This review includes full spoilers. Proceed accordingly. For other movie reviews from me, click HERE:
Dusty: [singing] Winds in the east, mist coming in. / Like someone's reviewin' and 'bout to begin. / Can't put me finger on what lies in store, / But like and subscribe if you want to learn more.
Rating: G
Director: Robert Stevenson
Writers: Bill Walsh, Don DaGradi, P.L. Travers
Stars: Julie Andrews, Dick Van Dyke, David Tomlinson
Release Date: June 18, 1965 (United States)
Run time: 2 hours, 20 minutes
THE PLOT:
via wiki:
In the spring of 1910, Winifred Banks returns to her home in London after a suffragette rally ("Sister Suffragette") and learns that her children's nanny, Katie Nanna, has quit after her children, Jane and Michael, ran away "for the fourth time this week." Later that night, Winifred's strict and ambitious husband George returns home from his job at the bank ("The Life I Lead"). George, after being informed with the news, puts an advertisement in the paper for a stern, no-nonsense nanny. In contrast, Jane and Michael present their own advertisement for a kind, sympathetic nanny ("The Perfect Nanny"). Winifred strongly agrees with the children. However, George rips up the letter and throws the scraps in the fireplace, but a strong wind draws the scraps up through the chimney and into the sky.
The next day, several sour-faced nannies await outside the Banks family's home, but a strong gust of wind magically blows them away. Jane and Michael then witness a young woman using an umbrella as a parachute to gracefully descend from the sky. The woman introduces herself as Mary Poppins. To George's shock, Mary is holding the children's advertisement, and the scraps have been put back together. She agrees with the advertisement's requests but promises George that she will be firm with his children. Mary hires herself and convinces George it was originally his idea. Mary takes the children upstairs and helps them magically tidy up their nursery ("A Spoonful of Sugar").
While walking outside, the trio encounters Mary's friend Bert, a jack of all trades working as a street painter; Mary transports the group into one of Bert's drawings. While the children ride on a carousel, Mary and Bert sing while strolling ("Jolly Holiday"), and Bert flirts with Mary. Mary then enchants the carousel horses to move on their own. Bert rescues a fox from a fox hunt. Bert and Mary take part in a horse race, which Mary wins. Describing her victory, Mary uses a nonsense word ("Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious"). When a thunderstorm dissolves Bert's drawings, the group is returned to London. While putting the children to bed, Mary calmly sings a lullaby ("Stay Awake").
The next day, the trio and Bert meet Mary's odd uncle, Albert, whose uncontrollable laughter has caused him to float ("I Love to Laugh"). Eventually, Mary leaves with Jane and Michael, saddening Uncle Albert. George becomes annoyed by the household's cheery atmosphere and threatens to fire Mary. She persuades him to take the children to his workplace. That evening, Mary sings a lullaby about a woman who sells bird food on the steps of the St. Paul's Cathedral ("Feed the Birds"). The next day at the bank, the children meet George's boss, the elderly Mr. Dawes Sr., who advises Michael to invest his tuppence in the bank, ultimately snatching his coin out of Michael's hand ("Fidelity Fiduciary Bank"). Michael demands it back; other customers overhear the conflict, and they all begin demanding their own money back, causing a bank run.
Jane and Michael flee the bank and get lost in the East End of London. Bert, now working as a chimney sweep, escorts them home ("Chim Chim Cher-ee"). The three and Mary venture onto the rooftops, where Bert dances with other chimney sweeps ("Step in Time"). George and Winifred return home to find Bert's friends dancing in their home; George sends them away. George then receives a phone call from the bank, requesting a meeting with him regarding Michael's actions. The children overhear the phone call and become concerned. Bert takes George to task for his neglect of his children, warning him to spend more time with Jane and Michael before they grow up ("A Man Has Dreams"). Michael gives George the tuppence, hoping to make amends. With the feeling of regret, George slowly walks through London to the bank, where he is given a humiliating cashiering. Lost for words, George exclaims "Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious," tells a joke Uncle Albert had told the children, and happily heads home. When Mr. Dawes Sr. understands the joke, he floats up into the air, laughing.
The next day, Mary Poppins tells the children she must leave. George mends his children's kite and takes the family out to fly it. At the park, the family encounters Mr. Dawes Sr.'s son, Mr. Dawes Jr., who reveals that his father died laughing at the joke ("Let's Go Fly a Kite"). Mr. Dawes Jr. says his father had never been happier and gratefully re-employs George as a partner. Mary watches the family and decides her work is done. As Mary flies away, Bert looks up and says, "Goodbye, Mary Poppins. Don't stay away too long."
My Review:
Prior to my recent re-watch, I had not seen Mary Poppins in years decades. Even including that long ago epoch when I was young, I don't think I was ever the target audience of this story. I have always had very little in common with rich little British children from the early 20th century, or the musical adults with whom they might spend their time. Nevertheless, I did endeavor a re-watch recently and to my satisfaction I enjoyed it.
The movie is based on the book series by author P.L. Travers, who has an interesting personal biography, including an occultic discipleship under George Ivanovich Gurdjieff. She was also taught by famous psychotherapist Carl Jung around the same time that she was an occultic disciple. Shortly after these two relationships started, Travers wrote and published her first Mary Poppins book. (Make of all of that what you will.) The book was an apparent favorite of Walt Disney's children, so at their encouragement, he doggedly sought to obtain the film rights for her story, from an initially resistant Travers. She eventually relented and the rest is history.
At the time it was made, the movie was visually cutting edge, incorporating animation alongside living human beings, together on screen. The dancing animated penguins still looks good today, six decades later. The movie utilized practical special effects really well, also, with the carousel horses riding free, and the playroom clean-up being particular stand-outs for me. The cinematography was excellent, too, with several fantastic shots in and around the bank, and then later on the chimney sweep rooftops.
The film's musical score is timeless. Even if musicals are not your thing, you probably knew and enjoyed several of these songs when you were younger. "Spoonful of Sugar" was a refrain that was returned to frequently, throughout the film, as it represented the story's moral message to some extent. I personally enjoyed the uplifted "Let's Go Fly a Kite" as the movie ended and its inversion of the usually hostile "go fly a kite" idiom into something positive.
The movie wouldn't have worked without its stars. Julie Andrews was perfect in the starring role, giving her character warmth, measured silliness, and a mysterious aloof quality that left the audience never quite feeling as though we know her. Dick Van Dyke was also great as Bert, providing much the same tone as Andrews' Mary Poppins, but with a bit more overt expression of his emotions - in both directions. He opens the film with the ominous song about how something's about to begin. He delivers the proverbial "come to Jesus" speech to Mr. Banks about missing out on the childhood of his children. He also dances the most and laughs the most. Both Andrews and Van Dyke provided characters who gave no unease to the audience regarding the children they were overseeing for most of the film.
What actually is the message of Mary Poppins? Why did her work end? At least as it regards the film, we are introduced to a pair of parents who don't have time for their children. The husband is a strict workaholic at his banking job. The wife is an absentee mother, offloading her children largely onto strangers while she works as a suffragette. As the movie ends, and the family is finally together, it is unclear whether these two will continue living the same way, or whether they should.
I found the character of the mother to be particularly interesting. While Mr. Banks' character arc is more obvious and overt, what are we to make of his wife? We are introduced to a meek, quiet, suffragette. She seems eager to hand over the responsibility of finding a nanny to her husband. Throughout the movie, she is portrayed as an advocate for her children, but one who is at a distance. It's subtle but their dynamic feels decidedly uncomfortable, only resolving itself as the movie ends with her joining the rest of her family for the first time. Are we as an audience supposed to conclude that the family will be replacing their nanny, finally, with a mother? I think you could definitely read into the film's ending that way. Is there some strong social commentary in all of that? I think so.
[You can also argue that the message of the film, in part, is that banks are cold, greedy, and not to be trusted. The meeting to fire Banks, near the end of the film, looked like it was taking place in an evil-doer's lair. Mary Poppins sets a chain of events into motion that kills the greedy bank owner and puts a softer-hearted person into a position of power there.]
In recent times, the character of Mary Poppins has been suggested as a possible member of J.K. Rowling's Wizarding World. It makes some sense. First, she is clearly magical and in the U.K. Second, while we do not see her using a wand, she does use an umbrella which might conceal a wand (such as is the case with Hagrid.) Third, her bag of things, containing an implausibly large assortment of large items, is very reminiscent of Hermione's handbag from The Deathly Hallows.
It wouldn't be that hard for Rowling to have written her into her own series by inference. Not for nothing, the author of the Mary Poppins books is named Travers - an unusual name also found in Rowling's books (it's the name of a 'Death Eater'.) One of the actresses in the film, portraying a maid, is named... Hermione Baddeley. It seems pretty reasonable to assume that Rowling drew some inspiration from the books and film.
There are hundreds of posts and videos on this topic, but I'll share one below:
Overall, I enjoyed the movie. It's fun, colorful, and completely safe for children. It's not scary, there are no bad words, and the tense moments are very mild. The moral of the story seems a good one to me, too (parents should, you know, parent their children and show them love.) The visuals still look great and the songs remain fun.
If you are looking for something to show the kids, this is a good one and I recommend it.
Have you seen Mary Poppins? If so, what did you think?
No comments:
Post a Comment