Review: 6.5 out of 10 stars.
Story of the author of Mary Poppins, or how to destroy a fantasy.
It might be a happy ending for Walt Disney to fulfill as a father’s promise (or what was portrayed), but it certainly is a bitter end for Travers, the author. The movie maker made it look like a jolly holiday flick, which is inaccurate.
You usually see the credits say dramatization, Tom Hanks and the rest of the Disney’s group acting was way more than that. They exaggerated every gesture like a cartoon, rendering eyebrows and voices that were to the point of extreme. Tom Hanks did play a slick businessman and even smoked in his office, it was almost obnoxious. He is always just an slightly above average actor because of his lack of emotional scenes. Rather, he relies heavily on clown like facial and body movements. Sometimes it’s in the eyes and subtle cues from a simple smile. Part of the fault also lies on the director who needs to pan the camera in the right angle and speed. This flick looks flat.
Comparatively, PL Travers, acted by Emma Thompson, shed a very and surface level of the real Helen Goff. But her acting was a little bit more genuine and natural, and actually represents more human touch.
Mary Poppins’ family, Colin Farrell and Ruth Wilson have done an alright job, nothing too impressive. The scenery was very beautiful though, making you feel like you were right there in the days. The touch of old times lenses and the sun shining through the hair of the female characters make them look angelic.
Paul Giamatti as the driver did get some good screen times and did a decent job.
Typical Hollywood movie and 2:05 is slightly long with singing and and tried to squeeze a few moments of sadness from the audience. It will be a bit less dry if it were about 1:45 at most.
No after the credits.
Keywords: book, fantasy, adventure, marypoppins
— Spoiler ahead —
Sometimes it might be better to live in a fairytale. In this case, don’t read about biographies or articles about TL Travers, at least not before watching the movie. Because it will certainly make you feel bitter towards the whole reenactment of how Walt deceived her and exploited her declining book sales to get the book rights so he can make many more millions. It does not make if it took him 20 years or whether it were true it was a promise to his daughter. The ultimate truth that he altered things that she despised most such as the animation and singing and certain cruelty simply made one take a different take of the whole Disney business.
To amplify and ultimately insult Travers, the writer and director decided to showcase (but slightly sugarcoat) when Disney did not invite Travers to the premiere. Added to a possibly inaccurate line that he could have invited her to the London premiere.
The sorta after-the-credits scenes started shortly after when credits were rolling with an actual tape of Travers, reflecting one of her requirements to have everything recorded in case Disney broke his promise. Can ypu blame her? Sadly that did not help. And who knows if the producer decided to pick one of her most demanding tapes when the chaps were coming up with unreasonable ideas that had altered the story if she did not voice it. And eventually coerced her to approve it.
What is even more sad is they never showed the tape when she approved the script.
There’s a lot of circulation about how Travers was so upset with the animation that she had never worked with Disney again. There was also a lot of negativity about her adopting only 1 boy of the twins. This could be understood when she was afraid of losing love if she adopted both of them. What if they had their own world and never involved her? Her mean persona was a facade of how sad she was her whole life, as she wrote her fantasy, a protected fairytale that no one would have destroyed it if it were not by the movie. Her world was temporarily better with her adopted son.