Christopher Walken cast as Captain Hook in Peter Pan Live!- Page 7

[South Fl Marc]

Posted: 7/15/14 at 10:23am

Because of laws about children acting in plays, Barrie wrote all the boys to be played by women, but they don't do that anymore , only Peter is a woman, the lost boys are all male. Shakespeare wrote all of his parts to be played by men, and with the exception of the recent Globe productions, that's not done anymore. Until recently, Othello was usually played by a Caucasian actor and asian parts went to caucasian actors too.

Just because an idea is relatively new, it doesn't make it the wrong one

Updated On: 7/15/14 at 10:23 AM

[Reginald Tresilian]

Posted: 7/15/14 at 10:27am

And I never said so. I was just clarifying that casting a woman wasn't some odd notion of the musical's creators.



Updated On: 7/15/14 at 10:27 AM

[South Fl Marc]

Posted: 7/15/14 at 10:39am

Point taken. But the reason Peter was originally cast as a woman no longer exists. It's time for a change.

When I first heard that the producers had chosen Peter Pan for the next live event my initial reaction was WHY? It's been done to death. Then I heard that they were thinking of casting a male in the title role and I thought the idea was exciting. Now they are casting a woman, I have lost any interest in seeing it. With the exception of Sandy Duncan, every actresss "plays" at what they think a boy acts like. I don't know how she did it, but Sandy Duncan became a boy. She didn't "act" - she just was.

It's time to cast this part appropriately.

Updated On: 7/15/14 at 10:39 AM

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 7/15/14 at 11:17am

To cast this part 'appropriately,' they would need to write a new musical version appropriate for a male to perform it.

And I can't say I agree that the reasons for the role to be played by a woman 'no longer exist' as it is a fallacy that Barrie wanted the role played by a boy and that labor laws, etc preventing him from casting it that way. Despite his origins of the story with the boys of the Davies family, Barrie conceived of the role in the play for Maude Adams - an American actress long associated with his work. When it came to casting the film, he also insisted on a woman (Betty Bronson) playing the role - so I think it speaks more to our modern sensibilities of gender that we have an issue with a woman playing the role than anything in the play (or the history of the play) itself.

[doodlenyc]

Posted: 7/15/14 at 1:24pm

I cant stand this musical for some reason.

I'd rather they do the Bricusse/Newley version:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ubivbpIkk-g

[Thparkaly]

Posted: 7/15/14 at 4:53pm

Is it weird that I can see Jessie Mueller as Peter?

[Showface]

Posted: 7/15/14 at 6:00pm

^Nope.


I also was excited by the possibility of a male Peter, but oh well. Also Kristin Chennoweth couldn't be more wrong for the role of Peter IMO.

[KathyNYC2]

Posted: 7/15/14 at 6:25pm

This might be a dumb question (it wouldn't be my first or last for sure)...How young/old should Peter be actually? I mean he's always been played by an "older" woman but how old should he actually be...as he never grows up.

Is he supposed to be a child? A teenager? An adult? Does he not grow up emotionally or physically? or both?

I don't seem to be an authority on Peter Pan.

[Wilmingtom]

Posted: 7/15/14 at 6:35pm

Sensational casting! Let's hope it keeps going in the same direction.

[darquegk]

Posted: 7/15/14 at 6:37pm

Peter Pan is traditionally portrayed as a boy right before adolescence, approximately 10 to 13. However, Barrie wrote him as being, at least physically, significantly younger, and he is even referred to as a baby or a babe several times.

His abduction to Neverland took place when he was an infant, so there is an argument that Peter Pan is a magical, hyper-intelligent baby, linking him to both the Pan figure his name invokes, and to the traditional angel/Cupid imagery common at Barrie's time. This is, however, difficult to depict, so he is usually drawn or played older.

[Wilmingtom]

Posted: 7/15/14 at 6:44pm

The story insinuates that there may be a romantic spark ready to ignite between Peter and Wendy which would place them on the verge of adolescence, although it has never been cast that way. Maybe now's the time?

[Reginald Tresilian]

Posted: 7/15/14 at 6:46pm

Peter wasn't abducted; he ran away, first to Kensington Gardens, and then to the Never Land.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 7/15/14 at 7:20pm

Barrie, throughout his life never stopped writing the stage production of PETER PAN, and was reluctant to even ever have the play published. He considered Pan an ever evolving creature, and never really felt obligated to be consistent to prior incarnations. In some instances, the character varies wildly in each take.

In analyzing the legend of PETER PAN, you almost have to separate the character into categories. The first incarnation of Peter Pan comes in a single chapter of Barrie's novel THE LITTLE WHITE BIRD, in which Barrie flies away from home the day he is born and lives on an island of birds (as a perpetual baby) in the Kensington Gardens.

But there is only scant resemblance between that characterization and the depiction in Barrie's 1904 PETER PAN. Peter Pan, on stage, as I already wrote above was written specifically for the actress Maude Adams. It was only because of scheduling issues that the premiere happened first in London with Nina Boucicault in the title role. The character of Peter Pan of the 1904 script was a variation on the 'fairy-child' archetype which was popular in Victorian Literature. These 'sprites' were essentially ageless and sexless, and I think the psychological study of Peter Pan and Wendy being a symbol for emerging romantic awakening came much, much later.

The character of PAN in the 1911 novelization of the play was yet another incarnation, borrowing in various ways from existing scripts, and adding some new details along the way.

The 1954 musical version of PETER PAN is it's own thing entirely. As it was tailored specifically for Mary Martin, the script is two-thirds Barrie and (at least) one third 1950s traditional operetta style musical theater writing.

I understand the basis of the point people make when they deem they would like to see a male play the role and cite other examples where it has proved salient (the recent live action film - yet another completely different take on the material - being a good example).

But for all the reasons discussed herein, the role in this version works best when played by a woman 20-40 because that is who it was carefully written to be performed by.

[broadwayguy2]

Posted: 7/15/14 at 7:39pm

One has no idea how hard I am biting my tongue...

[GlitterandBeGay2]

Posted: 7/15/14 at 9:56pm

According to Wiki, Jack Noseworthy played Peter in a late 80s Jerome Robbins revue. Anyone remember it? Was "I'm Flying" fully staged or presented in concert? I went to listen to the cast recording but, of course, it was a woman singing the number.

[Michael Bennett]

Posted: 7/15/14 at 10:44pm

Jack Noseworthy played John Darling in the PETER PAN sequence of JEROME ROBBIN'S BROADWAY and also understudied (and went on for) Charlotte D'Amboise who played Peter in said segment. Only time a male has ever played Peter Pan on Broadway.

[beagle]

Posted: 7/16/14 at 12:01am

I have also seen this show with a male Peter Pan--Francis Jue at the Muny in 2007. He was fine in the role, but whenever he sang I kept thinking the songs work much better with a female voice. It also seemed stranger for some reason to see an adult male in the role rather than an adult female. Maybe if a teenage boy played Peter, it could work but I doubt it. These songs were written to be sung by a woman, and I think they sound best that way.

For other versions of the story, a boy playing Peter would be great, but for this musical, I think a female works best. I think casting it younger would be good, though.

[Showface]

Posted: 7/16/14 at 12:16am

IMO, Peter should be around 15-16. I know this is not a popular belief, but let me explain my reasoning:

It definetely brings out rhe romantic tension between him and Wendy (if she's close to his age of course)

Peter should be a leader (do you honestly think a group of pirates would fear a ten year old?)

Instead of him just being a boy who doesn't want to have to be a boring adult, we see that Peter is just to immature and (maybe even scared)if having adult respnsibilities.

I also find the OUAT Peter casting to have worked quite well....



ETA: What I said only works if Peter is playeed by a male IMO.

Updated On: 7/16/14 at 12:16 AM

[GlitterandBeGay2]

Posted: 7/16/14 at 12:16am

Thanks, Michael Bennett!

[GlitterandBeGay2]

Posted: 7/16/14 at 1:14am

Some more male Peter Pans:

youtube.com/watch?v=5b8TOz2-JEE
youtube.com/watch?v=tHFMlMT-5OA
youtube.com/watch?v=xNnu9wdZdKI

[Reginald Tresilian]

Posted: 7/16/14 at 9:27am

I found that first one really creepy.