Who Made It?
Mary Poppins Returns is a sequel to Disney’s 1964 classic
Mary Poppins, which was loosely based on the Mary Poppins novels by P.L.
Travers. The film is directed by Rob Marshall (Into the Woods), and the screenplay
is written by David Magee (Finding Neverland) with Marshall and John DeLuca
assisting in writing the story.
What’s It About?
Mary Poppins Returns takes place in 1930’s London during “the
days of The Great Slump”. Since his life was changed by the magical nanny Mary
Poppins over two decades before, Michael Banks (played by Ben Wishaw) has
become an adult, living with his sister
Jane (played by Emily Mortimer), his housekeeper Ellen (played by Julie
Walters) and three children - the mature
older siblings Anabel and John (played
by Pixie Davies and Nathaneal Saleh) and more adventurous younger child Georgie
(played by Joel Dawson) . Since the death of his wife, Michael has been
struggling to pay his bills, and he now has just five days to save his family
home from the villainous banker William Wetherall Wilkins (played by Collin Firth).
Whilst walking through the park, discovers the old Banks family kite in the air
and follows it to discover Mary Poppins (played by Emily Blunt) who returns to
Banks house to look after the children. Aided by the lamplighter Jack (played
by Lin-Manuel Miranda) Mary takes Anabel, John and Georgie on a variety of fantastical adventures - including
visits to an underwater world, a music hall populated entirely by animals, and
an upside-down shop - whilst the Banks family try to find the documents which
could allow them to clear their debts.
Review
(This Review Contains Mild Spoilers)
Released in 1964, Mary Poppins became one of the most iconic
films in the Disney canon, winning several Oscars (and receiving a coveted Best
Picture nomination).. Watching it today, it is not hard to see why it became so
successful. The film is undoubtedly flawed - the characters are flat by modern
standards, and many of the scenes go on for a very long time without advancing
the relatively thin and simplistic story. However, these issues are minor in
comparison to the timeless messages, elaborate special effects and inescapably
catchy songs. Most importantly, the movie has a unique and magical atmosphere
which can enchant audiences of all ages. In the 55 years since its initial
release, Mary Poppins has inspired a long-running stage adaptation and even a
film about how Walt Disney brought it to life. Given its enduring popularity, it
is not surprising that Disney have opted to make a sequel, but the first film sets
an impossibly high bar for Mary Poppins Returns. Mary Poppins Returns is not
able to clear this, but it still manages to be a very good followup to the much-loved
original.
It is no surprise to learn that the story of Mary Poppins Returns
sticks closely to the template of the original. The Banks family are dealing
with a crisis, causing Mary to fly in and look after the children. She takes them
on a variety of adventures, including one which takes place in an animated
world, and one involving an eccentric relative with a strange condition. After the children cause chaos in the bank, they
run away and get treated to a musical number by Mary’s sidekick and his
workmates. Eventually, the story ends with the Banks family enjoying a
high-flying celebration outdoors. Many of the memorable elements from the first
movie also return to add to the nostalgic appeal. The talking parrot on Mary’s
umbrella gets a larger role, and Admiral Boom is still firing cannons to mark
the hour, although his timing is not as reliable as it used to be. In addition,
we get a wide variety of smaller Easter eggs, and spotting them provides Mary
Poppins fans with an additional pleasure. For all the callbacks to the
original, there are enough changes to help Mary Poppins Returns feel like a continuation
of the Banks Family story, rather than a full-on retread. One of the highlights is the
depiction of London. Whilst the original Mary Poppins was filmed entirely on
soundstages, with matte paintings used in the background, Mary Poppins Returns provides
us with a detailed world where Mary can work her signature magic. The exaggeration
of the first film is mostly discarded in favour of making a relatively
authentic depiction of London as it was in the 1930s. There are some
anachronistic touches (Miranda’s patter during one song is pretty close to rapping,
and we see several lamplighters perform modern BMX-style stunts on their bicycles
during one sequence) but this generally is a successful depiction of a London
which is grey and impoverished, but with magic and adventure nearer than anyone
expects...
The one advantage this film has over the original is the
characterisation. In the first film, Mr Banks was probably the only fully
developed and realistic character. Originally Michael and Jane Banks were
typical cute children looking for a respite from their rigid lifestyle, but
they have developed into interesting characters here. Michael has been pursuing
his dreams of being an artist, but his recent loss has forced him to grow up rapidly
and find a job in order to raise money for his children. Michael is struggling
to preserve his sense of childlike wonder in an inhospitable world, and this
plays a key role in his growing frustration with the chaos which Mary always
brings. His arc could have easily been a repeat of Mr Banks’ evolution in the
first movie, but it genuinely feels unique. Meanwhile, Jane is following in her
mother’s footsteps, running a charity to look after the poor and unemployed. Whereas
the first film played Winifred Bank’s suffragette status for laughs, this one
generally takes Jane’s activism seriously, and is all the better for it. The
children avoid being annoying, with an intriguing contrast between Anabel and
John (who had to grow up too fast) and Georgie, who is still unaffected by the
pressures of adult life. As in the first film, Mary and her sidekick are
relatively two-dimensional characters, primarily existing to generate change in
the Banks family. However, they are engaging and charismatic enough to inspire
and engage us, and they do an excellent job of promoting the incredible worlds
which they are able to create. The story is stronger than the first film, but it
is still a secondary element at best. The race to save 17 Cherry Tree Lane adds
a welcome degree of urgency and allows the film to be a bit more focused. There
is still plenty of padding, but the common threads linking the songs and
fantasy sequences are stronger this time around. However, for every improvement,
there is an unnecessary or pointless addition. The presence of an outright
villain is understandable given the more dramatic storyline, but Wilkins is not
interesting or threatening enough to please those who believe that the issues
in the Banks family provide enough conflict for the film. Meanwhile, Jane’s activism
is discarded in order to establish a romantic relationship with Jack. The two
make a lovely couple, but the decision to put them together feels forced.
The two things which made the original Mary Poppins such an
iconic film are the fantasy sequences and the songs. The fantasy sequences here
are pretty impressive, taking advantage of the leaps in technology which have occurred
over the last five decades. Mary makes
bathtime fun by taking the children on an underwater adventure, where they meet
whales and giant ships. She then turns the paintings on a ceramic vase into an animated
world populated by animals. The hand-drawn animation which made the “Jolly Holiday”
sequence so iconic is emulated in impressive fashion here, with CGI being used
to enhance painted backgrounds and sketchy hand-drawn animals reminiscent of
the 60’s style of animation. However, as in the first film, the simplest effects
are the best. Little moments of magic, such as Mary pulling a giant parasol out
of a sink and disappearing into a bath, are even more impressive than the grand
special effects sequences which follow. There are two big action scenes, which
are a risk in a generally charming and old-fashioned film. In the Doulton Bowl
sequence, Ananabel and Jon must rescue Georgie from a villainous wolf with a
remarkable resemblance to Wilkins. The chase scene which follows is fairly
weak, with Wolf Wilkins’s creepy facial expressions being the most notable
thing about it. Conversely, the climax, which features Mary and Jack’s lamplighter
friends invading Big Ben in order to literally turn back time, is genuinely
creative and engaging. The new set pieces and effects lack the hand-crafted
charm of the ones in the original, but they are still entertaining enough to feel
genuinely timeless
The songs are written by composer-songwriter duo Marc
Shaiman and Scott Wittman, best-known for creating the soundtrack to Hairspray.In
addition to following in the footsteps of the first film, they have to compete
with a growing number of recent musical hits, including Frozen, The Greatest
Showman and A Star is Born. However, whilst these used contemporary musical
styles to appeal to modern audiences, the soundtrack to Mary Poppins Returns is
defiantly old-fashioned, consisting of ballads and jaunty uptempo numbers which
would not be out of place in the musicals of the 1930s. The nine new songs
written for Mary Poppins Returns all serve as direct substitutes for the numbers
from the original, staying close to the Mary Poppins formula. To give a couple
of examples, Jack’s signature song, “Underneath the Lovely London Sky” takes
the place of “ Chim Chim In Nee”, (The theme tune of Dick Van Dyke’s lovable chimney
sweep Bert) , whilst “Royal Doulton Music Hall” and “A Cover Is Not the Book” provide
the same music-hall inspired entertainment as “Jolly Holiday” and “Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious”.
Elements of the original score make their way into the movie, and concluding
song “Nowhere to go but up” also contains
lines alluding to a couple of the old favourites. As the original Mary Poppins
contained one of the greatest Disney soundtracks of all time, the new songs are
fighting a losing battle and generally fail to match the iconic status of the
original tunes. For instance, whilst “Trip A Little Light Fantastic” contains intricate
lyrics with plenty of rhyming slang, it lacks the call-and-response charm and
energy which made “Step in Time” such an enjoyable song. However, they have
plenty of merit on their own terms. “Can You Imagine That?” is probably the
catchiest number, whilst “A Cover Is Not the Book” adds a surprising amount of
sauciness to this incredibly wholesome world (perfect for a music hall pastiche).
Overall, the strongest addition is easily “The Place Where Lost Things Go”.
This simple but lovely ballad allows the Banks children to come to terms with
the loss of their mother, and a later reprise is one of the emotional
highlights of the film. None of the songs from Mary Poppins Returns will be a
major chart hit like “Let It Go”, “This Is Me” or “Shallow”, but that was never
their intention, and they provide decent entertainment for the duration of the
movie.
The cast for Mary Poppins Returns is incredibly impressive,
but their performances are a mixed bag. Ben Wishaw, rapidly becoming one of
Britian’s national treasures, probably gives the best performance in the film, capturing
Michael Banks’ struggle to adjust to his difficult circumstances and keeping
him sympathetic even as his seemingly hopeless situation begins to make him
angry and frustrated. Emily Blunt starts out strict and aloof, but it does not
take long for her to bring out Mary’s playfulness, and she captures the unique appeal
of this iconic character. Davies, Saleh and Dawson do a decent job bringing the
Banks children to life, whilst Emily Mortimer is lively if underused as Jane
Banks . Hamilton creator Lin-Manuel Miranda brings a lot of charm and
likeability to his first major film role as Jack. His London accent is not very
accurate, but he never forces it too much, so it is a lot better than Dick Van
Dyke’s infamous “Cockney” accent from the original. For those who enjoy terrible accents, you don’t
have to look too far. In the role of Mary’s relative Topsy, (whose repair shop
has a habit of turning upside down), Meryl Streep provides a ridiculously thick
and wobbly “Eastern European” accent which plays to all the stereotypes associated
with the region. She is not the only big-name star who wastes their talents in
this movie. Colin Firth provides a villainous version of his signature posh
persona, but Wilkins is an incredibly flat villain, a stereotypical greedy banker
with little screentime and few unique traits. Julie Walters is barely given
anything to do, which is a tremendous disappointment considering her talent and
experience. However, there are still some memorable supporting characters. Veteran
actor David Warner is having a lot of fun as Admiral Boom, whilst Kobna
Holdbrook-Smith is likeable and amusing as Wilkins’s kind-hearted henchman Frye.
Dick Van Dyke turns up at the end in a memorable cameo as the elderly bank
owner Dawes (son of the decrepit Dawes Sr. from the first film, and uncle of Wilkins),
with his scene providing a touching reminder that the childhood magic promoted
by Mary Poppins can have some incredible long term effects. Meanwhile, Angela
Lansbury plays a balloon lady whose magical balloons are at the heart of the
closing scenes. Lansbury is as lively as ever, but it is impossible to dispute
that her scenes would have a greater impact if Julie Andrews played the role as
was originally intended.
Verdict
Like the iconic original, Mary Poppins Returns is hard to
judge by conventional standards. Technically, it is probably superior to the first
Mary Poppins - the story is tighter and more engaging and the characters are
generally better developed. However, the sequel lacks a lot of the spontaneity and
novelty which made the original so special, and there are too many flaws
and deficiencies in the narrative to compensate for this. That said, Mary Poppins
Returns is still a good film, with excellent messages, appealing characters and
impressive special effects. Therefore, audiences should check it out, regardless
of their familiarity with the original. Mary Poppins Returns will not become a
genre-defining classic like the first Mary Poppins film, but it is one of the
better films from Disney’s often inconsistent live-action division, and people
will be able to enjoy it for decades to come.
