Mary Poppins Returns

[RyGuy]

Wait RyGuy, I'm confused at what you mean by they will remember it fonder than it was. If the adults will forget, you mean they will remember it better than it actually was? I don't see how that fits with the line.

Ha! Fair question. I don’t think I explained it well. What I meant was they would remember but assume that they were rememembering it better than it was. Like where Jane says something to Michael like, “Those things, with Mary Poppins, they didn’t really happen, did they?” It’s as if she remembers, but assumes her imagination as a child made the memory better than it was. I think that was the point the balloon lady was making about the adults always forgetting. Indeed, during “Nowhere to Go But Up” Michael finally puts it all together and concludes it WAS all real and exclaims, “I remember!!” as if he has finally recognized no, it wasn’t his imagination.

Does that make more sense, Duster?

[Disney Duster]

Oh, ok yes! I didn't read the spoilers, but yes that makes sense!

[Farerb]

I thought I’d like it. I do love the original. But it was quite a disappointment. For a film which is – supposedly – put together by lovers of the 1964 original, it is deeply thematically out of step with it. This is a film made by someone who evidently regards the cartoon penguins as more integral to the first feature than Feed the Birds or the character arc of George Banks.

Ben Whishaw’s Michael is a pretty drab and uninteresting figure when compared to his father. David Tomlinson’s George Banks was subtle; a delusional, narcissistic and yet fundamentally decent man, an antagonist for whom we were invited to sympathise with. Michael Banks lacks his father’s depths; we are told he is an artist, yet his vocation never matters and his art never appears. He is too obviously decent to start with for his arc to have any resonance, and his anger at his children is so clearly unusual for him that the whole exercise seems rather unnecessary.

The use of some of the original’s songs in the underscore is nice, especially when it uses some of the lesser-known pieces in the appropriate places (The Life I Lead, The Perfect Nanny, even Fidelity Fiduciary Bank), but the approach serves to underline how confused the writing is when Feed the Birds inevitably appears. It makes its cameo alongside Van Dyke’s, in a scene where Mr Dawes reveals that Michael’s “tuppence” of the 1964 film has accrued sufficient interest to handily resolve this sequel’s plot. This clumsy exposition is not only rather thin gruel to give to Van Dyke, but also comically misses the entire point of the tuppence in the first film. After all, young Michael Banks wants to give it to the Bird Woman rather than the bank, a choice that Mary Poppins explicitly presents as the right one, framing it as a choice between compassion and shallow selfishness. This film thus sides with the villains of the original. It’s clearly an accident, but it’s not an isolated incident. Mary Poppins Returns also sees the adult Jane compare Michael to their father when Whishaw is shouting angrily; this is baffling, considering the fact that the story of Mary Poppins is how their father becomes a better, kinder man. That Jane would remember George Banks as otherwise is a careless error. But there is a possible explanation by the end of Returns: the Balloon Lady remarks, quite startlingly, that “of course, the grown-ups will forget by tomorrow” and Mary agrees. If this is the case, and George Banks went back to his old ways, and Michael is to go back to his, then Mary Poppins and her visits are pointless. If not, then she and the Balloon Lady are talking rubbish – either way, it doesn’t work. The story of Mary Poppins is to remember what it’s like to be a child, and to treasure the time you have with your family. It’s not the story of a fun day out that’s instantly forgotten.

Oh well!

Different strokes for different folks, I guess. I loved the film.

From what I recall, Michael gave the tuppence to his father not the bird woman. Still an act of compassion, albeit inadequate in light of his father’s impending job loss.

As for the adults will all forget by tomorrow line, I took that not to mean that they would forget what they learned so much as the whimsy of the experience - much how like Jane and Michael has hazy recollections of the wondrous things they had experienced as children but then had convinced themselves that couldn’t possibly have happened. In my mind it’s much like how you experience something as a child and you remember it as so much more wondrous than it actually was (like when I visited Griffith Observatory when I was 10 and then again when I was 23 and it wasn’t anywhere near as wondrous as I remembered it).

I always took the original Mary Poppins to be the healing of a fractured family (distracted parents and lonely children) and in this case again healing from a different kind of broken (grieving the loss of the mother separately rather than coming together).

I agree with you. The film was very disappointing and it really missed the point of the original where Mary tries to bring parents and their children closer together, instead it's about Mary beating the bad guy. Even the songs were mediocre.

[Old Fish Tale]

I agree with you. The film was very disappointing and it really missed the point of the original where Mary tries to bring parents and their children closer together, instead it's about Mary beating the bad guy. Even the songs were mediocre.

I'm afraid you completely missed the point of everything. She was there to fix the relationship between Michael and his children. I mean, it was even obvious she knew where the certificate was (she basically handed it to Georgie). If she was there to save them from homelessness, she would have left an hour later.

[D82]

Clip from "Trip A Little Light Fantastic" and featurette about the making of the musical number.

[nomad2010]

I agree with you. The film was very disappointing and it really missed the point of the original where Mary tries to bring parents and their children closer together, instead it's about Mary beating the bad guy. Even the songs were mediocre.

I'm afraid you completely missed the point of everything. She was there to fix the relationship between Michael and his children. I mean, it was even obvious she knew where the certificate was (she basically handed it to Georgie). If she was there to save them from homelessness, she would have left an hour later.

Yeah I agree. I thought this was handled incredibly well. From the kids being little adults to the emotional growth of the entire family... it was really moving.

My only issue with the film was that the music just did not stick with me at all. I really enjoyed the look and choreography of all the numbers. But I felt like a lot of them lyrically were just very oddly disjointed. I’m absolutely sure they’ll grow on me. However I don’t think any of these songs will ever be considered classics or hold a candle to the legacy of the originals. And in all fairness, that is a difficult task. But I don’t doubt that there’s someone in the industry who could’ve done a better job with them than what we ended up with. I will say the though that The Place Where the Lost Things Go is beautiful, and so emotionally complex. In a film that didn’t musically register with me, that song left an impression.

Complaints aside, everything else was lovely. And Blunt couldn’t have been a better choice. She deserves every bit of praise for playing the role with such grace and yet making it absolutely her own.

[Dr Frankenollie]

From what I recall, Michael gave the tuppence to his father not the bird woman. Still an act of compassion, albeit inadequate in light of his father’s impending job loss.

As for the adults will all forget by tomorrow line, I took that not to mean that they would forget what they learned so much as the whimsy of the experience - much how like Jane and Michael has hazy recollections of the wondrous things they had experienced as children but then had convinced themselves that couldn’t possibly have happened. In my mind it’s much like how you experience something as a child and you remember it as so much more wondrous than it actually was (like when I visited Griffith Observatory when I was 10 and then again when I was 23 and it wasn’t anywhere near as wondrous as I remembered it).

Michael does give his tuppence to his father, yes - not for it to go into a bank account, as in Returns, but as a show of compassion, as you say, for his father. It’s still clearly wrong in the film’s eyes to favour bank interest over birds. Which is why, notably, George Banks *doesn’t* put that tuppence in the bank. Considering he’s been fired and it’s nighttime, it’d be an odd move for him to do so right away. And what are the first lyrics for “Let’s Go Fly a Kite?”

“With tuppence for paper and strings,
You can have your own set of wings”

Michael’s tuppence didn’t go into a bank account, it was used to buy the materials for a kite - another act of kindness on George’s part, mirroring his son’s. But hey, I guess the kite song isn’t that famous.

[Toky]

From what I recall, Michael gave the tuppence to his father not the bird woman. Still an act of compassion, albeit inadequate in light of his father’s impending job loss.

As for the adults will all forget by tomorrow line, I took that not to mean that they would forget what they learned so much as the whimsy of the experience - much how like Jane and Michael has hazy recollections of the wondrous things they had experienced as children but then had convinced themselves that couldn’t possibly have happened. In my mind it’s much like how you experience something as a child and you remember it as so much more wondrous than it actually was (like when I visited Griffith Observatory when I was 10 and then again when I was 23 and it wasn’t anywhere near as wondrous as I remembered it).

Michael does give his tuppence to his father, yes - not for it to go into a bank account, as in Returns, but as a show of compassion, as you say, for his father. It’s still clearly wrong in the film’s eyes to favour bank interest over birds. Which is why, notably, George Banks *doesn’t* put that tuppence in the bank. Considering he’s been fired and it’s nighttime, it’d be an odd move for him to do so right away. And what are the first lyrics for “Let’s Go Fly a Kite?”

“With tuppence for paper and strings,
You can have your own set of wings”

Michael’s tuppence didn’t go into a bank account, it was used to buy the materials for a kite - another act of kindness on George’s part, mirroring his son’s. But hey, I guess the kite song isn’t that famous.

George puts the tuppence in the hands of mr Daws sr when he gets fired, runs of and tells them he will probably do all sorts of magical things...so the money does end up with the bank...He gets hired again when mr Daws sr dies of laughing and jr is left in charge of the bank(van Dycke in Returns)

[RyGuy]

Thanks, Toky.

Dr. Frankenollie I completely appreciate and respect your perspective on this film (I just have a different perspective). If my original response in any way did not indicate that, then I sincerely apologize. FWIW, I do find the whole your tuppence grew so much over the past 30 years it's enough to pay off your loan a bit farfetched, but by that point in the film, I was having so much fun I was willing to forgive it.

[Old Fish Tale]

New featurette: https://www.waltdisneystudiosawards.com ... rns/videos

It's really long too.

[D82]

^That featurette was really interesting. A new clip from "A Cover Is Not the Book" has also been released: https://twitter.com/DisneyStudios/statu ... 6139358209

[Mooky]

Mary Poppins Returns also sees the adult Jane compare Michael to their father when Whishaw is shouting angrily; this is baffling, considering the fact that the story of Mary Poppins is how their father becomes a better, kinder man. That Jane would remember George Banks as otherwise is a careless error.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Jane compares Michael to their father only once, referring to his grumpiness somewhat jokingly. Their father was a grumpy man at one point in his/their life, pointing it out doesn't seem like a sign of an emotional trauma to me. Also, earlier in the film, when Michael finds his old kite in the attic, Jane says something along the lines of "we used to love flying this kite with father", implying the kite flying at the end of the original film wasn't an isolated event and George Banks didn't revert back to his old ways.

I would say that the new film does feel like a beat-for-beat repeat of the original, but it's all done so sincerely and beautifully, with enough inventiveness to stand on its own. And God, that gorgeous hand-drawn animation...

[D82]

Clip from the beginning of the animated sequence with commentary by Rob Marshall: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=28Y8dZJAx_A

[Escapay]

Mary Poppins Returns also sees the adult Jane compare Michael to their father when Whishaw is shouting angrily; this is baffling, considering the fact that the story of Mary Poppins is how their father becomes a better, kinder man. That Jane would remember George Banks as otherwise is a careless error.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe Jane compares Michael to their father only once, referring to his grumpiness somewhat jokingly.

Michael: "Jane, have you gone completely mad? I can't afford to take on anyone else!"
Jane: "Mary Poppins isn't just anyone. Don't you see, Michael? Nobody's hiring nannies anymore. The poor woman has nowhere to go!"
Michael: "Well, neither will we by the end of the week!"
Jane: "You're so grumpy, you sound just like father."
Michael: (indignantly) "I do not!"
Jane: "Give Mary Poppins a chance, you need help just as much as she does."

While I can see how one throwaway line could be read as undoing a character's whole arc in the previous film, I don't see it that way at all. We're given a glimpse of these characters twenty years after only spending a week with them previously. Surely things have changed for them, but these characters can still get angry. It's not like Mr. Banks turned off that emotion for the rest of his life. Even though he became a kinder, more attentive father, I'm sure ole George could still get grumpy at things. Taxes. The first World War. Not having a grandchild named after him until the third one popped out.

The way I read the scene, Jane is essentially telling Michael not to be like their father was before Mary Poppins came into their lives. As you mentioned, clearly he's become a changed man and she's only referring to it somewhat jokingly. In a sibling-egging-the-other-on kind of way. "Remember how Father used to be? Don't be like that." Perhaps if Jane said that, it would be a more direct way of saying he was no longer like that, but I'd rather the audience already understand that instead of having to be told.

Albert

[disneyprincess11]

MARY POPPINS RETURNS was practically perfect in every way. It was so delightful! Even though it got really ridiculous at a couple of parts.

Emily Blunt was a great replacement for Julie Andrew. It took a while for me to get used to not seeing Andrews and once I did, she melted completely to the role. She nailed the mannerisms, expressions, and the personality. Lin Manuel Miranda was completely charming and adorable as Jack. Ben was excellent as Micheal: A right balance of warmth and strictness. Something that Christopher Robin failed to do. Emily Mortimer was lovely as Jane as well! But, Dick van Dyke and Angela Lansbury completely stole the movie. My whole audience freaked out when Dick came on. What’s so unfortunate is that Angela comes on right after Dick, so you’re hoping the balloon lady is Julie, but you’re disappointed (even though you know) that it’s not. But, still Angela was golden in the role (is she never? ) in the part that was 100% obviously written for Jules. Seeing Karen Dotrice with Emily was so much fun and I did not regret freaking out in front of my friend.

Trip A Little Light Fantastic, Nowhere to Go But Up, and the animated sequence are definitely highlights of this year in movies. Trip A Little Light Fantastic is a phenomenon and Nowhere to Go But Up was just a freaking joy. The animated sequence was so refreshing and even though some of the character designs were odd, it was beautiful.

I thought the second half of the animated sequence and the climax was a little ridiculous. What was even the point of the wolf / Banker symbolism? The fact that there’s a character just like the Banker, to the point of him having a watch (I rolled my eyes hard) is a little far-fetched to begin with. But hearing Colin Firth go crazy was fun. The climax with the Big Ben was again, ridiculous even for a Mary Poppins movie. And what was the point of Jack risking his life going in the clock when Mary eventually went up by herself and reset the clock?

Old Fish Tale, can you clear something up for me? Did Bert die? I swore Jack’s line was: Sad to say he’s gone from this world; off to explore the unknown. But, Tumblr is saying otherwise.

[Old Fish Tale]

I thought the second half of the animated sequence and the climax was a little ridiculous. What was even the point of the wolf / Banker symbolism? The fact that there’s a character just like the Banker, to the point of him having a watch (I rolled my eyes hard) is a little far-fetched to begin with. But hearing Colin Firth go crazy was fun. The climax with the Big Ben was again, ridiculous even for a Mary Poppins movie. And what was the point of Jack risking his life going in the clock when Mary eventually went up by herself and reset the clock?

That sequence made perfect sense to me. Especially because it made fantasy mirror reality (the actors who played the characters who were trying to take their house from them even voiced the animals who robbed their nursery).

Old Fish Tale, can you clear something up for me? Did Bert die? I swore Jack’s line was: Sad to say he’s gone from this world; off to explore the unknown. But, Tumblr is saying otherwise.

He didn't die. Jack said he was travelling around the world.

[Disney Duster]

I saw it and loved it. It was really great. I'm surprised it doesn't have a higher rotten tomatoes rating! Like 80's or 90's! Whatever. Emily is not quite as great as Julie was, but still a wonderful, bewitching Mary! And I loved Meryl Streep! And Michael! And Lin-Manuel's singing was so great! I had no idea from listening to Hamillton. My favorite part was the animated sequence and "Trip A Little Ligh Fantastic", but the best song to me was "The Place Where Lost Things Go".

Yes, disneyprincess11, I also wondered why Mary didn't just turn back the clock from the beginning when the other lamplighters RISKED THEIR LIVES to do it! I guess she thought they could do it their way and she wouldn't have to, but why would she let them almost die?!

[Farerb]

Yes, disneyprincess11, I also wondered why Mary didn't just turn back the clock from the beginning when the other lamplighters RISKED THEIR LIVES to do it! I guess she thought they could do it their way and she wouldn't have to, but why would she let them almost die?!

Because it's okay to let other people risk their lives to save your house. Anyway that whole 20 minutes of climax were pointless because Dick van Dijk came to let everyone know there's a Deus Ex Machina to solve everything.

[Old Fish Tale]

Yes, disneyprincess11, I also wondered why Mary didn't just turn back the clock from the beginning when the other lamplighters RISKED THEIR LIVES to do it! I guess she thought they could do it their way and she wouldn't have to, but why would she let them almost die?!

Maybe we should just assume Mary let the lamplighters climb the tower because it wasn't the first time they've turned time back. Remember: at one point, she did say "You'd think they've never done it before.". So, she only felt the need to deal with it herself when they were really running out of time and Jack said he couldn't reach the clock's hands without the ladder he had broken.

But yes, I struggled with the Big Ben sequence when I saw the film for the first time too. Because she can do everything they did. But way faster.

[JeanGreyForever]

It didn't really bother me because Mary Poppins has a tendency to not intervene until she absolutely has to. Otherwise, she lets others try and solve the situation by themselves.