DVDizzy.com

Home | Reviews | Schedule | Cover Art | Search The Site
DVDizzy.com Top Stories:

It is currently Fri Oct 18, 2019 2:22 am

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 823 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 42  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Sep 14, 2015 8:03 pm 
Offline
Platinum Edition
User avatar

Joined: Sat Sep 23, 2006 5:06 am
Posts: 13828
I was calm and I did read that but having "his support" does not necessarily mean he'll be involved in the film.

_________________
ImageImageImageImageImage


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 14, 2015 8:27 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 6:09 pm
Posts: 3632
From what I've read, it sounds like this may be an adaptation in the vein of "Charlie and the Chocolate Factory." Entertainment Weekly, which broke the story, said it is "decidedly not a sequel." That seems to eliminate a grown up Banks children plot line. Considering it's set in the thirties as the books are and that they've picked Robert Marshall to direct, a man known for his adaptations of dark musicals (and on the bright side, is friends with Julie. Choreographed her on Broadway in Victor/Victoria), that's what it sounds like to me-- a new, perhaps "darker" adaptation based on other stories from the books. I almost doubt they'll even include Bert, as he's more or less an invention of the film.

It's wholly unnecessary, but that seems to be the motto of Disney's live action division today.

_________________
Image
Avatar and signature are Al Hirschfeld illustrations of Julie Andrews in Star! (1968).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 14, 2015 9:38 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Fri Oct 17, 2008 4:53 pm
Posts: 3406
UmbrellaFish wrote:

It's wholly unnecessary, but that seems to be the motto of Disney's live action division today.


What, "Fix what isn't broken?" :glare:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 14, 2015 9:57 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2010 10:46 am
Posts: 4211
Location: Maryland, USA
This movie is selfish and insulting in many levels. It's insulting to...

Julie Andrews and Dick van Dyke, whose performances are iconic and can not be outdone. Not to mention that she won an Oscar for it. Despite her age and singing voice, I can't see why Julie can't reprise her role. The fact that they're getting another actress is terrible. Dick's Bert can easily get a cameo. 

Walt Disney, who had no desire to make a sequel (Could be wrong) and didn't believe in sequels. And now, they're whoring (is this inapporiate?) out the company for $$$.

And most of all, P.L Travers, who hated the movie to literally the point of tears and now, they're making it worse for Travers with this sequels. Are the people, who hold the rights, even going to approve this? Disney needed special permission for the musical.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Sep 14, 2015 10:29 pm 
Offline
Platinum Edition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 12:26 pm
Posts: 11070
Sotiris wrote:
I was calm and I did read that but having "his support" does not necessarily mean he'll be involved in the film.

I agree, there was nothing you said that implied you weren't calm.

After all their other re-makes, I guess I'm unaffected by this. Like all the other films they've made, it won't top the original so there's no real reason to worry in the long run.

_________________
Image
Listening to most often lately:
Josh Groban ~ "You Raise Me Up"
David Archuleta ~ "Joy to the World"
Whitney Houston ~ "Who Would Imagine a King"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 15, 2015 5:53 am 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 6:09 pm
Posts: 3632
disneyprincess11 wrote:
Julie Andrews and Dick van Dyke, whose performances are iconic and can not be outdone. Not to mention that she won an Oscar for it. Despite her age and singing voice, I can't see why Julie can't reprise her role. The fact that they're getting another actress is terrible. Dick's Bert can easily get a cameo. 


Julie will be gracious about this. She complimented Carrie Underwood in The Sound of Music for goodness' sakes. She'll give the film her seal of approval, and if Disney wants her at the red carpet premiere or to do promotion for the film, she'll go. I'd love for her to rip it, but that's not Julie.

disneyprincess11 wrote:
And most of all, P.L Travers, who hated the movie to literally the point of tears and now, they're making it worse for Travers with this sequels. Are the people, who hold the rights, even going to approve this? Disney needed special permission for the musical.


Well, I don't think P.L. is exactly spinning in her grave over this news, nor do I think Disney would have announced this project without securing the rights. There are contradictory reports regarding how Travers felt about the film-- some indicate she despised it, others that she watched it all the time. And in the 80s, P.L. actually worked on a script for a sequel to the Disney film that was to star Julie as Mary and Michael Jackson as Bert's brother as Dick van Dyke was deemed to have aged too much at that point. So, maybe P.L. hated the Disney movie, maybe she actually liked it in spite of herself-- we don't know. But she was always willing to capitalize off the property.

I wonder what they'll call the film? "Mary Poppins"? "Mary Poppins Comes Back" like one of the sequels? Something entirely new?

_________________
Image
Avatar and signature are Al Hirschfeld illustrations of Julie Andrews in Star! (1968).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 15, 2015 9:51 am 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2010 10:46 am
Posts: 4211
Location: Maryland, USA
According to the BWW forums, Emily Blunt is Mary Poppins and it'll be announced soon.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 15, 2015 9:56 am 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2004 11:47 am
Posts: 4646
Location: UK
Only the live-action Dumbo is as stupid an idea. :headshake:

The only thing that might make me accept it is if it were an adaptation of the Broadway musical (which is quite a different kettle of fish) but if it's going to try and be a remake/reimagining/sequel of the 1964 film, then I really hope the people working on this project, like the nannies who responded to Mr Banks' advertisement, are blown away by a sudden gust of wind and are never seen or heard from again. :angry:

_________________
-Joe

Blog | Deviantart


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 15, 2015 1:09 pm 
Offline
Platinum Edition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 12:26 pm
Posts: 11070
Wonderlicious wrote:
The only thing that might make me accept it is if it were an adaptation of the Broadway musical (which is quite a different kettle of fish) :

Yes, a movie adaptation of the musical would be great! It's too bad that's not what this is.

_________________
Image
Listening to most often lately:
Josh Groban ~ "You Raise Me Up"
David Archuleta ~ "Joy to the World"
Whitney Houston ~ "Who Would Imagine a King"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 15, 2015 1:24 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2010 10:46 am
Posts: 4211
Location: Maryland, USA
Sotiris wrote:
Is nothing sacred, anymore? Disney has become the sell-out company.


And this is the proof that supports it:



Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 15, 2015 4:43 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 23, 2004 11:47 am
Posts: 4646
Location: UK
disneyprincess11 wrote:
Sotiris wrote:
Is nothing sacred, anymore? Disney has become the sell-out company.


And this is the proof that supports it:



I've ignored Descendants for the most part, but that clip was vile. It looks like the horrific love-child of Glee and some dreary fan-fic found on DeviantArt. I imagine a conversation like this was the impetus:

CHAIRMAN OF DISNEY CHANNEL: Okay, welcome everyone to the meeting on Untitled Disney Channel Franchise Project. First of all, I'd like to welcome to our newest team member, Joel, recently graduated with a master's degree from Harvard Business School.

EXECUTIVE 1: Hi, I'm Joel. I went to Harvard Business School but I really had a passion for movies and I spent every night watching at least one DVD! I'm so happy to be working here with you guys.

CHAIRMAN: So, the mantra is to use old characters in different ways.

EXECUTIVE 2: You mean like Chip n Dale: Rescue Rangers or Tale Spin?

CHAIRMAN: No, no, let's move away from animation. Brand extension is good, but people want something different from the animated classics.

EXECUTIVE 3: Oh, okay. How about if all the fairy-tale characters - you know, Snow White and the seven dwarfs, Pinocchio, Jiminy Cricket, Captain Hook, the Wicked Stepmother, Rapunzel - all got banished from Fairy-tale Land and ended up in a glum, run-down New England township?

EXECUTIVE 2: Good idea, but we've done that for ABC. It's called Once Upon a Time. We've recently had great success putting in Frozen characters, so we're planning to put even more of our most popular fairy-tale characters in - Merida, King Arthur, Shrek, the Ugly Duckling.

EXECUTIVE 1: It's a good idea, though. I love Shrek.

ALL: Yes, we all do. One of Disney's greats.

CHAIRMAN: Yes, I agree.

EXECUTIVE 3: Yeah. Hey, I know. What about making it about the kids of the Disney princes and princesses?

EXECUTIVE 4: Oh, another idea. What about have them go to high school and have to face the Disney villains' children?

EXECUTIVE 2: What, like they're the bullies?

EXECUTIVE 5: Sorry, that would be repetitive in theme in my opinion. Wouldn't Cinderella tell her son not to let people make him clean up after them?

EXECUTIVE 2: I was about to say. If I were Cinderella, I'd tell him to have courage and be kind, but not that kind.

EXECUTIVE 1: I know! Let's make the villains' children want to be accepted and find redemption. They may have to defy their parents in the process!

CHAIRMAN: I like it. That'd add an edginess to it but also a strong moral backbone. You'd please both Republicans and Democrats.

EXECUTIVE 2: But what about different cultures? There's a reason why we don't want them to see that movie with the rabbit in it...

EXECUTIVE 4: What? Roger Rabbit?

EXECUTIVE 2: No, the one with, you know, the fox, and the bear...the ones who we say were created for the log flume.

EXECUTIVE 4: Oh, Song of the South? My grandma in Texas loves that movie!

CHAIRMAN: Okay, you're fired for mentioning the movie that must not be named.

EXECUTIVE 4: Drat.

(SECURITY PERSONNEL drag EXECUTIVE 4 from the room with force)

CHAIRMAN: And to answer the other question: colour-blind casting!

EXECUTIVE 3: I love it!

EXECUTIVE 5: We could add original songs?

CHAIRMAN: Good idea.

EXECUTIVE 1: Don't we have a library of beloved American songbook standards?

EXECUTIVE 2: We could add a remix of some of those songs too!

CHAIRMAN: Brilliant! Now let's get somebody to write it. Make sure they allow adequate product placement and scope for a possible sequel or spin-off movie. Meeting dismissed.

:huh:

_________________
-Joe

Blog | Deviantart


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 15, 2015 6:20 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 6:09 pm
Posts: 3632
This article, written as a response to yesterday's breaking news, discusses something I've long thought: the 1964 Mary Poppins is much more faithful to its source than it is ever given credit for.

http://www.theguardian.com/film/commentisfree/2015/sep/15/mary-poppins-disney-film-remake-pl-travers-book

_________________
Image
Avatar and signature are Al Hirschfeld illustrations of Julie Andrews in Star! (1968).


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 15, 2015 10:37 pm 
Offline
Limited Edition
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2007 10:19 am
Posts: 1762
Location: Portugal
disneyprincess11 wrote:
According to the BWW forums, Emily Blunt is Mary Poppins and it'll be announced soon.

I wouldn't mind it at all. She's my favourite actress and this film has a wonderful screenwriter attached. David wrote the screenplays for 'Finding Neverland', for 'Miss Pettigrew Lives for a Day' and for 'Life of Pi'.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 15, 2015 10:59 pm 
Offline
Limited Edition
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2008 11:23 pm
Posts: 1185
Location: Trondheim, Norway
Emily Blunt is an amazing actress, and just the thought of her as Mary Poppins have made me interested in seeing this movie. Also, the screenwriter are a great catch - I love "Finding Neverland"!

_________________
Favorite Disney-movies: Snow White, Cinderella, Alice in Wonderland, Sleeping Beauty, The Little Mermaid, Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, Pocahontas, The Hunchback of Notre Dame, Hercules, Mulan, Tarzan, Tangled, Frozen, Pirates, Enchanted, Prince of Persia, Tron, Oz The Great and Powerful


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Sep 15, 2015 11:26 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure

Joined: Sat May 05, 2007 2:24 pm
Posts: 2512
I'm gonna keep an open mind about this. It's a musical, it's based on one or more of Travers' original stories, so far, so good to me. :)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 16, 2015 1:43 pm 
Offline
Platinum Edition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 12:26 pm
Posts: 11070
Since this is happening regardless of what we'd want, it would be cute if Julie Andrews had a small role, maybe as a cook/maid or the bird-woman? I love little callbacks like that in re-makes. Maybe unlikely--I remember hoping the same thing for Lansbury in the B&tB re-make. Oh, well.

_________________
Image
Listening to most often lately:
Josh Groban ~ "You Raise Me Up"
David Archuleta ~ "Joy to the World"
Whitney Houston ~ "Who Would Imagine a King"


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 16, 2015 4:35 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Thu Nov 20, 2003 8:31 pm
Posts: 3294
Location: Utah
Disney's Divinity wrote:
Since this is happening regardless of what we'd want, it would be cute if Julie Andrews had a small role, maybe as a cook/maid or the bird-woman? I love little callbacks like that in re-makes. Maybe unlikely--I remember hoping the same thing for Lansbury in the B&tB re-make. Oh, well.


Julie Andrews completely retired from acting after her husband Blake Edwards passed away, I think that Anne Hathaway could have made a great Mary Poppins. But will have to see what they do with this.

_________________
"I have this tremendous energy. I just loved and love life. I love it today. I never want to die."
~Jayne Meadows Allen~


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed Sep 16, 2015 4:58 pm 
Offline
Platinum Edition

Joined: Wed Nov 09, 2005 6:30 pm
Posts: 5202
Location: Ohio, United States of America
Disney Guru wrote:
Disney's Divinity wrote:
I think that Anne Hathaway could have made a great Mary Poppins. But will have to see what they do with this.


I wouldn't mind seeing Anne Hathaway as Mary Poppins either. While I like Emily Blunt--she's quite a good actress--her singing is merely okay. Hathaway is a great actress, has a connection with Julie, and can sing quite well, so she's my choice. Laura Michelle Kelly would be wonderful, too, but I'm not sure if she's known well enough by the general public.

While this film is completely unnecessary, it seems like it's happening anyway. At least the original film will not ever be impacted due to the presence of this film. And, really, no one can hold a candle to Julie.

_________________
The Divulgations of One Desmond Leica: http://desmondleica.wordpress.com/


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Thu Sep 17, 2015 2:15 am 
Offline
Limited Edition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2005 3:28 am
Posts: 1014
Location: Surrey, BC
2099net wrote:
I think there's a problem with consistancy here. How many people on this forum have said how much they enjoyed the REMAKE of Freaky Friday?

I don't see why a remake of Mary Poppins should automatically be dismissed before anybody knows anything about it?

By all means critisise away if/when you have seen the film, but please show a little more restraint until you can make a valid critisism. No film deserves to be critisised blindly

We know very little about this film - based on the casting I would say that this is more likely to be one of those 'reimaginings' rather than a remake. I doubt for instance that it will be set in London. Do we even know for example that it will include all the famous Mary Poppins songs?

Plus, I know for a fact Disney are joining with Cameron McIntosh to create a Mary Poppins stage production. Could this rumour infact be based around a stage production? Regardless, I can't remember anyone complaining about the news that Beauty and the Beast or The Lion King were going to be mounted as stage productions when each of those were announced.

As I pointed out in another post Chicago is a film of a musical of a film of a film [*] And yet that won best picture. I don't hear anyone critisising that!

If the new Mary Poppins film is made and the film stinks then by all means complain and critisise. But give the film a fair chance and stop prejuding!


[*] Chicago (2002), Chicago - Broadway (1975), Roxy Hart (1942), Chicago (1927)
From what I read, it's not really a remake or sequel. It's Mary's other adventure. They're using the other book for this so I don't think it's really a remake.

_________________
My Growing DVD Collection!

http://www.invelos.com/DVDCollection.aspx/Pocahontas

Disneyland Trips: 09/87, 12/08

Walt Disney World Trips: 09/08, 12/09, 06/11, 09/14

Knott's Berry Farm: 09/87, 12/08


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu Sep 17, 2015 10:03 am 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2009 3:27 pm
Posts: 2648
The name of the thread should really be changed. Every source has said it's set 20 years after the film/book. Considering Walt Disney actually did consider making a sequel, this idea isn't sacrilegious.

_________________
"There are two wolves and they are always fighting. One is darkness and despair. The other is light and hope. Which wolf wins? Whichever one you feed." - Casey Newton, Tomorrowland


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  

Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 823 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 ... 42  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 28 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group