Exoticalot People are voting emotionally.

Voxitype Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

Logan By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

Cristal The movie really just wants to entertain people.

TumnusFalls 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.

ajhsys 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.

Grayson-Childers1971 I absolutely loved Peter Pan Live! Allison Williams was excellent. Christopher Walken wasn't my favorite Captain Hook but his portrayal was certainly his own. I LOVED the Lost Boys and every scene they were in was highly energetic. I was absolutely captivated by all aspects of the production and I have watched it about 6 times since. Unlike the original production, the cast had British accents, something that I love!!Allison Williams' "Neverland" drove me to tears and I wanted to dance with the Lost Boys during "I Won't Grow Up". I felt like a kid again watching this production and I hope many people of all ages will cherish this show forever!!!

trylontheatre1 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.