Scan barcode
harper11's review against another edition
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? No
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
1.0
rui_leite's review against another edition
4.0
It's beautifully written and a more than worthy sequel to the original Peter Pan story.
Geraldine McCaughrean actually manages to start off maintain the tone of J. M. Barrie, and then, slowly, takes hold of it and turns it into her own, which seemed to me a rather clever move. Also, the subject matter is very thoughtfully used, while "Peter Pan and Wendy" was all about childhood and how it feels like, "Peter Pan in Scarlet" is very much about revisiting childhood after you grow up, it's all about "grown ups" looking back at infancy, trying to keep it, and what it all entails. That explains why the tone of Neverland seems so different from the original, why Pan comes across as a slightly different character, and it is also a key to understanding Ravolo's true meaning (a brilliant villain and a wonderful metaphor as well).
Also... kudos for not shying away from the darker questions raised by the time period in which the story is set, at the time World War I had just happened and it had its effects on the children and on Neverland itself. In fact one of the most gutsy moves of Geraldine with the original material (that I will not spoil by revealing here) comes from that, I'll just say it is a take as gutsy as it will be heartbreaking once realisation dawns.
I don't often like "official sequels" by non original authors (see what happened with "And Another Thing"...er...yeah...that's why)but this one does deserve a spot, rather fairly, alongside "Peter Pan and Wendy" just for being so well thought out, respectful of the source material, and, more importantly, having the courage to go beyond it.
Geraldine McCaughrean actually manages to start off maintain the tone of J. M. Barrie, and then, slowly, takes hold of it and turns it into her own, which seemed to me a rather clever move. Also, the subject matter is very thoughtfully used, while "Peter Pan and Wendy" was all about childhood and how it feels like, "Peter Pan in Scarlet" is very much about revisiting childhood after you grow up, it's all about "grown ups" looking back at infancy, trying to keep it, and what it all entails. That explains why the tone of Neverland seems so different from the original, why Pan comes across as a slightly different character, and it is also a key to understanding Ravolo's true meaning (a brilliant villain and a wonderful metaphor as well).
Also... kudos for not shying away from the darker questions raised by the time period in which the story is set, at the time World War I had just happened and it had its effects on the children and on Neverland itself. In fact one of the most gutsy moves of Geraldine with the original material (that I will not spoil by revealing here) comes from that, I'll just say it is a take as gutsy as it will be heartbreaking once realisation dawns.
I don't often like "official sequels" by non original authors (see what happened with "And Another Thing"...er...yeah...that's why)but this one does deserve a spot, rather fairly, alongside "Peter Pan and Wendy" just for being so well thought out, respectful of the source material, and, more importantly, having the courage to go beyond it.
bookish_jules's review against another edition
3.0
While I respect Geraldine McCaughrean’s writing style to attempt to mimic or flow with J. M. Barrie’s own writing, the writing style in this book didn’t live up to the original “Peter Pan”. There were some changes to the personalities that went against the source material and weren’t well done in some areas. Rather than a brave, fearless leader, Peter came across as whiny. Yes – the dreams leaking out of Neverland can account for Peter’s change in personality, but I would’ve thought it would’ve made his personality stronger or more adamant to keep in line with J. M. Barrie’s Peter Pan. (There’s leeway in a slight tweaking of personalities when it comes to retellings, but readers should feel that the characters are still themselves at their core with this authorized sequel.)
This story started out as a fun way to introduce beloved characters (such as the Lost Boys) as adults & expanding on their personality. As the characters went on to Neverland to save Peter Pan & Neverland, the writing seemed to become more childish. (Whereas “Peter Pan” was a beautifully written and magical story about a childish boy who never grows up.)
Ravello’s addition to the plot line wasn’t my favorite. He’s a little too… overly obsessed with Peter Pan throughout the tale. Calling Peter things like “His Supreme Highness” was a bit much considering McCaughrean’s change in Peter’s personality. I don’t care that his true identity (behind the Ravello mask) is part of the plot point at the end of Chapter 17
Peter Pan “becoming” Hook after finding the treasure chest & Ravello being the supposed-to-be-dead Captain Hook from the original tale is a plot point I don’t like.
I did love that Pan and his crew were referred to as “The League of Pan”, “The Company”, or “The Explorers” while they were in Neverland. And Peter Pan’s continued dislike of talk about mothers remaining the same was refreshing!
I hate the added “oh no you can’t fly without your shadow!” plot point to the book. It’s a massive stray away from the source material.
A cute story, even if I’m a firm believer the writing could’ve been better. The premise itself is intriguing enough, though I had higher expectations for this book as an authorized sequel. Though it’s not the worst retelling/sequel to “Peter Pan” I’ve read.
This story started out as a fun way to introduce beloved characters (such as the Lost Boys) as adults & expanding on their personality. As the characters went on to Neverland to save Peter Pan & Neverland, the writing seemed to become more childish. (Whereas “Peter Pan” was a beautifully written and magical story about a childish boy who never grows up.)
Ravello’s addition to the plot line wasn’t my favorite. He’s a little too… overly obsessed with Peter Pan throughout the tale. Calling Peter things like “His Supreme Highness” was a bit much considering McCaughrean’s change in Peter’s personality. I don’t care that his true identity (behind the Ravello mask) is part of the plot point at the end of Chapter 17
Peter Pan “becoming” Hook after finding the treasure chest & Ravello being the supposed-to-be-dead Captain Hook from the original tale is a plot point I don’t like.
I did love that Pan and his crew were referred to as “The League of Pan”, “The Company”, or “The Explorers” while they were in Neverland. And Peter Pan’s continued dislike of talk about mothers remaining the same was refreshing!
I hate the added “oh no you can’t fly without your shadow!” plot point to the book. It’s a massive stray away from the source material.
A cute story, even if I’m a firm believer the writing could’ve been better. The premise itself is intriguing enough, though I had higher expectations for this book as an authorized sequel. Though it’s not the worst retelling/sequel to “Peter Pan” I’ve read.
therealtrabo's review against another edition
3.0
I see a lot of hate on this book but to be honest I enjoyed it... Sure, sometimes it feels forced and it took me about a hundred pages to really get engaged, and I didn't like all the aspects of the story, but it did a better job than I think most Peter Pan books and spin-offs I've read have done of capturing J.M. Barrie's unique and charismatic writing style... Overall I think I'd give the book 3 1/2 stars.
cmhillner's review against another edition
4.0
Read aloud for homeschooling. The style of this book was a beautiful modernized version of the orginial Peter Pan. The language and style was challenge for the boys but they followed along quite well with the plotline.
katherinecjones's review against another edition
adventurous
dark
funny
mysterious
reflective
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.5
eletricjb's review against another edition
3.0
The beginning was promising, but the way the story progressed, it just kept losing any charm from the original story. Sad.
pizzamyheart's review against another edition
1.0
Life is too short to spend on bad books. Tim Curry tried his hardest to sell this to me, but I had to give up at 50%. This book is ridiculous. Absolutely ridiculous. Instead of making a unique story with new characters it turns adults into children. It revives James Hook. It turns a lost boy into a girl just cause. It kills off Michael.
There are SO many better ways they could have gone. If you're looking for a good sequel to Peter Pan, read Peter and the Starcatchers. That series captures the magic of Peter Pan and Never land as it should exist.
There are SO many better ways they could have gone. If you're looking for a good sequel to Peter Pan, read Peter and the Starcatchers. That series captures the magic of Peter Pan and Never land as it should exist.
tinynavajo's review against another edition
5.0
Adults and children
Are on a spectrum, a sliding scale you might say. Anyone can exist as an adult and as a child, sometimes all in the same day. It's finding where you are on the scale and how to use that knowledge to make it through.
Are on a spectrum, a sliding scale you might say. Anyone can exist as an adult and as a child, sometimes all in the same day. It's finding where you are on the scale and how to use that knowledge to make it through.