Peter Pedophile

Now I know the most recent version of the Peter Pan story, the movie Peter Pan (2003) by P.J. Hogan is suppposed to be the more true telling of the story and all that crap, but to tell you the truth I just dont care. I don't care for many reasons; but the most important is because the existence of the marvelous Hook makes this version of Peter Pan seem like a remake of Pootie Tang. However, I must add that Peter Pan does have its plus sides, well only really one and it is the dude that plays Captain Hook and the father of the Darling family. He rocks, and is amazing at being a bad guy and for further proof see The Patriot or the Harry Potter movies where he plays that colossal dick Lucius Malfoy. Anyway, in viewing this most recent update of the Peter Pan story (aside from Finding Neverland which isn't really a remake but I'll get there be patient) I found myself realizing that even at a much younger age I would not have been able to identify with or even enjoy this story. The director seemed to take the focus of the story and place it mostly on Wendy; which may have been more true to the original tale but is simply not as interesting as Peter Pan himself. Wendy is boring, dumb, and whiny and nobody cares about her.
I also found the lost boys to be very uninteresting. Where I ask is the greatness of Thud, the kid from Hook that turned into a bowling ball; or where is the little kid that looked like Gary Coleman that felt up Robin Williams' face? And I know he was kind of a douche but come on we all loved Rufio with his crazy skunk hair. I'm not trying to say Peter Pan should have had all the same lost boys but at least some that were interesting. Hook had personality and personality goes a long way in movies. Especially because every character in Hook has something to contribute, in Peter Pan the lost boys are just like a bunch of pigs running around and eating their own feces--now who wants to see that? I don't.
One thing you might be saying right now is that I shouldn't be comparing these two movies and should let them stand alone. But I tell you it's not possible. If you've seen Hook then you know another Peter Pan adaptation is just gonna fall far short of anything Disney or Speilberg have done. Finding Neverland is a whole other story. The genius of this movie is that its not just the same Peter Pan story over again, yet it manages to still tell us the whole story and convey the wonder and magic that surrounds the original tale in a new and inventive way. Johnny Depp. The man is amazing and I almost have a boner just saying his name...ok not really but now that I got you thinking about him I bet you do. In adding Depp to this story not only do you get good acting but also a reason to put up with the extremely snobby British accents that come along with this era. Finding Neverland is an insightful rejuventation of the Peter Pan tale and lacks the boring child-porn-centric flare of the most recent adaptation. And it's easy to view without thinking about Hook because well, its not just a remake.
So in conclusion go see Peter Pan if you've never seen Hook, then go see Hook and never see Peter Pan again because it sucks and the director likes to touch small boys, hence all the halfnaked little boys in the movie, and then go see Finding Neverland because its awesome, then go to bed, three movies in one day is a lot. Goodnight.

(p.s. if you catch the pulp fiction reference in there you get 10 bonus points)