Quote:
|
No, not necessarily. Snow White and Charming are perfect, since he has no backstory and we didn't know how she was before she found the dwarves. Belle is the same, she just fell in love with Rumple. I've never been thrilled about putting him in so many stories, but her character is the same. Gipetto(sp?) is the same and they only changed August by so much.
They also did a great job with Archie and Granny and Ruby are faithful because they're using "Snow White and Red Rose" as one of their sources.
People are pissed off about Peter because even if Rumplestiltskin has gotten changed by a lot, his character hasn't been warped as far as his personality.
I don't think Hook was off-base. None of us knew what his life was like before Neverland and the only part that annoyed me was that Rumple was the crocodile. Even then, it didn't ruin Hook's characterization.
I loved their version of Peter until they made him an adult. Peter can be dark based on various interpretations, but the key portion was him being a child when he got to Neverland.
The writer's aren't perfect, you know. Everyone criticized the Cinderella thing, Whale left zoo after they figured out who he was and even Henry got confused and said that he's not in the book.
|
Do we know for a fact that they've used Snow White and Rose Red as a basis for the characters? I'm interested because I've never seen anyone actually ask them.
And, they've actually
completely ruined Hook's characterisation. Hook was a raised as a gentleman, a real gentleman, with a British Public School education (he went to Eton, which is as public school as you can get). Public schools are the top private schools in the country, and Eton is generally regarded the top one of them all (YMMV - As a former student of another public school, I naturally disagree as a point of honour
)
By the time of Peter Pan, he's middle aged, increasingly mentally unstable (witness the paranoia about the crocodile hunting him and his death), and obsesses about whether he or Pan has better manners. This version of Hook is none of that. And no matter how they spin it, he does
not have good form. They parrot the words but they have no real understanding of the meaning of them.
They should have just called him John Sparrow and been honest about it, rather than trying to play him off as their 'interpretation' of the original Barrie character.
I agree about your comments on Peter though, they've ruined the entire point of Peter Pan by making him an adult, with adult understanding and emotions, rather than the child spirit of the original. Wanting to be a child again is
totally different to not wanting to grow up.
It's like they've only seen a bad copy of the Disney version that missed out whole chunks, and thought they'd just fill in the blanks with bits from other popular movies, without actually bothering to Google, let alone read the original material.