More than half a century ago, Mary Poppins became an absolute hit across the ocean, collected a couple of Oscars and the people fell in love with her. Disney, in recent years powerfully squeezing its gold-rich stable, decided to use the other seven books that the writer PL Travers wrote about the British nanny, and comes with a sequel. But the already unimaginative name clearly foreshadows the spirit in which it will be carried. we will explore the Mary Poppins Returns Movie here
Mary Poppins Returns: PHOTO GALLERY
Disney left nothing to chance and took great care to avoid even the smallest risks. Mary is thus portrayed by the popular and likeable Emily Blunt, the direction was provided by the musical routine Rob Marshall, who, in addition to the success with Chicago and theater songs, also showed commercial potential in one of the sequels to Pirates of the Caribbean. The theme is again (and similar to, for example, in the recent Kryštůfk Robin) the loss of childish playfulness and idealistic naivety, which fades from adults when they encounter life. The story follows Michael and Jane, the children from the original film, who after twenty years of life have become a bit of a grind, and Michael’s children are having a hard time coping (although they are very good and capable). And so it is time again for the arrival of the ageless magical nanny. It sounds pretty corny, but why subject a popular book to criticism, right? After all, the audience doesn’t want anything else anyway.
The very character of Mary Poppins played by Emily Blunt is quite different from the 60-year-old Julia Andrews. Apparently, it is more based on the book model, but at the same time, it also reflects the changes of the times. So while the original movie Mary Poppins relied on her beauty and was often passed over by men, the current version takes physical beauty for granted and hardly comments on it. It relies more on the skill and sovereignty with which it casts its spells. Emily Blunt is therefore more strict, even towards children, more measured and nurturing. One could certainly argue at length about how Disney tried to subtly update the character to be more zeitgeist, but I’m not going to go into that any further; Blunt simply manages the role, even though his range of expressions is greatly limited by his character.
However, several figures in supporting roles will please. Dick Van Dyke appears in one scene, recalling his five-decade-old dance performances (albeit in a different role), and Angela Lansbury, another veteran actress with more than nine crosses on her stock, also has a bark. The mustachioed Ben Whishaw, the cute Emily Mortimer, and the cameo of Meryl Streep will delight. So the safe bet continues, although I personally got the most joy out of one unnecessary supporting character who was uncannily reminiscent of old Harold from the Hide the Pain meme.
Everything that worked in the original film is here too. So let’s look for a moment into the Disney animated world (now even with an action scene), instead of cleaning the room comes a bath and this time the dance choreography of the chimney sweeps is replaced by lamplighters. The craftsmanship is, as expected, stunning, and although the new songs aren’t as catchy or memorable as the first installment, the one hundred and thirty million dollar budget is enough to tell from the sweeping set. Such an approach is completely understandable, and legitimate and will lead to Mary Poppins being a commercial success and many of you enjoying it – simply because you will know exactly what product you are buying. However, resignation to any innovation and effort to move the topic bothers me, so I will be stricter, but the fans will definitely not be disappointed.
Also, Read On Fmovies