Jump to content

Type keyword(s) to search

Mary Poppins Returns (2018)

Kromm

By Kromm
in Movies

  • Reply
  • Start Topic

Recommended Posts

Kromm

Kromm

(edited)

 

 

I am so incredibly optimistic after seeing this tease. To say they nailed it is a vast understatement. The one objection I've seen on the Internet is that the color palatte is too dark, but that's clearly both intentional, and temporary for the beginning of the film--to represent economic depression, the death of the kids mother, and a loss of hope. True the original film also started in what was supposed to be a bad time for the family, and also with a death, but the films of this studio and that period didn't tend to use varying color palattes in a film as a visual metaphor. They just picked a single overall palatte they felt suited the whole film.
 

Emily Blunt clearly nails the hell out of this, if that one scene is any indication. She doesn't have to look like Julie's clone. But the voice is utterly perfect. The change in clothes will work if they simply acknowledge it happened (she just has to snark something about "those old rags being too depressing" or something like that.  And the line they have her deliver and her actual delivery? So Poppins. So perfect.

"Mary Poppins... it is wonderful to see you..."

"Yes, it is, isn't it?"

That so perfectly encapsulates the careful balance in Mary of being kind of snooty/gently arrogant, and yet also wonderfully droll. She does use a contraction though, and I may have to rewatch the original again to see if she ever does there.

And of course the mirror gag is directly a continuation of the similar gag in the original film.

The moment of Mary breaking out of the clouds?  You'd have to have a heart made of stone, or not be very familiar with the original film for that to not feel uplifting. And yes, she is holding the kite and not flying with the umbrella.

Edited by Kromm
  • Love 5
Link to comment
Irlandesa

Irlandesa

I have never really liked Mary Poppins much as a kid even though I love Julie Andrews and Dick Van Dyke and liked some of the songs.  But I was just not into most stories about children.

That said, this appears to be a very intriguing and interesting looking trailer.  I'm not sure if I'll see it but it definitely has potential to be good.  And Emily Blunt perfect channels Julie's version without being a mimic.

  • Love 1
Link to comment
Spartan Girl

Spartan Girl

Omg I'm really torn. On one hand, the teaser was perfect.

But on the other hand, the original was also perfect on its own and as much as I like Emily Blunt she's not Julie Andrews. Then again, i can't really argue about this sequel being unnecessary when I've loved the remakes of Cinderella, Jungle Book, Beauty and the Beast...

Oh hell, I'm seeing it.

  • Love 3
Link to comment
Kromm

Kromm

  • Author
7 hours ago, Spartan Girl said:

Omg I'm really torn. On one hand, the teaser was perfect.

But on the other hand, the original was also perfect on its own and as much as I like Emily Blunt she's not Julie Andrews. Then again, i can't really argue about this sequel being unnecessary when I've loved the remakes of Cinderella, Jungle Book, Beauty and the Beast...

Oh hell, I'm seeing it.

I think there's one essential difference between Mary Poppins and many of the other examples of remakes and unnecessary continuations...

Mary Poppins had 8 books. Admittedly none of them had the plot of Mary Poppins Returns, but the ground has been laid since 1935 for there to be multiple stories about her.

  • Love 5
Link to comment
starri

starri

I'm honestly surprised the Travers estate okayed this. She was pretty specific in her will about could and couldn't be done with Mary Poppins (she stated outright that if Disney tried to make a stage musical, the book and any new music had to be written by British people, and expressly forbade the Sherman Brothers from coming anywhere near it).  I can't image she'd have wanted Walt Disney to make more money off of her.

  • Love 1
Link to comment
rmontro

rmontro

On 3/6/2018 at 5:10 PM, starri said:

I'm honestly surprised the Travers estate okayed this. 

Maybe her family saw the charm in the Disney movie, and didn't share the author's rigid thinking.  The original really is a wonderful film IMO, and rises far above most Disney movies of the era.

I'm interested in seeing Lin Manuel Miranda as Bert's apprentice.  I had heard he might have a hand in helping with the score.  Has anyone else heard the same, and does that mean we might hear some rapping?

  • Love 2
Link to comment
rmontro

rmontro

Speaking of Lin Manuel Miranda rapping:  

If you've ever seen "Saving Mr. Banks", the movie about the making of Mary Poppins, there is a scene where the author (P.L. Travers) objects to the idea of Mary Poppins singing.  Disney argues that she sings in the books, but Travers refutes that, and says those are recitations.  

In addition to adding a modern take on the character, maybe adding some rapping would actually fit in closer to the idea of "recitations" than songs would.

Although I'm not sure Travers herself would agree with that lol.

I wonder why she barred the Sherman Brothers from being involved with the stage musical.  In the "Saving Mr. Banks" movie, it appeared that she had come to appreciate their ability by the end.  I realize that movie was not entirely historically accurate, however.  Dramatic purposes, and all.

  • Love 2
Link to comment
starri

starri

50 minutes ago, rmontro said:

In the "Saving Mr. Banks" movie, it appeared that she had come to appreciate their ability by the end.  I realize that movie was not entirely historically accurate, however.

That's putting it mildly.  While I think that movie is highly underrated, even the scenes that are based on actual events are basically truth-adjacent.  Among other things, Walt was barely present at her meetings at the studio.  He was there for a day or two and got so frustrated that he peaced out and left town.  

She did ultimately mellow out over the years, and eventually admitted that she thought it was a good movie, it just wasn't her character.

  • Useful 1
  • Love 2
Link to comment
rmontro

rmontro

4 minutes ago, starri said:

Among other things, Walt was barely present at her meetings at the studio.  He was there for a day or two and got so frustrated that he peaced out and left town.  

Well, that wouldn't make for a very exciting movie, would it?  :)  Especially since Tom Hanks' accent is one of my favorite things in the movie.

They did show him trying to avoid her at times though.  Can't say I blame him.

  • Love 3
Link to comment
starri

starri

Just now, rmontro said:

Well, that wouldn't make for a very exciting movie, would it?  :)  Especially since Tom Hanks' accent is one of my favorite things in the movie.

They didn't entirely make up the dialog, much if it just came from correspondence between the two.

She did go to Disneyland, although by herself.  She hated it and most definitely did not get on the carousel.

  • Love 2
Link to comment
VCRTracking

VCRTracking

(edited)

Okay, I'm sold. It looks great. I like Emily Blunt(although I weirded out by her singing in an American accent) and got emotional when I saw Dick Van Dyke.

I wish my 2018 was as going as insanely great as the Krasinski-Blunts!

Edited by VCRTracking
  • Love 6
Link to comment
Frost

Frost

On ‎6‎/‎24‎/‎2018 at 10:00 AM, starri said:

She did ultimately mellow out over the years, and eventually admitted that she thought it was a good movie, it just wasn't her character.

For me, growing up with the movie version, I'm grateful for that.  I bought the first two Mary Poppins books after seeing "Saving Mr Banks" and pretty much actively dislike Travers' version.  It might be the "correct" one, since she did invent the character, but I thought she came across as kind of a jerk, not "no nonsense," which is how I characterize the Disney version.  Maybe Julie Andrews is such a warm person that she's responsible for that.  All I know is, I'm going to be first in line for this movie!  I wasn't all that excited about it until this trailer.

  • Love 5
Link to comment
Sharpie66

Sharpie66

(edited)

Best lines in that trailer: “I was flying a kite, and it got caught in a nanny!” And “I’ve come to look after the Banks children.” “Us?” “Oh yes, you, too.” 

Definitely going to see this in the theater. I love the 2D animation! But I am a huge fan of the original, so unless they completely muck this one up, I was going to see it anyway. 

Edited by Sharpie66
  • Love 7
Link to comment
Crs97

Crs97

All in.  Take my money now.  I have teenage boys, but they know sometimes Mom gets to win (which was my mantra for Cinderella vs. Home, and they ended up loving Cinderella with me). I cannot wait!

  • Love 5
Link to comment
Bill1978

Bill1978

I was put off my the voice being used by Emily Blunt in the beginning of the trailer. I don't remember Mary sounding that arrogant (I think that's the word I want) in the original but I confess it has been years since I've seen the original but by the end of the trailer I was very much take my money now...even if the snippet of song we were given sounded very dated.

And how dare they put Blunt and Mortimer in the same movie. My brain always thinks they are the same person, it may not cope seeing them in the same frame together. Great to see Angela back on the big screen as well and full disclosure I did not recognise Lin-Manuel at all until I remembered he was in it.

  • Love 1
Link to comment
starri

starri

From a pure marketing standpoint, that may be the most effective trailer I've ever seen.  It moved my personal needle from "Mildly interesting, maybe when it comes to streaming" to "I wonder if they're playing it at the big IMAX theater..."

  • Love 10
Link to comment
ChromaKelly

ChromaKelly

5 hours ago, starri said:

From a pure marketing standpoint, that may be the most effective trailer I've ever seen.  It moved my personal needle from "Mildly interesting, maybe when it comes to streaming" to "I wonder if they're playing it at the big IMAX theater..."

Same. I was somewhat interested because of Lin-Manuel Miranda. I never really cared for Mary Poppins so I was meh on it except for him. Now I'm all squee magic that looks fun. It might be this year's The Greatest Showman.

  • Love 2
Link to comment
Sarah 103

Sarah 103

I was already looking forward to it but it looks like the penguins have a cameo. As a kid, I loved the cameo. Maybe they will rerelase the original back on theatres. They've done that for some of the animated movies before the live-action remake. 

  • Love 3
Link to comment
voiceover

voiceover

After the trailer, I'm almost, very-nearly, a "Maybe..."

I've loathed all the Disney remakes. There are some stories that certainly can be told, over and over again, with a new-decade cast & director bringing their own intriguing POV (I'm thinking, Little Women, and any Austen or Dickens redux).  But the Disney originals are of such a specific time & place in my childhood, it's a bit too much of messing with what is personal and precious.

Nowhere is this more true than Jungle Book and Mary Poppins.  Now, because it's really a sequel, and because Emily Blunt can barely put a foot wrong -- I am tempted.  That first floating vision of her though the clouds was a gut-punch.

But didn't we just go here, plotwise, with Ewan McGregor & Christopher Robin?  And why must Meryl Streep be in every. Fucking. Movie??

  • Love 2
Link to comment
Sarah 103

Sarah 103

@voiceover But there's a difference between a remake and a sequel, which I think you hint at towards the end of the your post. This movie is without a doubt a sequel. A remake is retelling the same story with the same characters. A squel takes place after the original and features the characters in a new/different story. 

  • Love 1
Link to comment
voiceover

voiceover

3 hours ago, Sarah 103 said:

@voiceover But there's a difference between a remake and a sequel, which I think you hint at towards the end of the your post. This movie is without a doubt a sequel. A remake is retelling the same story with the same characters. A squel takes place after the original and features the characters in a new/different story. 

I didn't "hint at the end".  My post's exact words:

"Now, because it's really a sequel..."

I actually *understand the differences: "remake" ( the "re-", defined as "again", as in "make again") and "sequel" (the "se-" defined as "apart", as in, the story is apart from the original).

My interest (defined as "Zippety-doo-dah", to quote a Disney song) in either type of film is purely subjective, which I think I also made clear.

  • Love 2
Link to comment
Sarah 103

Sarah 103

3 minutes ago, Phebemarie said:

There goes Lin-Manuel Miranda's chance at an Oscar.  

Not necessarily. Isn't he also composing a song for this movie or was that just a rumor. Also, just because Lin-Manuel Miranda doesn't get the nomination for this doesn't mean he'll never get the PEGOT. In The Heights is going to be made into a movie, which means at least an orginal song played over the end credits, and who knows what else he was in development. 

  • Love 2
Link to comment
MissAlmond

MissAlmond

(edited)
On ‎3‎/‎6‎/‎2018 at 4:10 PM, starri said:

I'm honestly surprised the Travers estate okayed this. She was pretty specific in her will about could and couldn't be done with Mary Poppins (she stated outright that if Disney tried to make a stage musical, the book and any new music had to be written by British people, and expressly forbade the Sherman Brothers from coming anywhere near it).  I can't image she'd have wanted Walt Disney to make more money off of her.

Never trust future heirs to do right by your wishes.  So specifically state they forfeit the inheritance if they don't.   

Edited by MissAlmond
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Crs97

Crs97

It looks like Lin Manuel will be put in contention for a lead actor Oscar, which still gets Dick Van Dyke his supporting.  Is the movie out anywhere?  How does it already have nominations?

Link to comment
Stuffy

Stuffy

3 hours ago, Crs97 said:

It looks like Lin Manuel will be put in contention for a lead actor Oscar, which still gets Dick Van Dyke his supporting.  Is the movie out anywhere?  How does it already have nominations?

It's not out yet, but it has had multiple industry screenings. 

Link to comment
ElectricBoogaloo

ElectricBoogaloo

3 hours ago, Crs97 said:

It looks like Lin Manuel will be put in contention for a lead actor Oscar, which still gets Dick Van Dyke his supporting.  Is the movie out anywhere?  How does it already have nominations?

The Golden Globe eligibility for movies is that the movie has to be released within this calendar year (January 1-December 31 of 2018). Mary Poppins Returns will be officially released on December 19 so any nominations have to be this year. HFPA members are invited to screenings so that they can nominate/vote for movies.

  • Love 1
Link to comment
Browncoat

Browncoat

Just got back from this one, and it was fine. I tried very hard not to compare with the first one, but it was extremely difficult, as I love that one so much, but I felt like this one was trying just a little too hard to be magical.  For example, they take a broken bowl to be fixed by Mary's cousin Topsy -- this parallels the "I Love To Laugh" scene with Uncle Albert from the first one, but then we never get the bowl back.  Was it fixed? 

Emily Blunt made a wonderful Mary Poppins, though she did things I'm not sure Mary would have done (like step in a puddle!).  Lin-Manuel was awesome, of course.  The songs were okay, but no stand-outs to me.  The last one with the balloons was my favorite, though I really would have liked if

when Angela Lansbury tells them to pick a balloon that has their reflection, Jane and Michael had seen their younger selves instead of no reflection at all

.  The lamplighters' song was okay, too. 

A villain was invented (and played by Colin Firth!), and kind of unnecessary, but it did allow for Dick Van Dyke's appearance, and he was AWESOME!  546 years old, and he can still cut a rug.  But there is one huge error at the end.  At least I think it's an error -- it's been a while since I've seen the original, but I would swear that in the original,

Michael retrieves his tuppence from Mr. Dawes, and in the sequel, Mr. Dawes says the account Michael started with the tuppence has compounded enough interest to save their house.

There were tons of Easter eggs, too.

Despite my criticisms, I did enjoy it, can recommend it, and would likely see it again. 

  • Love 6
Link to comment
Popples

Popples

On 12/18/2018 at 5:31 PM, Spartan Girl said:

Oh piss off, Honest Trailers. Mrs. Banks' first name is Winnifred. Did you even watch the movie?

I like Honest Trailers, but that was unforgivable lack of research.

  • Love 5
Link to comment
Morrigan2575

Morrigan2575

On it's own the movie is fine, good acting, pretty sets/costuming, the CGI stuff worked but, there were way too many scenes/Musical numbers copied/homaged from the first movie (at least 3). The songs were fun but, none of them stayed with me after leaving the theater.  There was one number where I swear it was written just because of Hamilton.

I think you're either going to love it because of the nostalgia or walk away going 'meh'. I fell into the later category.  Ultimately, all Mary Poppins Returns did was make me want to watch Mary Poppins.  

  • Love 2
Link to comment
Browncoat

Browncoat

I think there were more than three --

the kid and the kite, going into the bowl (painting), odd relative of Mary Poppins, getting lost after the visit to the bank, Admiral Boom (of course), lamplighters/chimney sweeps silhouetted against the night sky, and probably more.

Do I need to keep spoiler tagging these things? 

It's too bad they couldn't have gotten Glynnis Johns to have a cameo as grandma.  But perhaps she's not as spry or as in as good health as Dick Van Dyke.

  • Love 1
Link to comment
Spartan Girl

Spartan Girl

Just got back. It was very charming. Not easy to fill Julie Andrews' shoes, but Emily Blunt did a terrific job. I love that her Mary Poppins was a bit more tart like she was in the books -- PL Travers might have liked that. Lin-Manuel was fabulous, as usual -- was not expecting him to end up with Jane! Actually I'm glad they didn't replace Bert as a love interest for Mary Poppins so that worked out fine.

Also wasn't expecting Colin Firth to be the bad guy because they made him look a lot like Mr. Banks -- and adult Michael had some of his mannnerisms too.

Dick van Dyke was the best part. Kibd of wish he reprised an old Bert instead of Mr. Dawes Jr but whatever gets him dancing!

If I didn't know better, I'd swear the balloon seller character was written for a Julie Andrews cameo. That would have been awesome. Ah well, Angela Lansbury is great anyway.

  • Love 3
Link to comment
Browncoat

Browncoat

33 minutes ago, Spartan Girl said:

If I didn't know better, I'd swear the balloon seller character was written for a Julie Andrews cameo. That would have been awesome. Ah well, Angela Lansbury is great anyway.

That would have been great, but unfortunately Julie isn't able to sing any more.

  • Love 3
Link to comment
phalange

phalange

(edited)

I think Emily Blunt made a great Mary Poppins. She was caring, but with just the right amount of snark. Lin-Manuel Miranda was fantastic and I enjoyed his number with the lamplighters. The costumes when they were in the bowl were so vibrant and fun, and so was Mary Poppins and Jack's performance with the penguins. Using the original 2D animation style was a nice touch. 

I teared up when Mary Poppins first sang The Place Where Lost Things Go to the children, and then again when the kids sang it to their father. 

Loved pretty much everyone floating with the balloons at the end and Mary looking into the balloon and knowing it was time for her to leave because everyone would be okay. 

There was (IMO, well-deserved) applause when it was over. It was bright and charming and I'd definitely see it again. 

Edited by phalange
  • Love 8
Link to comment
Spartan Girl

Spartan Girl

12 hours ago, Browncoat said:

That would have been great, but unfortunately Julie isn't able to sing any more.

Not the way she used to because of that surgery, yeah, but she did sing a little in Princess Diaries 2, and her voice wasn't bad, just a lower octave. I don't know if things have changed more since then. In any case, they wanted Julie to cameo but she declined because she didn't want to take attention from Emily. Which was classy, but still a shame.

On another note, why the hell hasn't Dancing with the Stars gotten Dick van Dyke yet?!

  • Love 7
Link to comment
kiddo82

kiddo82

I thought it was really fun and Emily Blunt definitely deserves an Oscar nomination.  I agree with @phalange that she brought juuuust enough wit and snark without being mean and her mannerisms were on point.   Add in the singing and dancing and I honestly thought she was as close to perfect as one can get.  Lin-Manuel Miranda was great too but had less character to work with.  Still, he was a joy to watch.  I really loved the book by it's cover and lamplighter numbers.  I never cared much for the original (and haven't even seen it in about 20 years) so I was pretty much a blank slate going in.

6 hours ago, Spartan Girl said:

Not the way she used to because of that surgery, yeah, but she did sing a little in Princess Diaries 2, and her voice wasn't bad, just a lower octave. I don't know if things have changed more since then. In any case, they wanted Julie to cameo but she declined because she didn't want to take attention from Emily. Which was classy, but still a shame.

On another note, why the hell hasn't Dancing with the Stars gotten Dick van Dyke yet?!

 

6 hours ago, Spartan Girl said:

Not the way she used to because of that surgery, yeah, but she did sing a little in Princess Diaries 2, and her voice wasn't bad, just a lower octave. I don't know if things have changed more since then. In any case, they wanted Julie to cameo but she declined because she didn't want to take attention from Emily. Which was classy, but still a shame.

On another note, why the hell hasn't Dancing with the Stars gotten Dick van Dyke yet?!

   Didn't know that about Julie Andrews.  I figured she was probably unavailable for health reasons.  What a classy move.

  • Love 3
Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...