phantomstrider I was blown away by this sequel. The soundtrack phenomenally matches the scenes, the voice cast are exceptional choices, the animation is beautiful (despite only a 20M budget, which is tiny for a disney animated movie). This is easily among the absolute best disney sequels I've ever watched. I'm really glad they gave it a cinematic release as it deserved it.

emmafrances I know a lot of Disney sequels can be really horrible and completely ruin the original movie, but I think that this movie just continues the adventure of Peter Pan. Jane, Wendy's daughter, feels she needs to grow up fast, in order to take care of her family when her father is fighting. I think this storyline is a lot more relatable than the first. A lot of teenagers feel they have to be mature very early on in order to be "cool". I really enjoyed the time period being London during WWII. However, I felt that the parts at the beginning with the bombing was not suitable for really young children, who may not understand what is going on and be very scared. On the other hand, it may just go over their heads. I think Peter Pan still had his charming and selfish personality, which I feel the directors did a great job of continuing. I thought that it was so sweet and not creepy at all how they continued the romance between Wendy and Peter, between Jane and Peter. Although, I can see how people may think that is weird. The most beautiful scene, and the my favorite scene, was at the end when Peter sees Wendy all grown up. I could feel myself tear up a bit. It was so magical. I would watch this movie over and over just for that scene.

TheLittleSongbird Return To Neverland isn't terrible, but it does fail on many levels, so can't be classed as a good sequel. The animation and the story were the redeeming qualities, but unfortunately the songs and the characters fall flat.The animation is mostly bright and colourful, but falls flat in the dark backgrounds. The story wasn't bad either, trying to keep Hook from getting the treasure and everything. I also liked the war scene, because that was quite interesting on an animation perspective, and brought some intrigue on a contextual level. I was unimpressed by the trailer, but the film itself wasn't bad, but loses the charm about 15 minutes in. I will say it has a great message about cherishing your childhood.The first problem was that the kidnapping scene took far too long, despite the breathtaking animation of Hook's ship, and I hated the change to Hook. In the original and the criminally underrated TV series Peter Pan and the Pirates, which are both classics, he is complex and vindictive, but here he was manipulative in a negative way, and lacked menace. The best character was Jane, but that isn't saying much, and Peter's new voice was horrible, too bolshy. The songs were terrible and forgettable immediately after you've finished watching the movie, likewise with the dialogue. The main problem was that it isn't a true sequel at all, compared to the first film and the book. And the octopus, why replace the crocodile may I ask?I'm sorry that this is mostly negative, but Return To Neverland was very disappointing. Though better than the trailer suggested, it is still a pretty charmless film, with a 3/10(Adequate) Bethany Cox

motormouth2354 First of all, I must point out that Disney's first Peter Pan movie is a huge letdown to the deep, complex, and meaningful novel by the great Sir James M. Barrie. It simply does not do it justice. Therefor, to base the sequel solely upon that disappointing movie (no matter how cherished it may be by those who enjoyed it as children) is a recipe for disaster. Disney would have been far better off re-reading the novel and using it in conjunction with the events of their first movie.The only thing Disney did right was naming Wendy's daughter Jane. The last chapter of Barrie's work is about Wendy and her daughter, Jane, and her adventures with Peter Pan. But this excerpt from the novel shows that Disney did not remain true to the character that Barrie created for Jane: "Years rolled on again, and Wendy had a daughter. This ought not to be written in ink but in a golden splash. She was called Jane, and always had an odd inquiring look, as if from the moment she arrived on the mainland she wanted to ask questions. When she was old enough to ask them they were mostly about Peter Pan. She loved to hear of Peter, and Wendy told her all she could remember in the very nursery from which the famous flight had taken place" (258).The Jane in Return to Neverland is quite obviously NOT interested in Peter Pan, and did not go willingly to Neverland to be with Peter. This is a crime against the book, and Disney should be ashamed of itself.The novel aside, however, the movie does have a positive message behind it - cherish your childhood. Jane was forced to grow up quickly because of her father's active involvement in WWII. She hated all things childish, and was really more of a bitter adult in a child's body. Then, by the end of the film, she reconnects with her inner child and is reunited with her father and allowed to really enjoy her childhood.Overall, I think that children will enjoy this movie much more than their parents. Especially if their parents are fond of the novel!