Adaptaciones fílmicas de obras literarias: Peter Pan de Disney, arquetipo que desdibuja al personaje original
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Film adaptations of literary works offer an interpretation of the original work deeply conditioned by the medium and the author's interpretation of the adaptation. Thus, Peter Pan is revealed as a controversial character whose evolution over time has led to multiple interpretations. Specifically, the adaptation made by the Disney factory in 1953 of the original work and which transcends the collective imagination is one of the most representative examples. In this way, it could be affirmed that while Peter Pan achieves success through cinema, in the middle of the 20th century, his figure loses the essence that characterizes a story deeply marked by the personality of its author: J.M. Barrie; and whose central axis revolves around the figure of his mother. This paper presents the results of an empirical research with a qualitative approach whose main objective is to analyze the identity and evolution of Peter Pan through the five works written by Barrie that explicitly mention him. It is concluded that the iconic Peter Pan really has an unpopularized background that has been modified and that distances the character from his original literary conception as a result of his film adaptation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".