Why I'm Boycotting: Pan

But every legend doesn't need a beginning!

The factor that this film has already bombed big-time in the US in its opening weekend recently really says just how much people really don't want to see this film. So it should be suitable that Pan - the latest in a very long line of live-action retellings of classic stories which are popular for being present in the Disney classics archive – can earn a place alongside other avoidable films that have been released this year such as Fifty Shades of Grey, Paul Blart Mall Cop 2 and Entourage. But while seemingly more harmless than my previous articles, it doesn't seem like there's any actual need for me to voice my claims against the film; America has already decided not to watch the family film this week, and the foreign box office hasn't fared too well either – it likely only will if China gets their hands on it like they did Terminator Genisys - so that seems to be that. But seeing as it's still early days and can still possibly succeed (it really won't though), I might as well voice my reasons now rather than later when the film (doesn't) become a hit. 

For a lot of people, the primary reason for the failure of Pan is the white-washing debacle for Tiger Lily, here played by the Caucasian Rooney Mara (sister of Kate Mara, who's already had a hard time with audiences this year with The Fantastic Four). White-washing is a concept which  has been under a lot of scrutiny as of late, what with last year's Exodus: Gods and Kings being hindered by all the reports and Stonewall receiving a petition for boycotting as soon as the first trailer dropped and showed no signs of non-white people. And to that extent, I can agree – not to the level of something like the allegations against The Martian (so they changed one or two characters; at least there's still some diversity in the film!), but when a key character is altered just so that they can get a reportedly 'better performance' from it. It's not helped that Mara herself has been criticised for it because of how well she acts as opposed to being dismissed just because of the white-washing, so evidently it's been all for naught. I could say something bold like "If you watch this, you're against multi-cultural casts" about this, but it's not really like that; it's simply a factor which has played a big part in the fight against the film. At times, such as in The Martian, the white-washing has been only something minor and doesn't detract from the film itself, and returning to Fantastic Four the casting of Michael B. Jordan in a pre-dominantly white role caused anger on that front despite not really being all that important or adding anything to the overarching dull story he was in. But here? It's a little insulting really. Perhaps moreso than the original 1953 Disney film.

My personal primary reason for my boycotting is less to do with that though (although still a big drawback for the film); it instead has more to do with all these live-action retellings, and especially how the whole thing is a origin story for a character who really doesn't need a background ridded with a pre-determined destiny motif. You see, after the boffo success of Alice in Wonderland back in 2010 – where the film went on to gross over $1bn worldwide despite mixed reviews – Hollywood began to get a little greedy and pushed for similar ideas with Disney (who produced the film) leading the charge. First to come out were the two Snow White films by Lionsgate and Universal, which took the magical and the gritty styles from Wonderland to little critical avail. Disney's mini-experiment with the formula in 2013 had a smaller success with Oz the Great and Powerful as they gave an origin story to the infamous Wizard of Oz, before cementing their success with each following year with both the overlong and unbearable Maleficent and the equally disinteresting Cinderella. And now with countless announcements of live-action remakes for the likes of Winnie the Pooh (yes really), Dumbo and even a prequel to Aladdin ahead of a likely remake of that all about the Genie alongside sequels to Oz and Maleficent (the former I can understand, but Maleficent? Really?), and with other studios getting in on the action with Pan, Jungle Book: Origins and countless more? It's time to stop the freight train before it becomes over-exposed. And it would help if at least one of these films were good – they may have some fans but that doesn't stop any film from potentially (or likely) being terrible. Pan's reviews have been somewhat dismal, so it's not like it's going to be the saving grace of this new Hollywood gimmick. 

Another gimmick to despise? Pop culture referencing in films set in the past/fictional lands where such things shouldn't exist. Okay, that's quite a nitpick on my behalf, but let me explain: I hate it when films do that. With TV shows like Community it makes sense because it takes place in this very real world, and they can easily make the pun before it becomes outdated. With movies? Seeing as the screenplay gets done about a year or so before the film is even released, it becomes outdated fast, and in many cases audiences get put off by them. Why else do you think audiences were appreciative of how new How to Train Your Dragon felt in terms of Dreamworks film? And then how disappointed they later became with the final chapter of the Shrek series later that same year? It wasn't bogged down with pop songs and overdue puns, as it had actual jokes and a good story to boot. For those wondering where Pan fits in to the mix here Blackbeard's ship reportedly has the crew sing Nirvana's 'Smells Like Teen Spirit' amongst other tunes...despite being set in the 1940s. Yep, we already know what kind of ride would be expected when something like that happens. I don't really need to expand any further than that. 

So let's see now: White-washing debacle, overdone Hollywood formula, and abysmal pop culture referencing...anything else of note? Well, there's the obvious 3D gimmick in some trailers and the poorly rendered CGI which doesn't look like it's progressed since the first teaser; there's the awful accent that Garrett Headlund is using as Captain Hook (who apparently is only there because of the name and nothing more); and that just about clinches it. Is that enough reason to avoid this failure of a film? Or need I point you to just about every reviewer in the business or the box office receivings?