Board Thread:Off-Topic Fun/@comment-5367821-20130209055547/@comment-6195464-20130212132126

Well :) Now that you've explained it, it makes more sense. Thank you. Like I said - I'm not totally against the idea of changing a character, as long as there's more reasoning behind it than numbers or quotas.

Personally, my favorite version of Peter was Jeremy Sumptner (His acting left  a little to the imagination, but in a lot of ways, he was exactly how I picture Peter when I read the book). I wouldn't mind someone in that vein - Peter is all about characterization, rather than appearance... He's stubborn, arrogant and well, childish - but there's depth to him as well. He's a pretender. He claims he doesn't want to grow old, and yet he tries very hard to be the "grown up" amongst the Lost Boys. He is, quite literally, the polar opposite of Hook.

Now... can I tell you the trouble with casting Peter? As well as why I think the writers are hesitant to include him?

It's the Walt (LOST) issue... - In filming, Jeremy Sumptner aged less than one year.... he also grew about five inches. Peter is generally thought to be between eleven and thirteen. For a kid who doesn't age, this is a really hard -age- to keep him at. I know, personally, my brother went from twelve to thirteen and about four feet nine to almost six feet, almost over night.

Now, having Peter as a very brief guest star could work - but they have to be incredibly careful that his storyline doesn't carry him in to too many plot lines that require his presence - otherwise you're gonna wind up with the same trouble they ran into with Walt in LOST... He's gonna suddenly look a WHOLE lot older, a WHOLE lot taller, a WHOLE lot quicker than he's supposed to (Bear in mind - 9 months of filming, in the storyline is really only supposed to be a few weeks). Suddenly, Peter is gonna be problem for continuity.

If they do decide., eventually to inlude Peter, I'm almost positive - unless they plan on his being older, somehow, they will not have him on the show for very long.