Peter Pan Kensington Gardens 2009

[Robert Greenham]

If the early press reviews are anything to go by, the current production of Peter Pan, staged in Kensington Gardens, looks disappointing for all Barrie admirers.  While the quality of the acting would appear generally high, and the modern technology deployed has received high praise, sadly and perhaps all to predictably, "the play's poignant humanity is swamped by the technical dazzle", to quote Michael Billington in today's Guardian.  We read that Barrie's name is not even mentioned on the title page, and the production transforms Barrie's "enduring and troubling myth into a charmless spectacular extravanganza". 

Billington, who gives the show 2 out of 5, writes: "The genius of Barrie's play is that it leaves one undecided whether to admire its hero's defiance of maturity or to pine for his exclusion from familial life. But, in adapting Barrie's original, Tanya Ronder has deprived Peter of his pathos and made numerous odd changes. She turns Tinkerbell from a spritely light into a puckish scruff in a fluffy tutu. Hook and the pirates also become as much deprived mother-lovers as the lost boys. We even get dubious double entendres. Whatever is unnerving in Barrie's play is here remorselessly ironed out. In its place we get a vast spectacle which, as Raymond Chandler said of Los Angeles, has the soul of a paper cup."

Benedict Nightingale, in his Times review headlined "Barrie's voice gets lost in spectacle of Neverland", grants it a generous 3 out of 5, saying: "The plot is pretty much as Barrie wanted it, but the dialogue has been so rejigged by Tanya Ronder, you are startled when an authentic line surfaces, like Pan's "to die will be an awfully big adventure".  Never mind the new ending...".  "But should Peter's uninterest in sex be as emphasised as much as it is when, say, a sensuously undulating Tigerlily comes close to stripping to her feather headdress?  And should Tinkerbell morph from a darting light into Itxaso Moreno in a fluffy skirt?  She's a sprite so sulky and malicious it's hard to call out your belief in fairies in order to save her from poisoning.  A double dose of hemlock seems more apt." 

The play, or should I say the show - and at least it is not a pantomime - runs until August 30.  It will be interesting to read the impressions of members of this forum in due course.

[jodegal]

I just watched the play on Thursday and I did enjoy it. I think the modern technology used for the flying was very thrilling, nothing I have ever seen before. But the show is not just filled with modern technology. Puppetry is used for all the animals which I also really enjoyed. I think the play keeps a balance of new and old effects. However it is my first times seeing Peter Pan as a play so I have nothing else to compare it to, so I can't speak on if Barrie admirers will enjoy it or not. From what I know they kept to the story and did not try to lighten the story much or remove any of the more serious parts of it either. Peter Pan wasn't just a happy cheeky boy in the play as some of the movies show him, he was also very angry at times.

The downside I would say is that as I saw it in it's first 2 weeks of opening I think the cast were still getting into the swing of things. For example during the play they had to stop because one of the stage props was not working properly. Also I think some of the cast members could have delivered their lines in a way for better effect, but this could perhaps improve once they do a few more shows or maybe they are just not very good actors. The venue was not very full either perhaps just half full, I think it's nice to see a play when the venue is full because then there is more energy from the audience which makes it more exciting. For instance the I believe in fairies bit, many people did not really join in but most children did.

I thought it was quite nice that they did it in Kensington Garderns, I enjoyed having a stroll through the park before the play. Some people had picnics and they had set out lots of tables and benches. But I couldn't really enjoy the park that much as it was a weekday and had to get there after work so couldn't spend much time in the park.

There is something I wondered about the play, in the play when tinkerbell was dying Peter asked the audience to whisper 'I believe in fairies', in the movie Finding Neverland when it showed this scene Peter asked the audiene to clap. What is the original version for this and which do most plays follow?

[AlexanderDavid]

There is something I wondered about the play, in the play when tinkerbell was dying Peter asked the audience to whisper 'I believe in fairies', in the movie Finding Neverland when it showed this scene Peter asked the audiene to clap. What is the original version for this and which do most plays follow?

They clap.  I've never heard of anyone whispering "I believe in fairies," but that doesn't mean it hasn't been done before.

But yes, in most of the versions I know (including the published script and the book), they clap.

In fact, they clap in The Lost Boys.  Barrie ordered the orchestra to put down their instruments and start clapping if NO ONE ELSE would.  He needn't have worried.   

[smiles]

I thoroughly enjoyed the play/show. The acting was good enough, and I agree with Jodegal that the hi-tech stuff was enjoyable and the location of the venue added to the atmosphere.
I mentioned in another post that it was slightly eerie leaving the pavillion after the show and seeing the shadowy, 'locked-down' Kensington Gardens on the other side of the Serpentine certainly added to the experience.

I'm glad they included the act at the end of the play where Peter returns to visit Wendy and discovers she is grown-up and a mother. It includes a couple of lines where Wendy asks about tinkerbell but Peter has forgotten her. something about that that captures Barrie's message I think.

[Jude]

I went to see it last saturday with my 74 year old mum and 16 year old son. We all thought it was one of the best things we've ever seen (and we've been to alot of shows!) May i just add i've been a collector of J.M. Barries works since i was 7.....i'm 41 now so i was very excited when i learnt of this show!
Well, it was simply lovely! The cgi was unbelievable, you really felt you were up there flying with them, or under the sea, under the trees, on the ship........it just felt like we were a part of everything that was going on on the stage. The props were kept to a minimum, which i felt was just right, it meant there wasn't any visual overload to take away from the acting. I cant fault the acting in any way at all, they were all spot on! Tinkerbell as a feisty punk was just about perfect! Tinkerbell isn't meant to be a twinkly butter wouldn't melt fairy, shes a fairy with attitude! She's angry, she's jealous, she's cunning and crafty yet always loyal to Peter, and they captured that perfectly in this show. I loved her outfit with all its grubbiness! And Ciaran Kellgren who played Peter couldn't have been better cast, he was perfect!
During the "i believe in fairies bit" we were close to tears! kids from 5 to men of 80 were whispering it, all round the pavillion! it was beautiful!
The puppets were amazing. They'd made them from all things a child might make them from.....the  baby ostrich was made from a shuttlecock and rugby ball, the crocodile from coat hangers and dolly pegs, Nana from old blankets......it was just so well thought out. They completely made you feel like you were in the imagination of a child as they were drifting off to sleep.
The pavillion and its surroundings were so well presented too. Little seats with hearts cuts outs in them, flowers on the railings, decking to walk on...and that was just outside! even the toilets were fancy pants with carpet on the floor, proper wooden doors, gold framed mirrors and very very clean toilets!
I can't begin to imagine the sheer amount of work that must have gone into this show. I mean, they even built their own theatre! Every seat was close enough to the stage to see all the action. We sat in row E section C and it was perfect! I wouldnt want to sit any closer that row E, i think you'd be too close then. There was loads of room in the seats too!
The whole day was amazing. And i want to go again!

[andrew]

Nico's daughter (and Barrie's god-daughter) Laura wrote to me the other day:

" I saw PP a few weeks ago, and was actually very pleasantly surprised! I thought it would be spectacular, but had no idea how absolutely breathtaking. When they flew to Neverland you flew with them over the whole of London, past all the familiar buildings, and through Admiralty Arch-----------or so it seemed! But what really pleased me was how true it was to the original and the whole feeling of it. I liked it a lot better than the film, which was particularly disappointing as regards the flying, though I did much prefer Jason Isaacs to Jonathan Hyde as Hook. I also liked the fact that the lost boys (who were lovely) in the film, were real children, as were Peter and Wendy. However, I FAR preferred the Peter in this production to that American boy in the film!"

[KStirling]

I went to see the Kensington Gardens production last weekend and also enjoyed it very much. I've been teaching the play of Peter Pan to first-year university students for several years so was intrigued to see how they would do it. And I thought they stuck very close to the spirit of Barrie's 1928 version, especially by including "When Wendy Grew Up" at the end. I don't think the CGI detracted from the humanity of the play at all.

A couple of details which were not (I don't think) from Barrie seemed to come from Geraldine McCaughrean's sequel Peter Pan in Scarlet.  We learn in the "When Wendy Grew Up" act that Michael Darling died in the war as a soldier. Also, at some point we learn that the crocodile is female - in the performance Hook says "why is she the only woman who was ever attracted to me?", which got a big laugh. This is also in PP in Scarlet, but I don't think it's anywhere in Barrie, though I think it's quite a logical development. Does anyone know of any other references to the crocodile being female?

[AlexanderDavid]

I went to see the Kensington Gardens production last weekend and also enjoyed it very much. I've been teaching the play of Peter Pan to first-year university students for several years so was intrigued to see how they would do it. And I thought they stuck very close to the spirit of Barrie's 1928 version, especially by including "When Wendy Grew Up" at the end. I don't think the CGI detracted from the humanity of the play at all.

A couple of details which were not (I don't think) from Barrie seemed to come from Geraldine McCaughrean's sequel Peter Pan in Scarlet.  We learn in the "When Wendy Grew Up" act that Michael Darling died in the war as a soldier. Also, at some point we learn that the crocodile is female - in the performance Hook says "why is she the only woman who was ever attracted to me?", which got a big laugh. This is also in PP in Scarlet, but I don't think it's anywhere in Barrie, though I think it's quite a logical development. Does anyone know of any other references to the crocodile being female?

In Peter and Wendy it says: "When they have passed, comes the last figure of all, a gigantic crocodile.  We shall see for whom she is looking presently."

So I'd say it did originate in Barrie.

[KStirling]

Thanks! Can't believe I missed that, but then I know the play better...

In the play the crocodile is clearly gendered male: "The brute liked my arm so much, Smee, that he has followed me ever since.... licking his lips for the rest of me." (II.1, l. 127). Interesting.

[tcarroll]

You guys have no idea how blessed you are to be able to attend this play.
I am in the US and have absolutely no hope of seeing it.  Every time I read your comments, I'm very envious.  I live in a very small town, but we do have local theatre during the summer with very talented companies performing.  I have seen Peter Pan at our local theatre, and loved it.  The scenes where the children fly was magic.  It was very true to Barrie here in our little town.  Once again...enjoy and be thankful!

[Westh76]

There's hope yet, TCarroll. See this link to an article about the current production going to the US next year on a tour, starting in Chicago May 2010 (and for PP's fans in New Zealand, in 2011). You don't say where you are, but perhaps it will come somewhere near you?
 http://www.playbill.com/news/article/print/130830.html

[tcarroll]

That's wonderful to hear westh!  I'll keep my eyes and ears open!! Thanks!

[Robert Greenham]

I saw this production last Thursday afternoon, taking my family which includes two grandsons (aged 9 and 6). Generally speaking, we all found the production very enjoyable, the adults having approached it with open minds about adaptation and the justification for sometimes moving with the times. What was important for me was that, while billed as a show rather than a play (or THE play), here nevertheless was an opportunity for me to introduce my grandsons to a theatrical version of the Peter Pan story, rather than resort to a film or a book, and especially to pre-empt the inevitable Christmas pantomime. 

I cannot pass judgment on the degree to which Barrie's own words were retained as I am not terribly familiar with these, but there seemed to be close correlation with the story, as I remembered it, and I thought a pretty good balance had been struck between traditional theatrical presentation and the utilisation of some modern technology to enhance the impression of being where the action is.  But the danger with dazzling visuals is that the brain might not focus sufficient attention on the spoken word.

Where I feel the presentation certainly fell down was in the aural distractions caused by: 1) the continuous noise of what I think was a powerful air conditioning unit; 2) the occasional sounds of noisy vehicles driving through the park; and 3), by far the worst problem, the high proportion of the many young children, and some adults, in the capacity audience who evidently had neither learnt to sit still, look and listen, nor been taught how to behave with consideration for the rest of an audience, this despite clear notices on entry requesting that any talking be conducted quietly.  The very existence of these notices shows that the production management knew there was a problem.  Many of the lines spoken by certain of the cast were not heard properly.  The aural distractions could so easily have been significantly reduced by increasing the levels of amplification of several of the actors' voices; we could have tolerated double the volume comfortably, and even then some of the voices might still not have matched that of Mr Darling/Captain Hook, whose voice was clear throughout.  I do not understand why, especially with large/expensive productions, there is not a member of the organisation sitting in the auditorium - perhaps at the back, or at selected positions - monitoring all aspects of every performance, and the conditions for every audience, and feeding back, live, any shortcomings to whoever is in a position to effect improvements there and then.  This is so basic!

I thought the acting and choreography in Peter Pan Kensington Gardens was of a very high standard, and the 'flying' was artistically and technically excellent. I hesitated at spending £10 on the glossy, large format, souvenir programme but was pleased to discover that it contained no less than four excellent and enlightening pages comprising Peter Pan & his Creator, written by our host Andrew Birkin, and including a hitherto unpublished photo of JMB and Luath.

Full marks for staging this production in Kensington Gardens, albeit on the 'wrong' side of the water, but what a pity the management didn't hold off just the one year necessary for it to have coincided with the 150th anniversary of Barrie's birth.

[andrew]

Sorry you got ripped off £10 for the programme, Robert - they sent me a freebie and I thought it brash, hideous, and not worth 30 bob!

[Robert Greenham]

Yes, Andrew, I agree that the souvenir programme is brash, etc, and, as with all professional theatre and concert programmes nowadays, I resent paying a high price for what usually turns out to be mostly glossy pictorial and advertising content, and very little textual, educational 'meat'.  But your four pages came as a very pleasant surprise and proved to be an exception to the rule.

Just as with the film Finding Neverland, this show has attracted, and will continue to attract, huge numbers seeking primarily to be entertained rather than educated.  In my humble opinion, which I know is at variance with that of some of my friends, the purist admirers of Barrie should be pleased that Peter Pan lives on in various forms because these continue to provide, for anyone with an enquiring mind, gateways into the literary world and enduring genius of his creator. The inclusion of your excellent piece flings one such gateway wide open!  I sincerely hope that it will be a permanent feature in the programmes for all future stagings of this show in other countries, and that many people's lives will be enriched as a result.