4/10 · 23 January 2015]

I really wanted to like this. I thought that "The Sound of Music" was better than many said it was. This, however, doesn't work at all. Allison Williams is decent in the title role and there are a couple of troopers who make it work, but how Christopher Walken was chosen to play Captain Hook stretches the limits of credulity. He is terrible. He can't dance. He is a nervous wreck. And he can barely sing. Think of all the possibilities. For goodness sake, the put an embarrassed Christian Borle in the role of Smee. It must have killed him to do his usual classy job next to the stiff Walken (by the way I love Christopher Walken). It just never got off the ground. It begins with some decent stuff, but dies on the vine. There is no clean movement through the plot. It is jerky and endless. I wonder if this is the death knell for these productions. If the only reason to do this is the novelty, it may be time to stop. How about some high quality stage productions of some of the classic musicals, only recorded ahead of time.

Over-hyped fizzle compares poorly to original NBC version

[duraflex · 3/10 · 6 December 2014]

As a kid, I completely enjoyed the Mary Martin-Cyril Ritchard version of the boy who didn't want to grow up. That version I knew was done in 1960 on a small budget and rerun often to the delight of tens of millions. Mary Martin was totally into the role - enthusiastic, cheerful and full of energy, fun and mischief. English actor Cyril Ritchard was the definitive Captain Hook - tall, fit, threatening, agile and funny plus he could sing, dance and act.

The very expensive, highly promoted 2014 version of this 110 year old story was such a disappointment. It goes to show that no matter how good a story or a musical score, success comes down to who puts a show together as to whether it flies or not. This show did not fly. After the flop this same team of producers made of Sound of Music in 2013, it's incredible that NBC gave them another shot at a live TV musical.

Allison Williams was barely adequate in the title role and paled by comparison to Sandy Duncan, Cathy Rigby and especially Mary Martin. Williams lacked enthusiasm, emotion and charisma. She certainly did not dominate her scenes nor the show and she was playing the lead character of Peter Pan.

Christopher Walken as Captain Hook was barely making it through every scene. He looked like hell and he was obviously dependent on reading cue cards or teleprompters. He came off as bored and disconnected as though he hated being in the play. He cannot sing and he looked sickly, frail and totally out of shape. What ship's crew would respect him as their leader?

The pirates were as weird as the Indians.

And the lost "boys" of Neverland were in their 20s and 30s. GEESH!

On the production side:

There were some technical glitches with the electronically screen-generated Tinkerbell.

Camera brightness levels didn't always match and feet were cut off at the ankles in dancing numbers. Cameramen got in each other's shots.

The only compliment I can offer is that audio quality was much improved over The Sound of Music done a year earlier.

Did I mention this thing ran 3 FULL HOURS - half again longer than the original and way, way too long.

Not surprisingly, even before the show was over, NBC was already advertising that the DVD would be out on Dec 16. I cannot imagine who would want to buy it.

Energy

[maryalice750 · 1/10 · 5 December 2014]

I want to start out this review by saying, NBC shouldn't stop airing musicals. No matter how big of flops they may be, they might be the closest some people can get to real theater. However, I want the quality of the musicals to improve.

No more big names, please! Stage acting and film acting are so different, for the stage you need to be big and energetic. For film, you need to focus on the nuances. To perfect acting, you need to fully develop your character, and Allison William's performance makes me wonder if she's fully developed her character. The only moment where I truly saw her shine as Peter was where Peter was talking about his parents. However, I wish she took that pain she acted out and carried it into the care-free attitude Peter should have, because that's what Peter Pan's about. Peter doesn't want to grow up because adults have to deal with more pain, and by staying a child forever, he's escaping that. However, there really is no escape from the pain of not having a mother. Allison could have shown, but I didn't see that spark, that energy, that character development in her. The same goes for Walken. Why does he want this power? Why does he want to defeat these children? What happened to him in his past? Why does he want Wendy as a mother? None of this seems to be answered in Walken's head so he has no direction with the character, and therefore no energy.

The lost boys seemed a bit too old, but that's alright. Wendy did wonderful, as well as the other Darlings. I really thought Mrs. Darling's voice was magnificent.

The costume design was odd for everyone, but that's been touched on before. The direction of the entire thing could have been handled better.

NBC, PLEASE take notes from Broadway and high-end theater versions before putting it on TV!

NBC's live production, with their news anchor's daughter as Peter.

[TxMike · 10 December 2014]

This is the second year in a row that NBC has staged and broadcast live an old standard. Last year it was "Sound of Music", with Carrie Underwood.

This year Allison Williams, who happens to be the 20-something daughter of Brian Williams, News anchor, is in the starring role as Peter Pan. She is qualified, with stage experience in college and a pleasant singing style. But it brings up an interesting fact, many TV fans will watch this sort of production because they already know the star. No one knew Ms Williams and, while she is credible, maybe even better than credible, the show would have been watched a lot more, I believe, if a young established star had been chosen for the role.

I never have been a big fan of the Peter Pan productions, and this one is no exception. I watched it, because I rather enjoy the concept, but found it to be so-so, take it or leave it.

Perhaps the best was Christian Borle, veteran Broadway star, who played two quite different roles, the Pirate Mr. Smee and George Darling. He stood out in all of his scenes, he is perfect for this type of production.

Aside from him I also enjoyed Christopher Walken as Captain Hook. He is a stage veteran song and dance man and looked very comfortable in this production.

I hope NBC keeps doing these yearly and I hope the next one is a show I am more interested in. A solid "6" from me.

Peter Panned and the Hookzombie

[ifyougnufilms · 2/10 · 5 December 2014]

This shockingly awkward and careless production of a classic left me and my family (those who hadn't fled the room after Walken's Hookzombie appeared) numb with disbelief. How could a major studio disgorge so amateurish and unattractive a musical stew? No we weren't expecting performances like those of Mary Martin and Cyril Ritchard from the golden age. We didn't demand that, but we did look forward to some higher grade fun than this dreck. Williams tries hard to lend a bit of charm to Peter and succeeds to some degree, but she's swimming against an ugly tide created by the director and production managers. Walken, with (almost literally) one eye on the teleprompter and the other on the studio clock (When can I get out of this nightmare and go strangle my agent?), delivers what has to be one of his strangest performances, mincing around among his equally directionless crew like a geezerly Jack Sparrow. The pacing is nonexistent. The colors and costumes frightening. The Neverland boys are aging chorusliners, and the "Redskins" are ...let's see...what exactly are they supposed to be?

Not Bad

[garyclingman1234 · 7/10 · 24 December 2014]

I saw this with my mom tonight. She of course loves the old songs (original to the productions in her days) so she has a lot of nostalgia which carries her through it.

I overall enjoyed it too though,surprisingly. Christopher Walken, as always is really fun to watch. And it was interesting to see a live stage production turned into a DVD / movie to watch at home. I think they did manage to capture some of the live magic.

I wasn't a huge fan of the girl playing Peter Pan, but not sure if that's her fault or how she was directed. She didn't ruin it though, she just felt a little flat or something. The other actors did a better job of conveying emotions.

Peter Pan Dead!

[jlhendrix8888-10-144161 · 1/10 · 5 December 2014]

Is there some reason why Peter Pan cannot be played by a boy? Here Peter is played by a woman who unfortunately looked and sounded like a woman not even really trying to sound and act like a boy. Why did it have to be live? It would have been much better had they cleaned up the production woes, bad acting, and special effects??? And I believe it was only live in EST anyway (Can you imagine watching this train wreck as a taped production?). Live was a gimmick that ruined this production. I watched the whole thing, but just really felt sorry for the actors and crew by the end. Changing the story doesn't make it an event if that story is boring and unimaginative.

Where there's live, there's hope

[ajhsys · 7/10 · 16 December 2014]

I am surprised at all the negative reviews. This was live television. It is not supposed to be perfect. Many theater plays do not always go well and this is the same thing. It is precisely that spontaneity that comes with a live performance that makes it so much fun to watch. There is no post-production work when you do live, so that can't fix the occasional crew member or light that gets in the picture.

Most of the cast did a great job. If you know the history of Peter Pan productions, you would not be surprised at a young woman playing the title role. Allison Williams pulled it off beautifully, with a great singing voice and the guts to hook up to a wire on live TV.

As far as the stone-faced Christopher Walken, he played the role as he saw it. It worked, but it wasn't Dustin Hoffman or Cyril Ritchard. They saw it differently. It is called artistic license and Walken kept to his own style.

I gave it a 7 out of 10 because I thought the lost boys and the Indians were too old. They were extremely talented as dancers, actors and singers, but they looked almost perverse as they attempted to act like kids. Had they cast kids in those roles, the dancing and singing may have suffered, perhaps, but it would have looked better.

Some reviewers also complained about the sets. With very little CGI and only sparing use of green screen, the set designers did great! Neverland is a product of a child's imagination...it should be colorful.

I grew up watching Mary Martin play Peter Pan on our 9" black and white television. This was a modern tribute to that legendary performance. Watch the original again and you will see how archaic it looks. The performances are why it is a classic, and I hope time will show that this is no different.

Other than the too old ensemble to bring it down just a little, live television is something we need to see a lot more of.

Post-op Peter Pan

[bhostetle · 1/10 · 16 December 2014]

I'm just going to say what we are all thinking.

Wendy looked about ten years too old, but worse, Peter looked post-op.

Never, have I cared that Pan was played by a woman until now. Never has Pan looked so much like a woman, every single view.

I don't think I'll ever want to watch any version of Peter Pan again, not even Hook. This has ruined everything.

I'm sorry if you disagree, dislike my post, that is fine.

Worst Pan and Wendy, ever.

I still don't have enough lines...it's terrible.

It's awful, it's the worst.

A great effort, with some flaws

[PatrickDRusk · 8/10 · 5 December 2014]

When watching live productions like Peter Pan Live or last year's Sound of Music Live, you need to have realistic expectations.

In no way could last year's event, for instance, have lived up to the Julie Andrews' movie. That's just wrong to expect.

Nor should either movie be compared to a fully produced Broadway show. A Broadway show often has the luxury of running a number of performances off Broadway to work out all the kinks. And they only have to contend with one visual perspective, looking straight on from an audience.

These NBC events have attempted to put the home viewer right in the middle of the action, including sweeping scene changes moving from one set to another. They are breathtakingly audacious. When you realize that, it's remarkable that you never see a camera or even the obvious shadow of a camera.

If you want to enjoy these, you really need to go into it pulling for the actors to do well, hoping along with them. With that in mind, both of these performances were very enjoyable.

Christian Borle as Mr. Smee was the strongest performance, but Allison Williams did a great job as Peter, and Taylor Louderman was a standout as Wendy. The choreography of some of the scenes was very gutsy for a one-shot live performance. And the dog was spectacularly well- trained.

I am a huge Christopher Walken fan, and I will admit to being disappointed by his performance. I found myself wishing that they could have had him 10 years ago when he would have been more up for the physicality that the role should have aimed for. The role felt like it was probably made less ambitious at the last moment, especially the dismal sword fight between Hook and Pan.

It was also a bit disappointing to see the flying paraphernalia too often, particularly the distortion in the youngest child's shirt. It's too bad that some real-time digital removal of the wires wasn't possible (or attempted, since I suspect it may have been possible).

But, seriously, think of all they achieved. I am glad they went for it, and I will keep tuning in for future attempts. Bravo, NBC!

Disappointing and Too Long. Walken is miscast as "Hook"

[mike48128 · 7/10 · 8 December 2014]

Let's forget a moment about: the bad sound quality as the audio gain is turned up so high (in the nursery) that you can hear the ventilation fans. Shaky camera work and technical video flaws, especially in the opening nursery. Did it soar? Yes and no. Allison Williams was quite good but seemed "too tall" for the role. She mastered the art of "flight" and sang very well, but we saw the flying "rigs" far too often, on camera. Story changes? A few in 50+ years are expected. The maid's part is cut to nothing and her dance number in Neverland is missing. Good, colorful, sets, especially the "break-away" nursery. (In the 1960 version, the dance floors were all "studio white".) Good costumes, especially the "Lost Boys" who were wearing the clothes they fell out of the crib in and were much too small, on purpose. The "Indians" looked far too "Hawaiian" for my taste, but at least they were not "stereotypical" from the 1950's. The music was scored very well. The "Lost Boys" are too old and look like lost young men. Capt Hook's beard is "fuller" (and faker-looking) in the publicity pictures. Christopher Walken can dance but he sure can't sing. He looked tired. His performance was too "wooden" and I could write several pages about what's wrong about it. His pirate crew could dance and sing, and (literally) carried him along. A great ticking crocodile! I did not miss the "Mysterious Lady" song (too gay). "When I Went Home" was restored, and it has a haunting quality about it. In short, this remake showed much promise, but someone like the late great Robin Williams or even Steve Martin or Martin Short would have been far better, cast as "Capt. Hook". A "motion capture" version needs to be made, using these iconic songs.The 1960 Mary Martin "Producer's Showcase" broadcast (in "1955" it was not in color) was the best, and had the best "Capt. Hook" (Cyril Ritchard) as well. What made that version work was the charisma between Peter Pan and Hook. Both stars were outstanding. Those sets looked cheap as well. It's currently only available as a fuzzy 2nd generation "unofficial" Goodtimes (Universal) DVD. Even Cathy Rigby's later version is better, but she looks too old-in-the-face. I was disappointed and may not even buy this new version, although it might play better without 40+ minutes of commercials. Look for it, along with "Sound of Music Live" at Big Lots, at the $5 or less,dump bin, by next year.

The Saddest Review I've Ever Written

[zkonedog · 2/10 · 4 March 2017]

The Mary Martin version of this play was a staple of my childhood. I watched it time and time again, idolizing Peter Pan, harboring a crush on Wendy, and singing along to every song. Even as an adult now, I can appreciate the fun themes of this story, along with the obvious nostalgia factor When NBC announced that Peter Pan Live would be following in the tradition of last year's Sound Of Music, I was overjoyed! Unfortunately, that joy lasted all of about 15-20 minutes. Instead of making me hearken back to my time of youth (like any Pan production worth its salt should do), "Live" actually served to disconnect me from the story and characters.

The main, obvious, glaring problem with this production is that the casting is utterly terrible. I mean, some of the worst casting I've ever seen. The only one even passable was Wendy (Taylor Louderman), and she was just "okay". Allison Williams (as Pan) can't hold a candle to classic performers such as Mary Martin or Cathy Rigby. The energy just isn't there. There is also no innocence in the interactions between pirates/lost boys/indians/mermaids in Neverland, as they are all played by older actors that (once again) struggle to match the energy of previous productions I've seen.

Then, there is the train wreck that is Christopher Walken as Captain Hook. Whoever made that choice should probably be packing his/her bags right now, as it was the final (and largest) nail in the coffin. Walken is a great deadpan actor...which makes him completely wrong for the part. Hook needs to have a swashbuckling air about him, full of pent-up energy and frivolous anger. Instead, Walken does his traditional deadpan (maybe that's all he knows how to do, though, so again it probably just comes down to casting) and never alters his facial expressions once. During his times on the screen, I found myself reaching for something else to do...it was that bad.

Let me be clear on one quick thing too: I'm not rating this performance down because it didn't live up to my childhood nostalgia (though it would indeed be easy to fall into that trap). I love the Peter Pan story in all its formats, and can appreciate the different ways the story has been told. I loved Mary Martin, saw Cathy Rigby live, consider Hook to be one of my favorite movies along with Finding Neverland, and even just recently read (and thoroughly enjoyed!) the book Alias Hook. So, I'm definitely not just locked into one version/interpretation of the Pan mythology. This one just really was that disappointing.

As the title indicates, this is one of the saddest reviews I've ever written here on Amazon. I so wanted to enjoy this live production and was looking forward to it for quite some time, and it just severely let me down with the terrible casting and lack of overall energy. I can't bear to just give any Pan effort a single star, so I will give it two (but mainly because Williams and Louderman deftly execute their songs together). I sincerely hope that there are not kids out there turned off by the Pan story because of this lackadaisical effort, as that would be the real shame in all of this.

Bad In Ways I'd Never Imagined...Epic Fail!

[JasonDanielBaker · 5 December 2014]

The very notion of staging a live version of the Broadway musical version of Peter Pan for TV in this day and age was enough to generate publicity. Live TV is a phenomenon ripe for disaster and people knew well in advance that they were going to see a disaster.

They got that cheese-fest and substantially more in a horrific broadcast that was like sitting through three hours of a middle school play your kid isn't in. 'Peter Pan Live' makes Jersey Shore look like Masterpiece Theater.

The culprit in all this is the network NBC who evidently gambled they could get ratings just by staging an epic debacle that people would watch with the same fascination of rubber-neckers slowing down to check out a car wreck.

The sets were cheap. The make-up and costuming were atrocious. The acting was appalling throughout with performers seemingly always thrown out of rhythm by each other. The singing looked lip-synched in parts. The choreography was very often painfully out of synch.

Alison Williams in the title role kept flying up and back down again with obvious cables tied to her. Props kept falling and the camera crew appeared rattled and confused. It actually looked unsafe - like the cables could have broken leaving the star at the mercy of gravity.

Christopher Walken as Captain Hook walked through his performance injecting about as much personality as a wax museum sculpture and looked like he was reading every one of his lines off a teleprompter.

The low point came with a lackadaisically mimed sword fight between Pan and Hook near the end. The cast seemed tired at that point and beyond caring what the disaster looked like.

Sadly, this production didn't pass with flying colours

[TheLittleSongbird · 3/10 · 9 December 2014]

Watching it with an open mind and without comparison to the Cathy Rigby and Mary Martin versions(both superior), Peter Pan Live is not quite as awful as it has been said to be, there were a few things that were good. But on the whole, Peter Pan Live never really got its feet of the ground, starting off just okay at best and getting worse the later it got.

There were a few good performances, the two best ones being from Kelli O'Hara and Christian Borle. O'Hara is an incredibly touching Mrs. Darling and with its gentle, angelic quality and warm but not excessive vibrato has the best singing voice of the entire cast, so much so anybody would love for her to sing them to sleep. Borle's Smee is a riot and he looks like he is having a whale of a time and brings the most energy out of anybody involved(he is good as Mr Darling too though it was odd when you are so used to the dual role being Mr Darling and Hook). Singing-wise, he is close behind O'Hara, rich and characterful. Taylor Loudermann is rather mature for Wendy but has a very pleasant, sweet toned voice and comes across as compassionate and charming. The crocodile also looks great, Nana is very well-trained(her mannerisms done to perfection and providing some humour) and the pirates bring bucketfuls of liveliness to their scenes if a little too over-eager in places(though in honesty they were likely trying to compensate for Walken).

Allison Williams doesn't come off entirely successfully as Peter. She tries her best and actually is youthful, has a pretty voice that is up to the challenges of the role(and the role is not easy at all) and has alluring smile and eyes, however she does come across as too gamine and nowhere near cocksure enough(not even in the Duel number), certainly not passing at all as a 12-year old or so boy. She doesn't look completely at ease with the wires either. Christopher Walken is a disaster, I do like Walken but he was completely wrong for Hook. He completely phones it in, looks as though he wandered on stage drunk and squints a lot as if trying to read the prompter, his dancing is also lazy(whereas the rest of the pirates showed great athleticism he was basically shuffling from one leg to another and his singing is constantly tired-sounding and underpowered). Never do you feel any kind of menace and when there was any humour with him it came across as unintentional, like his out of time tambourine playing and radio frequency-sounding last note in Tarantella. The Lost Boys would pass more for football hooligans and the Indians even when looking more like Hawaiians still look and act stereotypically. John and Michael are okay though their energy flounders later on, John baring a resemblance to Harry Potter is a tiny bit disconcerting, while Alanna Saunders is an alluring and athletic if too sexy Tiger Lily.

Visually, the production didn't really appeal to me. There's a lot of detail evident in the sets, but the colours often do look too bright and gaudy, while the costumes are mixed, Peter's and Hook's are nice and traditional and Mrs Darling's is gorgeous, but Wendy's is rather low-cut, the Lost Boys' look way too small for them and the Indians' look like ones that would belong somewhere else other than Peter Pan. The camera work is shaky and over-reliant on panning and close-ups which completely betrays Williams' lack of boyish youthfulness and the wires are always too visible which takes away from the magic. The music and songs are wonderful and the orchestra do perform them well but they really needed much more energy and ensemble tightness than they had here, the early songs are not so bad but halfway through and onwards the pace slackens to the extent the production's almost lifeless.

Staging-wise and pace-wise other than Walken this was where the production fell down most upon, though some may forgive how clumsy the wire work looked. The choreography is very lacking, especially with the pirates, sometimes out-of-sync and too simple, Tarantella was a train-wreck but at least had that clever touch with the trap door. The Indian dancing looked more like gyrating, which looked so misplaced. What was also lacking was chemistry between the performers, again the opening nursery scene was very well done, but Duel was let down hugely by a lack of tension and lack of chemistry between Peter and Hook(Peter and Wendy's chemistry wasn't completely believable either but that between him and Hook was the bigger let down). The climatic sword fight fares just as bad, children doing pretend sword-fighting in the school playground is less amateurish than what was choreographed here. The pacing sags badly halfway through and never recovers beyond that point, the story is a classic but with a lot of musical numbers and thin on story there was a very bloated and overlong feel with nowhere near enough magic.

All in all, has its moments and not as entirely awful as all that but even when judged fairly and on its own in my opinion Peter Pan Live didn't pass with flying colours. 3/10 Bethany Cox

Laughable

[oprystar · 1/10 · 28 December 2018]

Absolutely the worst live broadcast to date. Very awkward. A disgrace to the work of Barrie, Charlap, and Styne. For those not familiar with this musical, do yourself a favor and watch either the Mary Martin or Cathy Rigby productions. And what's with all the political correctness? To make changes to the work of another is a great insult.

Bad, but gets worse as you watch it

[yastepanov · 3/10 · 6 December 2014]

I was hoping NBC learned from "The Sound of Music - Live" and they did, just not very much.

The lead role is rather well played, but Christopher Walken as Hook was a HUGE letdown. Walken plays the SAME PATTER as he does for every role. The problem is, the lines were written for someone with a rather lower class English accent which Walken did not (perhaps fortunately) even attempt, but the overall result was terrible.

Walken can act, but he didn't even phone this one in, he sent it snailmail.

Of course, being live has the problem of the flying harnesses, but because the camera zooms in on the characters (instead of the single POV you get during a stage presentation) the wires are not only visible, but annoying.

Maybe NBC should stick to Saturday Night Live! and avoid Broadway.

Cheaply Made and Uneasy Performances but Overall OK Production.

[michaelhirakida · 6/10 · 9 December 2014]

NBC's adaptation of Peter Pan live I thought would be something cool. In my assumption before watching it, I thought the whole production was going to be filmed front of a live audience. But unfortunately, this is not the case. The whole thing is filmed on a cheaply made sound- stage that is easily forgetful in the end.

Allison William's Peter Pan is all good fun and she is actually trying the best she can to make this performance work. But Christopher Walken....

Jesus. Christopher Walken is terrible! But it's laughably terrible. It's obvious he was miscast in the role and it could have gone to other better performers. His so called "Singing" is basically him talking normally, with rare occasions of vocals being visible. A weird running gag is that at the end of a song, he holds a note, then the commercials come on, then we get a 5 second snippet of him still holding the note! I don't get how this is suppose to be funny unless they cut to it after the song was over.

The sound-stage is super cheap. It is not what I imagined a Peter Pan musical to be. It feels like I am in more of a Dr. Suess storybook than I am in a Peter Pan musical (but that's just me) now think of the Disney Version. Look at all the sets they could have done. But instead, there are four main sets. The Darling's House, Neverland, The Lost Boy's Hideout and Captain Hook's Ship. You will be seeing so much of these sets throughout the entire production.

But It does not necessarily mean its a bad production. The whole musical is full of good moments that will certainly bring smiles to faces. I like the musical numbers a lot, the characters while uneasily performed are most of the time forgivable and it helps that they are trying to make something good.

Peter Pan Live is a cheap production and it shows because you can obviously see wires holding the actors together and it looks like a elementary school production. But there is obvious faith going on that keeps them holding the musical together. I might be interested in getting the DVD, but not now.

65/100 C+

Bad Bad Bad

[Man99204 · 1/10 · 11 December 2014]

Get out the cranberry sauce - you will need it for this turkey!

This stinkeroo should forever end any pretension that Alison Williams should be in the Entertainment Industry. The only reason she was castis because her Father, Brian Williams, is a powerful part of NBC news.NBC hyped the daylights out of this production, and it still crashed and burned.

As bad as Alison Williams was in this production, she was by no means the worst performer - that distinction has to go to Christopher Walkin. Walkin confuses "pirate" with "really bad drag queen " as he prances his way through his scenes. His Captain Hook comes across more as an aging pedophile than a serious villain.

This is a lovely family friendly story. I encourage you to watch any of the previous versions of this production which have been filmed over the past fifty years.

Unwatchable

[larry-miller · 2/10 · 4 December 2014]

The film if that's what it can be called is soft, not sharp, as if it's old.

The film mostly has a yellowish tinge.

Like the last "live" debacle, this one has the songs lip-synched, not live. Except that lips are out of sync. Is this because the actors are out of sync with the singing? Or because the transmission is out of whack? Worse. Dialogue too is out of sync, As if it it is prerecorded, thus not live.

Alison Williams is way too thin. And smiles all the time which is quite phony. Much better on GIRLS.

Credit to them for doing it live, if that's what it actually is. Two hours to go and I quit.

A memory of how musicals used to be and how everything old becomes new again.

[mark.waltz · 8/10 · 5 December 2014]

Never underestimate the magic of live theater, and I had to remind myself of that ten years ago when I saw a touring production of "Peter Pan" with Cathy Rigby. I had of course seen the Mary Martin T.V. production when it was brought back years after the original broadcast, and simply expected a fun, unchallenging night at the theater. What I came out with was the sense of joy and delight, feeling like a kid again and reminding myself why we should never grow up to the extent of finding pleasures in simple things. A simple story, but exquisitely told through song and dance, and some of Jerome Robbins' greatest choreography that deserves re-discovering beyond Peter's ability to fly.

For NBC's second live broadcast of a musical, "Peter Pan" seems likely to be the icing on the cake following last year's "The Sound of Music" which I enjoyed and found many great things in even if it lacked the cinematic scope of the 1965 movie. That is not at all an issue with "Peter Pan" because it has only been filmed as a T.V. special with two of its Peters, and not done with the cinematic magic of Hollywood. This makes the audience utilize their imagination, and even if strings are visibly attached, there are no strings between the performers and the audience. It is a love match all round.

Once you get past the obvious knowledge that it is a young lady playing the role of Peter, Allison Williams will take you along side him/her in Peter's journey to Neverland with the innocent London kids in need of an adventure. Williams is so androgynous in the part after you get used to her, it makes me wonder how she'd be in "Victor/Victoria". She's not as tomboyish as Martin, Rigby or Sandy Duncan, and there is definitely evidence of a slight bosom, but she really gives it her all. Promotional shots of her did no justice; You have to see her entire performance to totally appreciate her.

The real triumph in this production is Taylor Louderman as the sweet Wendy, chosen by Peter to mother himself and the boys he joins with to remain a boy forever. She is absolutely charming in the part, Unlike other young actors thrown into the spotlight, she brings much subtlety into the role, never mugging or overacting, especially in the singing department. Leave the mugging for the wonderfully funny Christopher Walken as Captain Hook, perfectly cast and delightfully over the top without ever being too much in your face. Alanna Saunders is a likable Tiger Lily, and Christian Borle is adorable as Smee, a nice surprise, having seen him playing the pre-Hook version of Captain Hook in the Broadway comedy "Peter and the Starcatcher". He even brings humor to the usually overly serious part of Mr. Darling, reminding me of David Tomlinson in "Mary Poppins" as the droll Englishman who does on occasion allow himself to have a light-hearted moment. Broadway's sweetheart, Kelli O'Hara, is an absolute delight in the small part of Mrs. Darling. Everything I see this young woman in has been memorable, from her early Broadway performances to the recent "Bridges of Madison County". May Anna in "The King and I" bring her that long over-due Tony! With delightfully animated like sets, "Peter Pan" goes into overdrive every time the characters begin to dance.

There's some definite moments of gay camp here, especially with Peter's pals and Tiger Lilly's macho Indians who get together for a big dance number that seemed like the Village People and their chorus boys from "Can't Stop the Music!" put into a Candyland setting. Even with my praise, I can still see the criticisms coming here, because there is a ton of corny moments, especially the fate of the pirates. Minnie Driver adds some class as the narrator and the older Wendy, and in her brief moment, Caitlin Houlahan takes on the presence of Mame Dennis's great-nephew Michael as she is lead off by another variation of the Pied Piper.

NBC's live musicals, long may they continue to shine!

Could've been better... Still worth owning on DVD

[martinc003971 · 5/10 · 6 December 2014]

I thought it was good not great but good. I thought Allison was a good pick for Peter Pan considered she's wanted to play the role since she was 3. I honestly would have picked Tim Curry or Jason Issacs to play Hook . Christopher Walken had no energy behind his interpretation of Hook. Sad really. The One thing I LOVED about Walken and Williams together was the duet "Duel" SO GOOD! The actress that played Mrs. Darling was also GREAT.

My favorite version of the musical was Cathy Rigby's version. I have seen her twice live in 1997 and 2005, I have also seen Mary Martin and Sandy play Peter as well.

I'd give Peter Pan Live! a 6/10. Allison was the best part of it honestly. I would see her on Tour if she goes on tour with it.

Wonderful job

[vchimpanzee · 5 December 2014]

After "The Sound of Music", I had high expectations for this production, since NBC seems to want to make this an annual event. While I didn't see as many excellent performances as last year, this was quite an accomplishment.

Taylor Louderman was the standout actor. Absolutely wonderful and a fine singer, plus she was beautiful.

Allison Williams was great as a singer and pretty good speaking lines, with occasional moments of brilliance. She was too pretty for me to consider her a boy, but at times I felt I was seeing Peter Pan rather than watching someone play a role and evaluating her. And she was completely convincing as British.

Christian Borle wasn't as spectacular as last year, but he did play two roles and did them very well. Without being told he had two roles, I would never have known. It was like Richard Bucket and his brother-in-law Onslow. Wait, not Richard. More like Hyacinth, but a male version.

Kelli O'Hara is an amazing singer.

The two young actors playing the Darling boys did a fine job for their age.

I liked the three pirates who spent the most time on screen other than Hook himself. I knew Shmee (that's how Hook pronounced it; live TV!) but I could never keep track of who the other ones were. But they were great and very funny. And not threatening at all. As dangerous as the pirates sounded in the Macy's parade and their first scene, they couldn't live up to their reputation and that's just fine. A kid-friendly movie can't have villains that are TOO scary. And these bumbling idiots reminded me of The Three Stooges or perhaps Dumb and Dumber (and Dumbest).

As for the pirates, they were very talented indeed as singers and dancers. Not since Michael Jackson's "Beat It" video have such sinister types shown so much musical talent. And no, I've never seen "West Side Story". Imagine, tap-dancing pirates. And pirates doing the tango. And waltzing! And an Esther Williams routine from overhead! What a silly yet magnificent production!

The Lost Boys were great too. Once again, I didn't really try to keep up with which one was which, but the three with the most lines all did a great job. Not just speaking lines but also singing and dancing.

Minnie Driver did a fine job as narrator and later as adult Wendy.

Finally, there is Christopher Walken. Sufficiently goofy, but I never once forgot this was Christopher Walken playing Hook. I don't know the man all that well but his distinctive style was there. Still, he was frequently overshadowed by his talented subordinates and he often didn't enunciate in a manner to stand out, or even be heard. He was entertaining enough, especially after I got used to (on a competing network on Sundays) seeing Pan as villain and Hook as handsome and dashing hero.

Tiger Lily wasn't given much to do. Alanna Saunders was pretty and a good dancer but she was kind of a disappointment.

In the "making of" special that aired a week earlier, I learned the people in charge of flying had a lot of experience with Peter Pan. They executed their jobs nearly flawlessly. Watching Pan fly was amazing. I couldn't see what held him (her) up except at the end. There may have been a slight problem with the youngest Darling because I could see an edit; apparently this wasn't completely live, because I saw the same thing happen 20 years ago in the sitcom "Roc". Ever since the Janet Jackson incident, "live" can't really be "live" because things can happen. Still, excellent work on the flying.

On the same special we were told how Tinkerbell would work. "She", of course, was presented spectacularly. And on this kid-friendly show, we were apparently lucky not to hear her talk. On that subject, the Macy's parade had one inappropriate word which I didn't hear here, and the worst thing we were told Tink said was a synonym for donkey. Yeah, that's it.

The well-known music, of course, was great. New songs were added, but this is real music and kids need to know that when I was their age, this is what music sounded like. Back then, rock and roll was this evil presence which mostly stayed in the shadows.

Once, again, NBC gave us something to be proud of, something the whole family could watch.

PETER PAN (Live) was dead

[trylontheatre1 · 1/10 · 7 December 2014]

PETER PAN (Live) was suppose to be a big event for NBC. What we got was a production poorer than some high school plays I have seen. Alison Williams was so blah as Peter Pan. She brought no excitement to the role. Than we have the biggest shocker Christopher Walkens as Captain Hook. He slept-walked through the entire show. He spoke his lines like he was holding the script in his hands. Walken seemed totally bored with the whole thing. Now we come to lost boys who were played by grown men. I'm surprised we couldn't see any hair on their chests. The dance numbers were nothing and the sword fight between Pan and Hook was laughable. If you can, watch the Mary Martin version or the Cathy Rigby production of PETER PAN. They will make you forget this truly awful presentation of a classic musical play.