This message has been deleted.

It didn't work because it's not Barrie's work. Barrie would've never approved. Peter Pan is never gonna grow up. There is only one official sequel and it's called Peter Pan's NeverWorld. Tinker Bell is all screwed up in this version. It's Just all wrong. Peter Pan is based on a real boy who achieved the impossible and never grew up. It's not something you can Just make a Hollywood money grabber out of.

I can't take it.turning it off after 25 mins. It's completely non-engaging.
I guess it doesn't help that I've never been a huge Robin Williams fan he's a very self conscious actor (though I like his bit in
Dead Again
.)
The only interesting thing is noting that Caroline Goodall, who plays the wife, was also used by Spielberg a few years later as the wife in
Schindler's List.
Goodbye forever.
.

Just watched this with my wife & kids over the holiday and still loved it. Saw it when I was in my 20's and was really amazed with the scenery and color.

I've always loved the movie and I rewatched it and I still love it and I appreciate all the little jokes I didn't understand as a kid, so I love it even more if anything.
Perhaps some felt it was too long for a kids film, and maybe people didn't buy Robin as Pan, maybe people thought he was just messing around being his sterotypical self, which is true but the film is still a masterpiece I think.

The Peter Banning character is almost a reflection of those who dislike it. He had such a hard time using his imagination and just having fun that it completely clouded his judgment.

I was very surprised to learn that so many people dislike this movie. I was about 17 when Hook came out, so I never watched it as a kid, but really love anyway. I have watched it over and over again.

i don't understand at all why people of today bash it. I loved it when I was a kid and love it now. It's magic

I'll keep this short and simple: too long.

I have to say for me one of the main things that irritated me without having to go too deep into analysis is the way Peter almost completely ignores and crushes Tinkerbell's romantic feelings for him.
In the original novel Tinkerbell was a more spiteful and vindictive character than she is in this movie, she DID arrange to get Tootles to shoot Wendy after all
However for some reason the writers chose to make Tinkerbell a much more sympathetic character in this movie, which to me worked very well with Julia Roberts playing the part. However I continuously find myself wondering.WHY???
They could have still remained true to Tinkerbell's romantic feelings tword Peter, but made her more true to her original self, thus less sympathetic, and I would have lost no sleep about Peter inconsequentially brushing her off for his true love.
They could have played her as is, but perhaps added another short scene with Peter finally realizing how much Tink cares for him, especially now that he's an adult, and him resolving a unknown but still "never can be" love for her and I could have been fine with that also.
But the several seemingly incongruous moments when Tink is trying to get Peter to find himself again, ALONG WITH her showing her romantic feelings for him, only to be completely ignored, even in the ONE moment she wishes "the only wish I ever wished for myself", only to use the scene as a plot reminder for why he's REALLY there, and not even ATTEMPT to come to terms with Tink's feelings for him; that one was just the final straw for me. Especially having to try to explain to my friends kids the first time I saw the movie when I was babysitting why Peter just "blew off" Tinkerbell.
I am sure the rest of the points brought up here are valid in their ways, but this simple part of the movie plot always just cheesed me off to no end.

What are you talking about? This is my favourite movie of all time.