Yesterday I went with my niece and great-niece to see Mary Poppins Returns. We all have fond memories of the original Mary Poppins movie and we were looking forward to seeing the new one. These are my thoughts on it, but if you want to experience it without any prejudgements, please be aware that there are spoilers in this article.
This movie has everything going for it. It has great actors; lots of old familiar ones and a few newer ones. The film involves performers interacting with cartoons (just as in the original), ensemble dance routines, and some great songs. What could possibly go wrong?
Well, I’m not sure, but my guess would be that they tried to do too much, to include too many star actors, and to add in at least one too many unnecessary scenes. It felt as though it was planned by a committee, and everyone was allowed to include their wish list. So much so, that it is a long movie. If you go with children, be aware that it lasts more than two hours.
Aside from that, though, the film seems a little dark despite some very cheery songs. It may have something to do with the dark streets of London during The Great Depression (which, oddly, is called The Great Slump), or it may be that Mary Poppins is a little severe this time around. She becomes more fun when she adopts her Cockney alter-ego in the cartoon world, but in the BBC-accented human world, she is a bit too serious.
My niece pointed out that we didn’t leave the theatre singing. We didn’t feel easily drawn into the songs, and some of them were so complex that singing along would have been impossible anyway. There were several songs that were very densely packed with a mixture of Cockney slang and more familiar words, and they went by so fast that I wasn’t able to fully appreciate them. I feel as though I need to hear them repeatedly if I am to catch all the verbal jokes and jollity. I may have to buy the soundtrack for that to happen.
I did enjoy the dance routines that involved lamplighters with ladders and bicycles. They made brilliant use of stunt bike tricks, London parks, and lighting. I also enjoyed the plot development and the principal characters. The child actors were remarkably natural and enjoyable, and casting Colin Firth as the bad guy was a stroke of genius.
There was a long sequence involving Meryl Streep that was entertaining but completely superfluous, and which left a plot detail hanging and unresolved. If I had been on that committee I would have left that out, no matter how good the performances were.
On the plus side, Lin-Manuel Miranda was entirely convincing as a Cockney, which was a big relief for me. I have never really forgiven Dick van Dyke for his terrible accent in the original. I think that although this film is good, it would make an even better Broadway show, which is where several of the performers have their professional roots.
That said, I do think you should see it. It has some great performances, songs, and scenes. If you are looking for the same light-heartedness that you felt when watching the original Mary Poppins, you may be disappointed. If, on the other hand, you want to see some great actors in some great song and dance routines, you will love this.
[Edited to reflect that Lin-Manuel Miranda did not write the songs, but was one of the principal singers.]
I saw this movie recently with a friend who was eager to see it and loved it! However, I had some of the same reservations that you did. It was very dark, and I think some of the scenes would be too scary for young children. The music was not good, was not memorable the way the tunes were in the original, and were derivative of the original. The scenes with Meryl Streep were also similar to the scenes in the original where they all flew up to the ceiling when the laughed (“I love to laugh…”), only in this one the room turns upside-down and it’s not very jolly at all. Emily Blunt was very good in her part, as were some of the others. It may be I’m too critical this time around, I don’t know–also I read the book when I was little and I loved the book. I bought the video of the original movie for my very young grandsons when it came out again about 15 years ago and they loved it and watched it again and again. I remember Ian, about 2, attempting to dance along with the chimney sweeps.
That’s interesting, Barb. I had forgotten about the flying up to the ceiling part in the original, but I do agree that the upside down scene in the new film is not very jolly.
We may be biased by our fondness for the original, or we may have become jaded over the years, but I still think we are right! 🙂
Thanks for your review; I hadn’t seen it yet. It’s good to know about its dark side and the complexity of the songs. I still have a piano book of the first Mary Poppins from my childhood and like the songs.
I chuckled at your comment about Dick Van Dyke’s attempt at a cockney accent. I don’t have your experience, so didn’t realize he didn’t pull it off.
Oh yes. His role is universally disliked in London…in the nicest possible way, of course. We love his singing/dancing style, but he should never try English accents.
I also wonder why they didn’t use an English performer in that role in either the original or the remake.
Oh, just saw your comment. It would have made total sense to use a British actor instead of Dick Van Dyke!
I know! There are lots of good cockney actors who also sing. I grew up listening to my parents sing music hall songs and there was (is?) a long tradition of Londoners cheeky songs.
This is so interesting! Watching it in the midwest, it never occurred to me to wonder how British folks reacted to the movie. I love the thought of ”cheeky songs” too. 😊
So now I am wondering what you thought of the movie, ”Saving Mr.Banks”?
I think I’ll save those thoughts for another blog post! 😉
Hmmm … some films are best left alone.
I suspect that, while i too cringe at the thought of Van Dyk’s cockney, I would be cringing a lot more with this re-boot.
The kids have mentioned going to watch it, but I will probably give it a miss.
It has some lovely moments, but overall it lacks the charm we were hoping for. But, please dodn’t miss it on my account!
Never forgiven Dick Van Dyke?! Dick needs no forgiving. His accent was crazy but so was the movie. Tea parties on the ceiling? Popping in and out of chalk drawings? Come on, now.
Ha ha! Yes, but crazy can be good in a children’s fantasy movie. What I liked about the original concept was that it gave children agency and value in a world where they were told to be seen and not heard. Mary Poppins’ and Peter Pan’s children were the Harry Potters of their day.
I dig it, Snowbird, I dig it.