Film review

Finding Neverland

2004 · Directed by Marc Forster · 1h 46m · MPA PG

In a sentenceJohnny Depp does a bear impression in a garden, Julie Christie disapproves from a window, and Peter Pan gets written

DramaFantasy

London, 1903. The playwright J.M. Barrie (Johnny Depp) watches his latest play open to polite applause and close soon after, leaving his American producer Charles Frohman (Dustin Hoffman) out of pocket and in need of a hit. Walking his enormous dog in Kensington Gardens, Barrie falls in with four boys and their widowed mother, Sylvia Llewelyn Davies (Kate Winslet). He starts spending his afternoons in their garden inventing games, pirates one day and cowboys the next, while one of the boys, Peter (Freddie Highmore), sits apart and refuses to play. Sylvia’s mother, Emma du Maurier (Julie Christie), watches from the drawing room and does not approve. Barrie’s wife Mary (Radha Mitchell) waits at home for a husband who comes back later each evening. Out of the games, a play begins to take shape.

Fi1m review

Marc Forster’s account of how J.M. Barrie came to write Peter Pan is gently acted, handsomely dressed and so well-mannered it barely dares look at its own story. Johnny Depp and Freddie Highmore make it worth an evening; the script keeps tidying up after them.

London, 1903. J.M. Barrie’s latest play has closed, his producer is out of pocket, and Barrie takes his dog to Kensington Gardens, where he finds four boys, their widowed mother and, over the summer that follows, the play that will make him. Marc Forster’s film, from a screenplay by David Magee, is about how a small man in a bowler hat turned those afternoons into Peter Pan. It is well acted, handsomely dressed and decent through and through, and it has decided before the first scene that nothing untoward will be allowed to happen in it. That is why it is pleasant company for its length and why it never becomes more.

Depp plays Barrie with a soft Scots voice, a slight stoop and the attention of a man who watches children the way other people watch the weather. He does not play him as a child; he plays an adult who has kept the habit of pretending and knows how odd that looks. Freddie Highmore’s Peter is the film’s best asset, a solemn boy who has stopped playing since his father died and regards this new grown-up with more suspicion than his brothers can manage. Their scenes are the best written in the film, because Peter will not be charmed and Barrie has to work. Winslet gives Sylvia wit and a tiredness she keeps waving away, and Dustin Hoffman’s Frohman gets the drollest lines, most of them about money.

Gemma Jackson builds the fantasy as theatre. When the garden becomes a pirate deck, it is painted canvas and real rope; when Barrie imagines a stage he imagines flats and footlights. Roberto Schaefer keeps the London rooms brown and lamp-lit and the garden green and over-bright, and lets the two bleed together during the games. Matt Chessé cuts from the boys jumping on a bed to the boys in the air and straight back, so we never stay anywhere imaginary for long. Alexandra Byrne keeps Barrie in the same dark three-piece whether he is at his desk or up a tree, and puts Sylvia and the boys in white cotton. It is all careful, pretty and a little quiet.

The trouble is the good manners. A married man is spending his days with another woman’s sons; the film knows how that looks, has Julie Christie’s Emma du Maurier say so from the drawing room, has a dinner table say so, and then rules the subject out of order and moves on. Radha Mitchell’s Mary, the wife Barrie leaves at home, gets one good scene at a bedroom door and is otherwise an obstacle the plot needs cleared. Barrie’s own childhood, which explains him, is dealt with in a single speech. Jan A. P. Kaczmarek’s score, piano over strings with a waltz that keeps returning, arrives at every soft moment to make sure we have noticed it is soft.

For a film about a man inventing things, it invents surprisingly little. The Neverland sequences show us what the boys are imagining, and what they are imagining is fancy dress: pirates, cowboys, a circus, Barrie in a bear suit. The games are charming and they are not strange, and Peter Pan is strange, a play about a boy who refuses to grow up, a crocodile with a clock in it and children who fly out of a window away from their mother. The film’s idea of that play is a tea party with swords.

The reviews so far are split almost evenly between the charmed and the irritated, and for most of the running time we sat between them in polite regard. Then, late on, in a scene involving Highmore alone with something he has made, it got to us, against our will, because he plays it with his mouth shut and his face refusing to do what the score is begging it to do. We were cross about being worked on so plainly. We gave in anyway. The second half takes a turn we will not describe; the film handles it with the same decorum as everything else, and for once the decorum earns its keep.

It belongs to the lawns-and-lawn-dresses school of Edwardian pictures and is a well-behaved member of it; beside the play it is about, it is tame. It carries a PG and runs 106 minutes, and it will do for a Sunday afternoon with children old enough for a period drama and adults willing to be nudged. Barrie wrote a play in which growing up is the thing to fear. Forster has made a film in which nobody is allowed to misbehave.

Critical consensus AI synthesised

59
Positive
5
Mixed
1
Negative
4

The reviews split almost down the middle, and the praise, where it comes, lands on the same things. Most admirers point to Johnny Depp’s Barrie, played as a grown man who never quite left the nursery, and to Kate Winslet opposite him; the young Freddie Highmore is mentioned more than once. Marc Forster’s direction is credited for the way the boys’ games in the garden slide into fantasy and back without the joins showing, and several find the mix of comedy and grief handled with tact.

The doubters watch the same film and find it sugary. Maudlin and saccharine are the words that recur, along with the complaint that it is a period piece too polite to look at what it skirts. The Guardian goes further and calls Depp torpid, which nobody else does. The spread is wide, from the highest possible rating to something near the floor, with only one review in the middle, which suggests the whimsy either works on a viewer or grates from the first scene.

RogerEbert.com
18 November 2004 · ★★★★/4 · Roger Ebert
100

The film tells the story of J.M. Barrie finding inspiration for Peter Pan through his relationship with a widow and her sons. Depp's nuanced performance as the childlike Barrie is singled out for making the character believable and moving.

Read the full review →
Empire
29 October 2004 · Olly Richards
85*

The critic praises the film's elegant storytelling blending comedy and tragedy, highlighting Marc Forster's visual ingenuity in blending fantasy with the Victorian setting and strong performances, especially by Johnny Depp, Kate Winslet, and young Freddie Highmore.

Read the full review →
Los Angeles Times
12 November 2004 · Carina Chocano
80*

Forster’s loving take on Barrie’s relationship with the Llewelyn Davies family is gently seductive and moving without being maudlin. Depp and Winslet’s rare combination of airiness and intelligence is singled out as making their intellectual connection convincing.

Read the full review →
Time Out
10 September 2012 · WH
70*

The critic notes Forster's sensitive direction in telling the story of JM Barrie and Sylvia Llewelyn Davies, praising the performances especially from Depp, Winslet, and supporting cast, while highlighting effective fantasy-reality fusions in garden scenes; however, the film is hampered by an awkward decorum around unmentioned themes.

Read the full review →
The New York Times
12 November 2004 · Manohla Dargis
50*

The handsome film about Barrie and his inspirations is steeped in melancholy but features Depp moseying forward with vague purpose. The director and actors have not been pushed to their limits in this genteel holiday movie.

Read the full review →
Evening Standard
10 April 2012 · Will Self
40*

The critic finds the film sweet on first viewing but ultimately saccharine and wooden, appreciating some performances and imaginative elements but criticizing its overly whimsical, Merchant-Ivory-style period approach and lack of deeper texture.

Read the full review →

Cast

Awards

Academy Awards, 2005

Nominated
Best Actor
Nominated
Best Costume Design
Nominated
Best Film Editing
Nominated
Best Picture
Nominated
Best Production Design
Nominated
Best Writing, Adapted Screenplay
Won
Best Original Score

Broadcast Film Critics Association Award for Best Family Film, 2004

Won
Broadcast Film Critics Association Award for Best Family Film

If you liked this, try…

Shadowlands poster79

Shadowlands

1993 · Another writer, another widow, another watchful boy, and Attenborough lets the grief actually hurt.

Peter Pan poster

Peter Pan

2003 · P.J. Hogan’s straight adaptation keeps the menace Barrie wrote in and this film leaves out.

Pan's Labyrinth poster87

Pan's Labyrinth

2006 · A child imagines her way out of something dreadful, and the imagining is dreadful too.

Bright Star poster

Bright Star

2009 · Jane Campion’s Keats film is a period romance with dirt under its fingernails.

The Railway Children poster

The Railway Children

1970 · Edwardian children in white cotton, a father missing, and Lionel Jeffries never once goes soft.