Just watched this movie, and I thought it was pretty good. Ophelia was a pretty good child actress. She demonstrates why 'Daniel Radcliffe' is such a shitty actor.
Pan had very little to do with 'fantasy'. In fact, I felt deceived that they had marketed it as fantasy.
I thought that the vast majority of the movie would be set in Ophelia's fantasy world, much akin to Alice in Wonderland, with brief interludes in the real world. But the movie ended up being the reverse of that.
That doesn't make that the film had very little to do with fantasy - fantasy operated in the real world, and real world operated in fantasy.
So did I. But they shouldn't have advertised it as a fantasy movie. Anyone who goes to the movie expecting 'Alice in Wonderland' is going to be a little put out.
So, how should they have advertised it? A historical drama? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! I think you're complaining with no reason, but it's just me.
Jeesh, I've already said that I enjoyed the movie. Quite a few people have also expressed the same opinion as me, so apparently it wasn't just me who was deceived.
I also thought how it was advertised was a bit misleading. I'm glad I read the reviews and that it wasn't for children. That face stabbing scene was horifying. Umm, Best movie I've seen in a long long time. All American studios do is make remakes of remakes or tv shows. Love originality.
