Return to Never Land Image
Metascore
49

Mixed or average reviews - based on 26 Critics What's this?

User Score
6.2

Generally favorable reviews- based on 22 Ratings

Your Score
0 out of 10
Rate this:
  • 10
  • 9
  • 8
  • 7
  • 6
  • 5
  • 4
  • 3
  • 2
  • 1
  • 0
  • 0
Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 7 out of 26
  2. Negative: 5 out of 26
  1. 80
    Cleverly structured, fast-paced, funny, even moving.
  2. 75
    A Saturday afternoon stop for the kiddies -- harmless, skillful and aimed at grade schoolers.
  3. Even if you tap only a little of the magic of "Peter Pan," you'll come away with some pixie dust.
  4. It's no use expecting Return to Never Land to match, much less exceed, Disney's 1953 version of "Peter Pan," which by itself isn't quite in the uppermost tier of the studio's full-length cartoons.
  5. Not only did it not engage the adults, its lackluster story line didn't spread much illusion or magic over the kids in the audience either.
  6. Little more than direct-to-vid nonsense offered by Disney at dollars on the penny to parents looking to waste time and money keeping kids occupied away from the TV screen.
  7. 10
    More criminal than the lack of inspiration in Return to Never Land is the absence of a sense of magic.

See all 26 Critic Reviews

Score distribution:
  1. Positive: 4 out of 8
  2. Negative: 2 out of 8
  1. Mar 1, 2011
    7
    It's not as good as the original, but the plot is really good, and the characters are pretty enjoyable, it was cool seeing Wendy's kid go toIt's not as good as the original, but the plot is really good, and the characters are pretty enjoyable, it was cool seeing Wendy's kid go to Neverland and continue on the story of Peter Pan, but it's pretty upsetting that they replaced the crocodile with an octopus, I mean an octopus? really? but it's still a good movie from beginning to end. Expand
  2. Jun 14, 2012
    7
    This sequel lives up to the original Peter Pan. The ride ends somewhat fast because of the short length, but it has a good story and animation.
  3. Mar 19, 2014
    5
    Return to Never Land is a cheaply made, underachieving sequel, and is nowhere close to the original in any way. But, I suppose it'll make theReturn to Never Land is a cheaply made, underachieving sequel, and is nowhere close to the original in any way. But, I suppose it'll make the little ones happy. Expand
  4. Jul 3, 2013
    4
    Despite having some charming moments, this sequel to the Disney classic just can't live up to what made the original such a great animatedDespite having some charming moments, this sequel to the Disney classic just can't live up to what made the original such a great animated film to watch. Expand
  5. Mar 25, 2014
    3
    This movie is made for children and is not well done for general audiences. The magic from the 1953 original is lost. The story is what I findThis movie is made for children and is not well done for general audiences. The magic from the 1953 original is lost. The story is what I find to be most troublesome. If this is a continuation of the first one, shouldn't Peter Pan have Captain Hook's ship as he did steal it from him in the previous movie. Also, the little girl does not believe in fairies although she is staring one right in the face, kind of odd. Also the fact that I like Captain Hook's character a lot more than Peter Pan is not a good thing. In the end the poor animation, poor voices, and poor story all resulted in a terrible movie and a 27.6 out of 100. Expand

See all 8 User Reviews