Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - JAQ

Pages: 1 [2] 3
16
Peter Pan / Re: Syfy Journeys to 'Neverland' in Peter Pan sequel...
« on: September 09, 2010, 01:32:35 AM »
I don't think it's based directly on the Starcatchers books (Disney had/has plans to do their own movie(s) based on them), it's just using some of the same ideas.  The plot teaser sounds more like an mash-up of Peter Pan and Oliver Twist to me.  I'm imagining verses of "You've Got To Pick a Pocket Or Two" segueing into "Second Star to the Right". :)
17
Peter Pan / Re: "Floreat Etona!" and "Bad form!"
« on: September 09, 2010, 01:27:09 AM »
The play was published in 1928, 17 years after the novel, and after a quarter century of "tinkering" by JMB.  He didn't mention Eton by name in the novel, but alluded to it with a reference to "Pop", the elite social club at Eton.  George and Peter had both been there by 1911.
18
Peter Pan / Re: Hook & Jill
« on: September 04, 2010, 02:09:02 PM »
In Chapter 2, when George and Mary are reflecting on the children flying away, George says: "I am responsible for it all. I, George Darling, did it. Mea culpa, mea culpa."
I don't think he says this in the play though...only in the novel :D
(Technically it's not speaking in the third person, just a bunch of first-person pronouns and verbs, and his proper name.  It would only be third-person if he paired his name with a third-person pronoun or verb, e.g. "George Darling, he did it.")
19
JMBarrie / Re: barrie's siblings
« on: August 24, 2010, 02:40:48 AM »
I just learned today of the "basement babies" story, from a reporter contacting me for information about the Barrie family.  I'm trying to assemble the facts as they become known on http://neverpedia.com/pan/Jean_M._Barrie which I hope will help clarify that any "link to J. M. Barrie" in the incident is tenuous.
20
JMBarrie / Re: Glandular Problems?
« on: July 30, 2010, 06:10:29 PM »
There's an endocrinologist named Robert Sapolsky who decided at one point to make JMB a poster boy for Psychogenic Dwarfism.  The syndrome is when stress causes an individual to stop growing, and Sapolsky decided that David Barrie's death and the "neglect" that JMB experienced afterward triggered this.  However, many of the "facts" that he cites about JMB are inaccurate or even completely fictional, such as him being the only child after David died, never undergoing puberty (so the mustache was fake?), having chronic legal troubles for molesting boys, and his age and height at death (60 years, 4ft 10in).  He's either gotten JMB confused with some other person, or he's even more careless with the truth than Piers Dudgeon.  I wouldn't put much stock in his "diagnosis".
21
JMBarrie / Re: NEVERLAND by Piers Dudgeon
« on: June 24, 2010, 02:35:58 PM »
You're absolutely right that Dudgeon cherry-picks only the facts which support his preconceived thesis, and interprets them in the most damning possible way. 
22
Peter Pan / Re: Peter Pan wiki
« on: April 13, 2010, 07:03:29 PM »
I'm just glad the URL didn't change because I had that bookmarked....
The "official" address is now Neverpedia.com, but the old URL will still work for the foreseeable future.  (I have some other plans for it eventually.)
23
Peter Pan / Re: Peter Pan wiki
« on: April 13, 2010, 02:59:00 PM »
I've been on the fence about changing the name of the site, based on comments from those who thought the pun in poor taste, and I've decided to go ahead with Option B, which is Neverpedia.  It's a bit too Wikipedia-alike for my tastes, but it's clear and inoffensive enough.  I don't want the site to become a visual mess of footnotes on everything, but I take your point, Andrew, about the need to cite quotations and sources of images, and I'll be working on that. 

As for "the man who never grew tall": it was just a little joke, a play on words.  It seems that everyone who knew him commented on his stature at some point, and I see no reason to take offense at it.
24
Peter Pan / Peter Pan wiki
« on: April 08, 2010, 01:40:37 PM »
I want to let people here know that I've begun a wiki about Peter Pan, J. M. Barrie, and pretty much anything related.  It's based in part on information from Wikipedia, but goes into (or eventually will go into) topics that don't qualify as "notable" by their standards, such as articles for each actor who played one of the Lost Boys in the 1924 film, for every character who appears in The Little White Bird, for every play Barrie wrote, etc.  I welcome the involvement of others interested in developing an online informational resource about the boy who never grew up and the man who never grew tall.  You can find it at http://peterphile.info
25
Peter Pan / Re: Screen versions of Peter Pan
« on: March 13, 2010, 05:09:17 PM »
Bernstein didn't write a full score, just a few key songs and they were charming
Actually Bernstein wrote more songs, but the principals weren't up to all the singing, so all but a few songs were dropped.
See http://peterphile.info/pan/Peter_Pan_%281950_musical%29
26
Peter Pan / Re: Screen versions of Peter Pan
« on: March 10, 2010, 02:23:36 AM »
I don't know about that line taking away children's imaginations, but aside from taking away the ambiguity it also seems to set Neverland in space instead of on earth....
In my personal opinion, the most unforgivable consequence of Disney inserting "star" into that line is that it will still be remembered that way in the 23rd century, and at the end of six feature films full of moaning about feeling old, Jim Kirk will use that line as a corny cap-stone to the three decade career of the original Star Trek crew.  But that may be a personal hang-up of mine. :)
27
Peter Pan / Re: Screen versions of Peter Pan
« on: March 08, 2010, 04:32:15 PM »
The 1924 silent film-I just wanted to say..I've never seen this...how do I get my hands on it?
It's available on DVD from Kino Video.
Quote
I loved the I do believe in faeries scene..kinda handled well considering clapping would have been odd in movie form i suppose..but I guess if done the right way it could have worked.
If Barrie was nervous about whether the audience would clap for Tink in a 1904 theatre, Hogan had even more reason not to count on it in a 2003 cinema.  Except maybe at the end of a big crowd-pleaser on opening weekend, it just doesn't happen.  I thought his on-screen solution was quite effective... and it was based how the scene was handled in the novel, which also earns it points.
28
Peter Pan / Re: Peter Pan, or the Boy Who Hated Mothers
« on: March 08, 2010, 05:04:59 AM »
There was something we were talking about tonight while we were out....there are two books i LOVE and neither have had definitive movie adaptations..Peter Pan and Phantom of the Opera....we're contemplating writing a couple screenplays...
I dabble at writing and drawing comics, and it dawned on me recently that Peter & Wendy has never been adapted - not even badly - into graphic novel form.  There have been a few satirical "reinterpretations", but the closest thing there is to a straight retelling of JMB's story is Disney's 32-page comic-book version of their movie.... which doesn't count.  That surprised me, because I think a graphic novel could offer a perfect blend of the visual engagement of the stage play with the literary depth of the novel.  So I've started work on writing one.
29
Peter Pan / Re: Which movie version represents Barrie's story the best?
« on: February 17, 2010, 04:42:48 PM »
The main problem is the Americanization of it--I'm not sure if that's unique to the American version or if there's a British version.
I read somewhere that there were different edits for the two countries.  The Peter Pan Alphabet Book, published in New York in 1907, had some stupidly nationalist bits in it ("G is for Old Glory" referring to the flag-raising scene) which make me suspect that the play was Americanized as soon as it crossed the pond, and the Brennon was just following its lead.

There are a couple of additional film adaptations worth mentioning:

Burbank Films Australia did one in the late 80s (part of a series of animated literary classics) that managed to be even more childish than Disney's: the pirates are complete buffoons, and the dominating message is that everybody wants a mother.  But in an effort to prove they weren't ripping off Disney, they went back to the novel and pulled out bits like the Lost Boys having to roll over in bed in sequence, Hook putting out a cake as bait, etc.

Around the same time, it was adapted by Soviet TV, as Питер Пэн‎, a live-action musical.  I haven't watched the whole thing (I have a low tolerance for musicals, especially if I can't understand a word of the language) but it's a mix of getting some things right (the business of the beasts tracking the Indians who were tracking the pirates tracking the boys) and other things wrong (no Smee).  Unlike every other production, the children were all played by pre-teen children, including Peter, though he was a bit too well-behaved and pleasant for the part.
30
Peter Pan / original version of the play
« on: February 17, 2010, 02:38:37 PM »
Has the original (or an early) version of the play ever been published?  The 1928 edition is fairly easy to come by, but that's the product of a quarter century of JMB "tinker"ing.  The introductory notes for John Caird and Trevor Nunn's version of the script mention scenes such as the "beautiful mothers", the wedding of Tootles and Wendy, Hook in Kensington, etc. which would be interesting to read. 

I wonder if GOSH has considered taking advantage of the copyright they undisputedly do still have in the US (the 1928 script) to publish a "Compleat Peter Pan", including not only JMB's final draft but the various "deleted scenes" and "alternate endings" he wrote (and toss in Kensington Gardens while they're at it).
Pages: 1 [2] 3