Hook - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

Hook Reviews

Page 1 of 1037
Super Reviewer
½ September 25, 2010
A film solely made for children with very little adult substance to sustain it's tedious 142 minute running time. I will say that Robin Williams and all the kids involved throughout this film are very well-cast and they make the film seem better than it really is. It may have one of the silliest and most unnecessary stories, but the payoff is nice and it makes what was ridiculous worth it in a way. I can neither confirm nor deny whether I liked this film or not, because it had so many elements that I hated, but quite a few that I loved as well. Taking place after the event of the original "Peter Pan" from Disney, "Hook" is all about the remeberance of the character and a revenge story of captain hook. Full of cheese, an uneven script, plot holes galore, and a waste of talent by Steven Spielberg, "Hook" is mediocre at best. However, the score, landscapes, and action scenes are very well-done. I never grew up watching this film, so I do not feel that nostalgic factor that some do, but I completely see why people love this movie.
Super Reviewer
June 2, 2011
Wendy Darling: So, Peter, you've become a pirate.

"What if Peter Pan grew up?"

Hook was one of the many movies I remember vividly from my childhood. It's also one I remember liking a lot more than I do now. The movie is nothing amazing. It's definitely one of Steven Spielberg's weaker movies, but still a fun and entertaining one. The production is pretty large and looks really good, for the most part. How they decided to do the Peter Pan story for Hook is interesting and although it could have been better, I liked it.

Peter Banning is a 40 year old lawyer who has no time for his two children, Jack and Maggie. He makes promises to them, but ends up always missing the important moments. Him and his family fly to London to visit Wendy, who is having a ceremony to dedicate an orphanage to her name. Peter remembers her as the lady who found him a family, but Wendy tries to explain to him that he's really Peter Pan. He's forgotten it all, but when his children are stolen from their beds in the night and a letter with a sword through it says Captain Hook; Peter is forced to remember as he is taken to Neverland by Tinkerbell.

I like the usage of symbols and foreshadowing in the film. My favorite part of the movie is when the family first arrives at Wendy's house and we get all these little clues from the dialogue. When in Neverland, the movie begins to get extremely silly and maybe to silly for its own good.

Hook is a decent family movie. I wish it was as good as I remember it being as I kid, but older eyes show the glaring imperfections. Dustin Hoffman gives a wonderful performance as Hook, which is nice, as the rest of the cast is pretty weak. All in all, it's a worthwhile movie if you like the Peter Pan story, just don't expect anything too amazing.
Super Reviewer
January 28, 2012
The only movie about Peter Pan that I liked.
Super Reviewer
August 15, 2011
I hated this movie, ruined Peter Pan for me, if you haven't seen it, I beg you to not ever see it, Spielbergs worst of al time in my opinion.
Super Reviewer
½ September 4, 2011
In every persons childhood there always was that film you loved above every other, and there has been a few favorite films during your childhood. Hook is not really one of them. I can name a lot of films that I've seen throughout my childhood that are far better than this one. Steven Spielberg's has made one of his weakest films with this film, and though it's entertaining, it doesn't do anything great. I felt that of all the films I've seen throughout my childhood, Hook was one of the few that hasn't stood the test of time. The film, today, unlike many others, doesn't do anything for me. I watched it a while back, and I remember my reaction being something like, "meh, it was decent, doesn't beat other childhood favorites." I felt that idea for the film was pretty good, but there's something that doesn't quite work for me. I personally felt that this was one of Spielberg's weaker efforts, and though it was a creative twist on J.M Barrie's Peter Pan, the result was a decent film that's quite frankly forgettable. I think that this film didn't age, and it looks very dated by today's standards. Julia Roberts is as usual annoying and Dustin Hoffman is really the only good performance of this film. Hook is a decent film for what it is, but its nothing ever truly wonderful. Watch how the character of Peter Pan was created in the far superior Finding Neverland. This is just mildly entertaining.
Super Reviewer
June 24, 2011
A good modern version of Peter Pan!
Super Reviewer
June 6, 2011
A positive, charming and often memorable "sequel" to the fabled fairytale. The film's premise is possibly it's most alluring element, the prospect of Pan growing up and losing his innocences is a great device for it's theme; the merits of childhood.

It's the character exploration and emotional details that push this would-be mundane family film forward. There's also a hint of sophistication over your every day children's film (Death, Unrequited Love) which is always a good thing.

The problem is that these themes are ultimately sugar coated down for said younger audiences and consequently don't have their expected impact.

Also, Hoffman makes a remarkable Hook. Probably the best pirate on screen until Depp's Jack Sparrow. All in all? Good film.

Movie Monster
Super Reviewer
May 10, 2011
Have you ever seen "Hook"? Was it a film you enjoyed as a child? Were you a little shocked at what critics said to this film? I just anwered "Yes" to all those questions. "Hook" is a critical mystery. Why did so many of the mainstream critics hated it? I personally love this film and you probably will. Its a creative Spielberg take on the tale of Peter Pan. A classic story we all love. Did you know that this was originally intended to be a Spielbergian remake of the Disney "Peter Pan" film?

In this film, Peter Pan has grown up. Shocking! He is married and has two annoying kids. Trust me when I say "annoying". They travel to London where Wendy is getting a hospital dedicated to her. While Peter, his wife, and Wendy go to the ceremony, Peter's annoying children, Jack and Maggie, are kidnapped by Captain Hook. Tinker Bell then revisits Peter and takes him back to Neverland, where things haven't been so right since he left. There, he meets the Lost Boys' new leader, regain his children, and face his longtime nemesis, Captain Hook.

This is one of my favorite Spielberg film and one of my favorite Peter Pan renditions. If explores a question we would have not bother looking at: What if Peter Pan grew up?

Robin Williams plays the main character. Williams is an actor that entertains me and can also get on my nerves. He plays Peter well. I enjoyed him. Dustin Hoffman as Captain Hook was quite silly but passable. Julia Roberts as Tinker Bell was good and Maggie Smith (Professor McGonnagall) was good too. Bob Hoskin was entertaining as Smee as well. We all love Smee, do we? Denise Richards: annoying. Her acting: "meh". A lot of the children in the film are weird actors.

The effects are cheesy but just like Hoffman's performance, its passable. The writing is just what you expect from a family film. A GOOD family film. I think one of the problems critics had with this movie was the amount of weird, oddly executed, scenes. Some of them include:

*Santa Claus being the umpire at Jack's baseball game. What was that all about?
*That weird dude that lives with Wendy.
*The cheesy scene where Hook kidnaps the children.
*The scene where the mermaids give Peter CPR underwater. Okay???
*The scene where Peter has a feast with Rufio and the Lost Boys.
*The scene where the pirates have their own baseball game.
*Denise Richards

The list goes on and on. Then again, this movie is set in Neverland. Strange and magical things occur there. Except for Santa being an umpire. Also, what was up with the length? This runs for two hours and twenty-four minutes. A lot of kids are going to be able to sit through that! The length makes it feel like Christopher Nolan directed it.

Its a harmless film that is so easy to enjoy. And when you do, you notice how great and fun this film is. Sure it has its weird moments. That "Boo-box" scene still frightens me. Seasrch that on Youtube! I feel to lazy to post a link. If you ever watch this, you'll wonder why critics hated it. That is still a big mystery. "Hook" will always be one of my favorite films and I think you will enjoy it too. It isn't the best but its passable and so enjoyable! I know I've already said that. Great 90s Spielberg family fun!

"This is for not letting me blow bubbles in my chocolate milk."
Super Reviewer
½ September 6, 2010
My favourite Peter Pan movie ever! This movie is a great kids adventure, it furthers the story of the classic play, and the actors are fantastic. I highly recommend it.
michael e.
Super Reviewer
September 19, 2010
i am a huge fan of the peter pan story and so far every imagining or re-imagining of the story has been great and this one is no different all the actors did some of their best performances in this movie but the only thing i didn't like about the movie was Tinkerbell played by Julie Roberts shes just too happy i mean in the old book Tink had a happy personality but she behaved as a regular person with a tomboyish attitude, i mean this is the fairy that tried to have Wendy killed. But other than that this movie was funny entertaining and can be loved by any generation of people children and adults alike.
Super Reviewer
September 8, 2010
2 stars
Super Reviewer
March 4, 2006
I still find this as one of my favorite children's movies ever made.
Super Reviewer
May 24, 2009
One of the few best Spielberg films. The acting absolutely could not be better. The production design was so creative and detailed. Love it.
Super Reviewer
½ April 12, 2007
My all-time favourite Peter Pan movie! Altough the one from 2003 is really good also, there's just something about this version that is a little more magical. Dustin Hoffman (here almost inrecognizable) makes for a memorable captain Hook, and Robin Williams, like always, shines in everything he does. My only real beef with the film is that the acting is a little uneven. You also get that "studio feel" quite often, which detracts some of the magic, and brings you out of the illusion at times. Not to mention the needlessly long running time of 140 minutes. It's all easily forgiven though. Because in the end, this a really enjoyable watch. A childhood favourite of mine, and a movie I think ranks as one of the best family flicks out there. Very underrated!
Super Reviewer
January 11, 2010
Definitely an odd take on Peter Pan, but it's too fun to hate. Dustin Hoffman's Captain Hook was near perfect and you've gotta love Julia Roberts. My only complaint was that it was just too much like the original story to be considered a sequel. I also wasn't in love with the idea of Peter Pan having a beer gut, but it's Robin Williams.
Super Reviewer
January 12, 2007
It may have been crap, but I enjoyed it.
Daniel Mumby
Super Reviewer
October 16, 2009
It has long been argued by Spielberg?s critics (myself included) that he places schmaltz and sentimentality over substance, story or anything which generally constitutes a decent film. And if ever there were a film which proves this beyond a shadow of a doubt, it is Hook.

The idea of Peter Pan growing up has always been an interesting one, and the best parts of the film are the early scenes where we see the adult Peter (who has forgotten who he is) going through the motions of a busy working life and neglecting his children as a result. Obviously Robin Williams doesn?t have much to do from a comedic point of view since, unlike in Ferngully or Aladdin, he?s the film?s protagonist rather than the comic relief. Nevertheless, right up to the point that the children go missing, we?ve started to settle into a film which could plausibly be about emotional development and what it is to be a child.

However, from there on in, the film is tosh. Complete and utter tosh. One immediate problem is the title - why call it Hook when the story centres around Peter Pan? - but a much bigger problem is the actors involved. Most of the performances consist of people playing themselves and being completely wooden in the process. A prime example of this is Julia Roberts, who is effectively being paid to turn up and smile. Maggie Smith, who is a very talented actress, is chronically underused as the elderly Wendy, and Bob Hoskins is kicking back way too much on the job. He just doesn?t look like he?s trying hard enough, whether in his scenes with Hook or the little comic monologues which he has towards the end.

The strangest performance is that of Dustin Hoffman as Hook. Being a Method actor, Hoffman is the sort of actor who gives his best performances in gritty, realistic roles which are grounded in character development and meticulous attention to detail. Occasionally, as in Marathon Man, this can lead to self-parody, but in Rain Man, which he made three years prior to Hook, Hoffman showed that this is what he does best, namely working from the inside out. In this however, he bizarrely appears to be working from the outside in, allowing the costume and comedy moustache to do all the work while he struts around hamming it up and doing the evil laugh. Even in its more complex moments, where the script attempts to look at the pointless nature of Hook?s life without Peter Pan, he spoils it by being frivolous.

The script itself is riddled with corny lines and lots of pointless sequences which are designed, in typical Spielberg fashion, to force you to emote, to force you to laugh or cry. The arc of the story is completely predictable and yet the choice of scenes is inexplicable. Why do we need to see a baseball game being played by the pirates, when Jack?s alienation from his father has already been amply demonstrated through conversations between him and Hook? Why do the battle scenes have to be so farcical and so drawn out, to the point at which it feels like you?re watching Home Alone on a loop? And why does the ending never seem to end, with endless group hugs, reunions and loose ends being unsuitably tied?

The answer is simple: Spielberg is too obsessed with the spectacle and with second-rate entertainment. The problem is that the entertainment value isn?t that great, largely because the action sequences are either un-compelling or unoriginal, and the dialogue around them is cheesy. Even the sumptuous sets and costumes eventually become tiresome. Really the only good things about this film are that Spielberg did not take a salary for it, and that it is at least about something relatively frivolous as a children?s story. When Spielberg tries the same tricks on a more serious subject matter, like the Holocaust, it is hard to be even this forgiving.
Super Reviewer
½ September 14, 2009
Dare I say Steven Spielberg's worst film ever. It's not horrible, but I was asking myself over and over, "THIS is a Steven Spielberg film!???" I was appalled, cause it's such low quality from a man of that caliber, the best in the business.
Super Reviewer
August 9, 2006
This movie kicks butt.
Super Reviewer
September 4, 2007
i love this movie ive seen them all about petterpan and that and i loove it its a nice light heared family fun movie for everyone to enjoy and remember!
Page 1 of 1037