PrincessNelly_NJ
Well-Known Member
I believe she wanted no Americans to work in the creative development portion of the stage show but they could act in it.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Saving Mr. Banks Trailer
- Thread starter peterpanic74
- Start date
I believe she wanted no Americans to work in the creative development portion of the stage show but they could act in it.
ExtinctJenn
Well-Known Member
Here's hoping that the film portrays what really happened vs. how to make Walt look good. Though, being that it's not "The Walt Disney Story" or a film about his life in anyway and is really ultimately about Travers and her book, I think there's a good chance it'll be more non-fiction than fiction. 
Tonka's Skipper
Well-Known Member
Still American in the show I would be very surprised if there were no Americans in the production.
The more I am reading here and other places this morning I am getting the idea Mrs. Travers was more upset she couldn't have her own way in everything.
Tonka's Skipper
Well-Known Member
Here's hoping that the film portrays what really happened vs. how to make Walt look good. Though, being that it's not "The Walt Disney Story" or a film about his life in anyway and is really ultimately about Travers and her book, I think there's a good chance it'll be more non-fiction than fiction.
I am still waiting to hear what Walt did wrong? Why does something have to be done to make him look good?
AKK
ExtinctJenn
Well-Known Member
The concept being that they could spin the film to make it look like ultimately she loved his version of her book and they went on to be besties and everything was roses when truly that is not how it went at all.
Tonka's Skipper
Well-Known Member
OK, that makes sense, but the trailer certainty showed that there were issues, Why would you think they would suddenly decide to change the ending?
I was thinking that it is well known the lady was extremely hard to work with and didn't really get along with anyone, including the publisher of her books. This was not a sweet little old lady, who was pushed around by Walt, she was very able to push back!. Hopefully this will be shown as well!
Of course the Movie rights and the royalties from the film made her a very rich woman.
AKK
I was thinking that it is well known the lady was extremely hard to work with and didn't really get along with anyone, including the publisher of her books. This was not a sweet little old lady, who was pushed around by Walt, she was very able to push back!. Hopefully this will be shown as well!
Of course the Movie rights and the royalties from the film made her a very rich woman.
AKK
ExtinctJenn
Well-Known Member
I think the honest answer to THAT question is... because it wouldn't be the first time a "true story" was changed to have a happy ending. LOL!
Tonka's Skipper
Well-Known Member
I think the honest answer to THAT question is... because it wouldn't be the first time a "true story" was changed to have a happy ending. LOL!
OK.That is one statement I cannot argue with, your 100% correct!
Sped2424
Well-Known Member
\
Sorry but not totally correct, she said julie andrews made a nice Poppins but was directed wrong and they decided to dress her up too pretty. Also If you look at her last will in testament she only granted the rights for a stage show of Mary Poppins if there were no american writers involved or anyone from film production either. Clearly she hated that process, and if you were going for complete correctness then after seeing the film at its premiere she went up to Walt Disney after the film had ended and said that he had to get rid of the animated sequences to which he responded word for word "Pamela that ship has sailed" at least according to her. And you should check your facts as Disney did try to pursue other sequels for the film but she rebuffed on every offer. Here is a quote "She would never allow another Disney adaption even though they made many requests for sequels". What you forget is the film came out two years before his death meaning afterwards Walt wasn't in charge anymore so the whole sequel philosophy does not really play out here.
DDuckFan130
Well-Known Member
I was soo skeptical when Hanks was cast as Robert Langdon because I pictured someone like Hugh Jackman in the role. But Hanks convinced me and was amazing as usual. I'm pretty sure the same will happen with this movie, especially because he was very passionate in playing the role.
828tnt
Well-Known Member
http://news.moviefone.com/2013/07/11/saving-mr-banks-trailer/
i have to admit the first 15 seconds of this gave me chills. "Chim Cim Chir-ee" is my favorite work by the sherman brothers, and likely my favorite disney song. (btw, there's a great documentary out there about them on the doc channel and with walt were simply one of the most magical components of what really made the disney brand so timeless- imo and i'm really no music buff )
the rest of the trailers makes me that much more excited to see this film. but there were times when i wanted to scream at the screen when tom hanks spoke. there's a bit of an accent he always has, no matter his role, that's a bit folksy, southernish, whiney, tom hanks kinda thing (mouth open yet smiling, kinda saying eeehhh?) that is very different from anything i've ever heard from Walt.
i digress. this one may be a no win for hanks. perhaps this is one of many reasons we have never seen anyone portray Walt on screen?
but what a line: "who wouldn't want to go to disneyland with Walt Disney?"
i have to admit the first 15 seconds of this gave me chills. "Chim Cim Chir-ee" is my favorite work by the sherman brothers, and likely my favorite disney song. (btw, there's a great documentary out there about them on the doc channel and with walt were simply one of the most magical components of what really made the disney brand so timeless- imo and i'm really no music buff
) the rest of the trailers makes me that much more excited to see this film. but there were times when i wanted to scream at the screen when tom hanks spoke. there's a bit of an accent he always has, no matter his role, that's a bit folksy, southernish, whiney, tom hanks kinda thing (mouth open yet smiling, kinda saying eeehhh?) that is very different from anything i've ever heard from Walt.
i digress. this one may be a no win for hanks. perhaps this is one of many reasons we have never seen anyone portray Walt on screen?
but what a line: "who wouldn't want to go to disneyland with Walt Disney?"
Tonka's Skipper
Well-Known Member
Sorry you may want to go back and reread my posts and fact check!
1. As I stated in my 1st post she liked Julie Andrews as Mary Poppins............I do not know about the dress comment, but one of her problems with the film was is was to cute, which would go along with the dress thing.
2. Her will has nothing legal backing it up as Disney has had Mary Poppins on the Broadway stage for years. Just because she may have put it in her will does not mean it had any legality behind it. I know the play had American playwrights. I do not think any one from the film worked on it.
3. Yes she hated the whole film process, but just because she didn't get her way, doesn't mean Disney or Walt did anything wrong. The contract clearly stated she had some control of content until the film was released. Walt's statement when Mrs. Travers told him all that was wrong with the film, and asked when do they start cutting, (she especially did not like the penguins), Walt said,*we are not changing a thing*, and rightfully so!
4. I never said Disney never wanted to do a sequel, I said part of the reason they never did sequels is Walt did not like doing sequels. They may indeed have asked her to work on another sequel after his death, when he was not there to stop it.
You have to remember this was not some sweet little old lady, she was well known to be hard to work with, very demanding and was not push over. Her books publisher has stated that many times. She signed a contract with Disney, with limited control and became very frustrated when Walt would not just give into her wims.
She did warm up (some) to the film in later years, as she could not argue with the world acclaim of it and the Mary Poppins characters and the increase in book sales. Not to mention it made her a very wealthy woman.
AKK
Monkee Girl
Well-Known Member
I had no idea this movie was about Disney or that it was coming out. After seeing the trailor, I was very impressed. I love 'behind the scene' movies like this. Finding Neverland was another one I liked. I thought Tom Hanks looked great and sounded close to Disney. Now, I never spoke with him in person so I can only go by small clippits of things. But I thought that little strain he does with his voice was dead on. Can't wait to see the film.
Nemo14
Well-Known Member
The father in the Mary Poppins movie.
Monkee Girl
Well-Known Member
Mr. Banks is referring to the father in Mary Poppins. According to the trailer, Disney is saying she sent a nanny to save the children when in reality, she was sent to save the father. Therefore "Saving Mr. Banks."
Sped2424
Well-Known Member
1. We both mentioned that I just elaborated further what she found wrong with the portrayal of the character in the film.
2.Once again did I mention anything of legality? Nope, I was merely referencing that she was clearly affected by working with american's and the film industry that she didn't want them anywhere near the musical, which is 100 percent true. Also if the contract didn't have any legal standing then the Sherman brothers, who were still around writing mind you, would have written more songs for the play, but they simply were excluded based of the contents of her will.
3.She hated the film process simply because it took creative control out of her hands, that would be stifling for any author who wishes to see a faithful representation of their movie. If you look at my post not once will you see the word, she was angry she didn't get her way so I don't know who you are arguing against. Also in your original statement you claimed that after the premiere "Walt reminded her that her rights to change the movie ended at the premier and said I am not changing anything" Which if we are going to be historically accurate is not true. If you don't believe me here are some sites you should check out (x) (x) (x).
4. You clearly stated in response to me posting that Disney had wanted to purse sequels due to Walt's philosophy and he moved on to other films, that it was not simply true, here look "Yes they did not do more work together, but that was because Walt never liked to do follow up films" which was not the case that I was making as I mentioned she did not want anything else to do with the "Disney company" which is completely accurate.
I know plenty about the kind of woman P l Travers was, she was a brilliant author and wanted to see a faithful version to her piece of work on the screen which she had every right to and to make that happen she was not afraid to step on some toes. All of which you are stating has nothing to do with the original statement I made, which you seemingly "Corrected".