Mary Poppins Returns (2018)

[baumer]

Discuss

[Cap]

Lin-Manuel Miranda, while doing press for this, kept saying that it was always his dream to be cast in someone else’s musical. Cause for him it was basically A Chorus Line and West Side Story for roles who “looked like me”.

 

So watching him up on screen, getting to play the Romantic lead, getting the best songs, leading the big musical numbers, and using that beautifully terrible accent was just SOO CUTE AND EXCITING. 

 

I just  him so much. 

[La Binoche]

5 minutes into the movie, when an off-key Lin-Manuel Miranda begins singing some awful song, I wanted to turn this off. 

 

The story is dull. The songs are tuneless. There's hardly any sense of magic or wonder. It aims for old-fashioned charm but comes off  as antiquated and drab. Mary Poppins as a character feels like a complete non-factor in her own movie and Emily Blunt (who looks too old to pull off the role...homegirl is aging kinda rough...those neck wrinkles, yikes) does nothing to elevate her. When Lin-Manuel is about to break his neck trying to set Big Ben back and Mary just stands there watching...use your umbrella and get the fuck up there, you useless fucking bitch. 

 

Rob Marshall remains a hack with only one fluke of a good movie in his career. 

 

D-

[filmlover]

Mary Poppins Returns @Christmas baumer 

 

This had me grinning more than any other movie this year. While it obviously can’t hold a candle to the classic original, this works as both a continuation and as a loving homage that successfully mixes old school and more modern filmmaking. Some of the VFX work aside, this could just as easily been made 30-40 years ago. Emily Blunt is wonderful in a performance that likely made Julie Andrews smile: while she living up to Andrews’ performance was always gonna be a tall order, Blunt brings the same amount of charm to the part while also carving out her own take on the iconic magical nanny. I am all in favor of her finally getting awards attention for this performance, which is backed up by a great supporting cast including Lin Manuel-Miranda (not a major Hamilton fan but he’s quite good here), Ben Whishaw and Emily Mortimer as the grown up versions of the Banks children, the kids, and a fun one scene cameo by Meryl Streep. Enjoyed the songs too even if none of them are as memorable as, say, “A Spoonful of Sugar.” It’s the perfect movie to see with the family over the holidays, the cinematic equivalent of meeting up with old friends you haven’t heard from in so long and finding out what they’ve been up to. B+

 

Also, that entire 2D animation sequence was the highlight of the movie and made me wish that Disney would once again make an entire film in the format.

[The Panda]

A real delight.  The cast is fun, Emily Blunt and Lin Manuel kill their roles, and it has the best music of the year.

 

It’s the best Live-Action Disney Classic remake/sequel that Disney’s done.  The 2D animation sequence is gorgeous fun, very well done.

[Cap]

On 12/21/2018 at 6:38 PM, PANDA said:

and it has the best music of the year.

 

 

 

[cannastop]

The songs weren't memorable, except for one. "A Cover is Not the Book" stuck with me, perhaps because it was from the best part of the movie, the 2D animation bit.

[baumer]

It's not often I agree with @La Binoche but she nailed it. A horrible boring uninteresting drab ridiculous movie with no plot that was covered up by singing and dancing every 5 minutes for no particular reason. I pretty much hated everything about this movie.

[The Panda]

People giving this movie a D or F need to go see Holmes and Watson so they can see what an actual F grade movie looks like.

 

I hated the Greatest Showman and I couldn’t even go lower than maybe a D+ on that (in reality it’s probably a C- movie).

 

The fact that this movie tells a coherent, well-enough edited story, with competent musical numbers and performances makes it not F/D- range worthy imo.

[Ezen Baklattan]

+Blunt and Miranda are practically perfect.

+Streep gets to have fun in a bit role, maybe her most memorable performance in years.

+Whishaw carries the family scenes pretty effectively helping the movie, when the main duo isn’t on screen.

+THE ANIMATED SCENES!!

 

The songs are good if not terribly memorable. CYIT and CINTB are probably my faves.

 

-Sorta drags in places and certain scenes, the two major red herrings were interesting but kind of drag the plot.

-I wish Blunt got more to do in the second half.

-Firth kinda is just there. Kind of a dull villain.

 

Overall still really dug it.

 

B+

[Fancyarcher]

My review. It was an absolute delight. 

 

https://dailyuv.com/972441

[baumer]

On 12/25/2018 at 10:30 PM, The Panda said:

People giving this movie a D or F need to go see Holmes and Watson so they can see what an actual F grade movie looks like.

 

I hated the Greatest Showman and I couldn’t even go lower than maybe a D+ on that (in reality it’s probably a C- movie).

 

The fact that this movie tells a coherent, well-enough edited story, with competent musical numbers and performances makes it not F/D- range worthy imo.

 

I can hate other films as well as this one.  I'm sure H&W is horrible.  But I just hated this one.  It had nothing going for it except for the visuals.

[The Panda]

8 hours ago, Christmas baumer said:

 

I can hate other films as well as this one.  I'm sure H&W is horrible.  But I just hated this one.  It had nothing going for it except for the visuals.

I think what I’m getting at is we often confuse highly disliking a movie with a movie being just straight up objectively awful.

 

Like, last year I hated the Greatest Showman but I’d be wrong to really say the movie was an objective failure, so not worthy of an F.  For Mary Poppins Returns, it’s certainly not a perfect movie by any means, but are well performed (even if you don’t necessarily like them), there’s quite a bit of good visual and production work, and the movie tells a cohesive story that’s not a mess to follow.

 

 I don’t think you were equivocating that though, so that comment really wasn’t directed at you (or really anyone in particular).  I think it’s just a reminder sometimes we trash decent/mediocre/flawed movies that rub us the wrong way, when they aren’t really failures of filmmaking they just weren’t really for us.

Edited January 1, 2019 by The Panda

[fabiopazzo2]

C

 

 

[Webslinger]

Catching up on all the reviews I've missed lately thanks to far more pressing real world concerns:

 

While it doesn’t fill the extraordinarily tall order of matching up to its classic predecessor, Mary Poppins Returns is an eminently delightful sequel that succeeds in recapturing much of the first film’s spirit five-and-a-half decades later. Tempting though it might have been to update Mary Poppins for modern audiences at the expense of the previous film’s charms, the filmmakers succeed in making this sequel feel like an old-school children’s film in the same vein as its predecessor; the story is simple and episodic enough for younger viewers to follow, but also sufficiently resonant and never too juvenile to lose the interest or admiration of older viewers who grew up on the original. The musical numbers admittedly aren’t as memorable as they were in the 1964 film, but each one is staged impressively and works effervescent charm over the audience. Viewers’ mileage may vary as to which numbers stand out most, but my personal picks are: “The Place Where Lost Things Go” for its simple but potent heartstring-tugging; “A Cover Is Not the Book” for its liveliness and Emily Blunt’s gameness in making it work; and “Trip a Little Light Fantastic” for its impressive choreography. Taking over the title role after Julie Andrews’s iconic work is no small task, but Emily Blunt is delightful as she channels the paradoxical charm and dry aloofness that made Andrews so memorable. She fits into the role so well that she makes it look almost effortless. Lin-Manuel Miranda is also tons of fun to watch as Bert’s protégé Jack, complete with an adorably off-key, exaggerated accent and terrific chemistry with Blunt. I get the criticisms that lauded performers like Colin Firth and Meryl Streep are overly silly in their roles here, but their performances both fit well within the context of the roles they’re playing and the universe they inhabit. There’s not much in the way of a conventional plot, but this film is not one interested in convention so much as exploring themes associated with the lessons the title character aims to convey to the now multiple generations of Banks children. It’s not the classic its predecessor has become (nor is it quite up to the level of fellow big-hearted children’s sequel Paddington 2), but Mary Poppins Returns is such a sincere and kindly film that it proves hard to resist.

 

B+

Edited January 3, 2019 by Webslinger

[YLF]

Charming movie. B

[BK007]

Music is forgettable. 

 

Mary Poppins is severely underused. Lin Manuel Miranda's character was astoundingly annoying and should have been cut. 

 

There is no real fluidity, perhaps because the story itself is rather weak. I also got bored which is probably the worse thing a movie can afflict. 

 

C

[ScoobyDoo21]

Not good. It has no business being as long as it should. Could have cut out at least 20 minutes and be perfectly fine. Everyone sings a forgettable and boring song every 10 minutes.

 

On that note, at least we can see some traditional animation for once and it is a pretty movie and Emily Blunt is great. 

 

I guess i never was into Mary Poppins. I was more into 90s Disney anyway.

Edited January 16, 2019 by ScoobyDoo21