• Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.You can use your Twitter or Facebook account to sign up, or register directly.

Mary Poppins Sequel in the works

Sped2424

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
I may be saying something blasphemous here but there was very little about Mary
2. The Songs. Not a single song was good (the final song was "OK"). None of these songs had you singing as you left the theater. Where were the songs of the same caliber as "Supercalifragilisticexpealidocious," "Let's Go Fly A Kite," and "Spoonful of Sugar?" Every song was just plain bad IMO.

4. Miranda... I like the guy. His forced accent was awful though.
Ugh...I hate writing this because I REALLY had high hopes for this and Mary Poppins is my #1 favorite Disney movie. I heard Emily Blunt was cast and there was "no way this could be bad!" Such a letdown.
Blasphemous indeed. If you can hear trip a little light and feel no joy I don't know what to tell you! Also hating a forced accent in a poppins movie???????
 

Sirwalterraleigh

Well-Known Member
Advertisement
Except it isn't. A reboot happens to rekindle a long dead franchise, Poppins never died.
I think we are arguing semantics...54 years doesn’t imply a certain state of “rigor”??

I like the movie...it’s almost the same as the original...we can both like it for different reasons and disagree on other finer points
 

Rich Brownn

Well-Known Member
I love, love, loved this movie. It’s the exact film the world needs right now. However, I feel like there is a pretty significant plot hole here:

What happened to the bowl???
Topsy said to pick it up next week and it would be fixed. Now, if the kids can remember how to show Michael where that alley is....
 

erasure fan1

Well-Known Member
The problem with this...as with all things disney...is it’s another remake.

And that is a huge problem because it’s done by a management not looking to stay around...so the don’t care.

To be fair to Poppins...60 Years is the right time for a reboot. Not 15, 20 or....38....cough
Yes 60yrs is a good length of time for a reboot/remake. Of course I still have no real desire to see this but I give it the most slack of the reboot/remakes.
 

AJH219

Well-Known Member
Of course I still have no real desire to see this but I give it the most slack of the reboot/remakes
To be honest, I didn't either. I only went because my mom and sister wanted to see it. But I am so glad I gave it a chance. If you go in with an open mind and with understand it won't be like the original, and isn't trying to be, you'll love it.
 

WDWFREAK53

Well-Known Member
Blasphemous indeed. If you can hear trip a little light and feel no joy I don't know what to tell you! Also hating a forced accent in a poppins movie???????
Haha...ok, sure...I'll give you the accent one... DVD's was awful as well. (But even Emily Blunt's accent in A Cover Is Not a Book is way over the top. Julie Andrew's never really stood out like that)
Just to see if I was just completely wrong, I decided to give the soundtrack a listen today.

Underneath the Lovely London Sky. Ughhh..
A Cover Is Not a Book. I couldn't make it through that one. The beginning is fine...the chorus is fine...but that whole "rap" just goes on for too long and it's too hard to even make out what they are saying.
Turning Turtle? Again...couldn't make it through that a second time.
The Place Where Lost Things Go. Meh
Trip a Little Light Fantastic is probably the only one that I actually even liked but even then, doesn't compare to Let's Go Fly a Kite, Supercali..., Spoonful of Sugar, Chim Chim Chireee....
Nowhere to Go But Up. This one is the most "Poppins" song of all of them.

So, after a second listen, I still stand by my assessment.
 

orky8

Well-Known Member
Yeah...it’s a reboot...to put it succinctly.

And that is an alarming trend for Disney and no groundwork Bob

BUT...in this case it works because it’s been so long since they did the original. I like it for that reason.

Doing a live lion king...and Aladdin...and treasure planet?? Not so much. And to say nothing of outer space 😎
My showing had previews for 5 movies, 3 of which were Disney. All the Disney ones were remakes. Feels like a company that has lost its creative mojo. Although it’s felt like that for a long time for us park lovers.

As to the movie, I thoroughly enjoyed it, but agree with others that the songs are not memorable.
 

erasure fan1

Well-Known Member
To be honest, I didn't either. I only went because my mom and sister wanted to see it. But I am so glad I gave it a chance. If you go in with an open mind and with understand it won't be like the original, and isn't trying to be, you'll love it.
It for sure won't be a movie I see in the theater but it will probably be a rental.
 

Rich Brownn

Well-Known Member
I think the issue people have with the songs is they lyrics are a bit more complicated than the original. The music is certainly memorable. But when the Sherman Bros. wrote songs they tended to keep the lyrics simple and often repeated within a chorus making it easy to remember. Take "A Spoonful of Sugar". In the chorus the phase 'medicine go down" is repeated 3 times, followed by 'Just a spoonful of sugar' again and then 'the medicine go down'. In the sequel the lyrics don't repeat as much so its harder to recall.
 

TheOriginalTiki

Well-Known Member
I think the point of the Shermans having really simplistic, repeating lyrics is spot on. Returns songs are far more non-linear and almost none of them rely on a traditional "verse/chorus" structure. The original songs might be more classic, but I also think the original had more filler in its soundtrack...specifically the three songs introducing us to the Banks family. The two "terrible parents" songs and the "we want a perfect nanny" song are both fine but really slow the pace of the first film to a crawl. The themes of the first film creep up on you, the themes of Returns are loud and in your face for all to see. It's an interesting crossroads. The songs in Returns are where most of the depth comes in, not in the subtlety of the storytelling which I admit there's not much of.

Step in Time is obviously a far more iconic sequence than "Trip a Little Light", but if I'm being honest I think I like the song even more from a sheer creative writing point of view. Step in Time is literally just "do something...step in time!" over and over again. Trip a Little Light has highs, lows, really fun wordplay, and some fantastic choreography and set piece moments in its own right.

Lin Manuel Miranda is freaking adorable and I love his bad accent. It's a total throwback to the Bert performance and was a bold choice. I can see how it can rub people the wrong way, but I personally think the inclusion of the bad cockney made the film feel even more authentic to the original.

There's definitely a few sequences that don't hold up that well. I'm not a big fan of "Can You Imagine That". It's a bit of a CG overload and oddly more of a send up of Bedknobs and Broomsticks than Poppins. Streep is by far my least favorite part of the film. That whole scene feels like a total diversion and the weird translvanian accent feels oddly out of place.

The animated sequence also doesn't hold a candle to the chalk drawing scenes in the original. Nice to see 2D animation in a Disney movie again but I'll agree that it's the one moment in the film where Blunt's cockney goes a bit overboard. It's not a bad sequence by any means, but goes on too long especially with the action scene at the end. That being said as a huge Hamilton fan Lin's "Dirty Rascal" rap was a highlight.

The stuff with the bank is also very much not on point with the original. Colin Firth is another part of the movie that doesn't feel needed. I think the film would have played better if he wasn't inherently a villain character but more in line with the original film's bankers as well meaning but cold. That being said...when the Feed the Birds story gets brought up...INSTANT tears on my end haha. ;)

One of the things I find delightful about the movie that no one's talking about are the bit part characters from the original who get expanded on. Specifically Ellen the housekeeper and Admirable Boom. Boom's arc with Big Ben in particular felt really special and in line with the spirit of Travers and the original film. Loved the magical realism of the "turn back time" sequence. I also thought Ben Whipshaw was a particular highlight as Michael. He showed a wide range of emotions and in some shots looks almost uncanny to the original kid, just grown up. Love, love, LOVE all his interactions with Mary. His song in the attic early on is one of my favorites. It's like a better, more fully fleshed out version of Maurice's song from Beauty and the Beast 2016.

Blunt herself is simply fantastic. What a great combination of the writing for a character being spot on and an actress coming along to make said writing absolutely leap off the page. Overall it's definitely not a perfect film, but at the very least I think it's FAR AND AWAY the best of the post-Alice in Wonderland remake/sequel trend Disney has been on. At its core, I think it's basically "The Force Awakens" but for Poppins. A new story that takes an almost beat-by-beat approach to recreating the original. On that level I think it's just as much a successful piece of pure escapism entertainment as that was for Star Wars fans.
 

fractal

Well-Known Member
I had the chance to see MPR yesterday. As a fan of the original, I enjoyed this film. There were several moments that struck me emotionally even if I can't tell you why, but the lump in the throat and the swollen eyes did appear. I am in agreement with most that the music was much less memorable and vocally, Emily Blunt is no Julie Andrews (not really close). But the songs did have some "heft" to them and helped serve as part of the narrative.

Visually, the film was spectacular - even the scene with Meryl Streep (by far the worst and unnecessary) was at least interesting to look at. The animation, perhaps because we've been saturated with so much CGI over the last 10 years, seems fresh and new and leaped off the screen.

I didn't like Ben Whishaw's portrayal of Michael. It seemed very one dimensional and I found it hard to connect with him; certainly harder than I should have. Same with Jane, who basically just smiled through the entire movie. Manuel did I fine job with selling Jack and Emily Blunt owned the screen when ever she appeared. I thought the children actors did an especially fine job.

The ending got a bit clunky but seeing Van D-yke brought a smile to my face.

Overall, I'm glad I went to view MPR on the big screen and would give it a thumbs up.
 
Last edited:

Princess Leia

Well-Known Member
Hoping to see this either next weekend or the weekend after that. It really looks magical, and I'm still holding out on listening to the soundtrack until I see the movie.
 

Magenta Panther

Well-Known Member
I think the point of the Shermans having really simplistic, repeating lyrics is spot on. Returns songs are far more non-linear and almost none of them rely on a traditional "verse/chorus" structure. The original songs might be more classic, but I also think the original had more filler in its soundtrack...specifically the three songs introducing us to the Banks family. The two "terrible parents" songs and the "we want a perfect nanny" song are both fine but really slow the pace of the first film to a crawl.
Uh, okay, gotta disagree here. HOW do they "slow the pace of the film to a crawl", exactly? They are vital. They help establish character. "The Life I Lead" tells us the mindset of Mr. Banks. "Sister Suffragette" tells us the mindset of Mrs. Banks. And "The Perfect Nanny" is the "I Want" song of the film. (As was "Over The Rainbow" for The Wizard of Oz and "I'm Wishing" for Snow White). I really doubt those songs made audiences squirm with impatience, except for those parts of the audience wearing diapers and those who need constant stimulation in order to pay attention (intellectual infants, as it were). Those songs are leitmotifs of superior quality. I cannot fathom why you find them tedious.

But I agree with you about the simplistic lyrics of the Sherman songs. They are clean, spare and to the point, yet full of imagery. That's good lyric writing. Poor lyric writing uses too many words to get the point across, and a lot of modern songs have this flaw. Which is why they suck.
 

Ripken10

Well-Known Member
Too early to "track" if Mary can overtake the #1 movie all time to never reach #1? Sing holds title at 270 million. After yesterday, it sits with 114 million after 14 days, which is already 95th all time (this of course assumes it never reaches #1 as it inches closer to aquaman each weekend, which I think is a safe bet?). It is still 73 million behind Sing after 14 days, but one would think it will make up ground. It is 7million ahead of A Star Is Born after 14 days, which made 201 million overall (currently 7th overall, only 1 million from 6th).

I expect Aquaman to keep the #1 this weekend, but could it get interesting next weekend? If Mary keeps the slow descent some project, it could be really close between the two for #1 next weekend, possibly ruining any chance at this record. Curious what some of the resident experts think (@WhatJaneSays)
 
Last edited:

WhatJaneSays

Well-Known Member
Too early to "track" if Mary can overtake the #1 movie all time to never reach #1? Sing holds title at 270 million. After yesterday, it sits with 114 million after 14 days, which is already 95th all time (this of course assumes it never reaches #1 as it inches closer to aquaman each weekend, which I think is a safe bet?). It is still 73 million behind Sing after 14 days, but one would think it will make up ground. It is 7million ahead of A Star Is Born after 14 days, which made 201 million overall (currently 7th overall, only 1 million from 6th).

I expect Aquaman to keep the #1 this weekend, but could it get interesting next weekend? If Mary keeps the slow descent some project, it could be really close between the two for #1 next weekend, possibly ruining any chance at this record. Curious what some of the resident experts think (@WhatJaneSays)
You're right about it being to early for proper tracking. Late December releases are often the bane of box office statistics! You never know for sure how they shake out until a month later. This coming weekend and next week should be a better indicator of MPRs long term performance.

Sing is going to be hard record to break, but it is doable with the right combination of events. There is a lack of competition for either MPR or Aquaman for a nice long while; they are both likely to still drop in the rankings but stay more stable. If she breaks more on the The Greatest Showman (also never hit #1) side with low consistent drops, Disney might be more inclined to push for a rally around awards time to extend it's range of good legs. I still only rank it beating out Sing for that spot at 10-15%, provided MPR goes the most predictable drop %; could be a lot higher if the loss week-to-week stays really low.
 
Top Bottom