The original Mary Poppins from 1964 has a special place in my heart. I absolutely adore Julie Andrews and have since childhood. I love the elegance of the Edwardian era. I love stories of children going on magical adventures. I love musicals and can sing nearly the entire score. I saw the Broadway show in NYC, and I've appeared as the cook, Mrs. Brill, in a local stage production of it.
I was very curious but optimistic when a sequel was announced. I read all the books a long time ago and knew there were more stories to tell. When the first teaser trailer premiered, I was enchanted.
I think one of my favorite parts of Mary Poppins Returns is just how well they matched the style of the Walt Disney films of the 1960s. From the joyful songs that felt as if they were carved from the same wood as the originals to the spirit of unadulterated, unapologetic childlike wonder echoed in the script to the sketchbook style of drawings used in the animated sequences, you could easily imagine that you had traveled back in time. It's cliche to say it, but they just don't make them like that much anymore.
I saw a lot of trepidation among the online Disney communities about the idea of someone other that our beloved Julie Andrews playing Mary, but oddly enough, I wasn't terribly worried about that. I had already seen the role in the hands of other capable actresses both in the Broadway production and in the one I'd done myself. Sure enough, Emily Blunt was marvelous. She definitely chose a spin on the character that was closer to the books, a bit more curt, a bit ruder. Her voice has a lower overall tone than Julie's. But I completely bought into her as the magical nanny. I had been hoping she'd get an Oscar nod as Julie did before her, but no such luck- oh well.
Lin-Manuel Miranda as Jack the lamp lighter has received mixed reviews, but I thought he was great too. Hearing him in a fake cockney accent was amusing. Dick van Dyke is infamous for his. What I loved, though, was his genuine enthusiasm. You could tell he was so excited to be there. What a dream come true that must have been! I also loved how his character was tied to Bert- clever to have him have been a former apprentice. I know some people complained that he was given one of his signature rap pieces in the middle of a dance hall style number in the animated sequence, but it was actually a patter song- perfectly appropriate for the era. In fact, Bert did a similar one in the middle of "Jolly Holiday."
Storywise, the script hits a lot of the same beats as the original. You can easily link each song to a Sherman Brothers counterpart. But it's not the exact same story. It's a bit darker, a bit more serious. We meet up with the Banks children about 25 years later. Michael is a recently widowed father of 3, and Jane is a single woman with her own flat who, like her mother before her, is an activist. We are now in the 1930s, and Michael is in danger of losing his home, the same home he grew up in. He has also lost much of his childhood joy. It always makes me so sad when children grow up to be adults who no longer believe in the magic they once experienced when they were young.
While Jane and Michael were happy-go-lucky children who craved love and affection from their parents, Georgie, John, and Annabel have been forced to grow up too soon due to circumstance. They act like tiny adults and tell Mary Poppins that they don't need a nanny because they've grown up a lot in the past year. "Well, we'll have to do something about that," replies Mary. In this film, Mary's job becomes reminding the children (and the former children) how to be children.
Now, least you think I'm fawning a little too much, Mary Poppins Returns isn't without it's flaws. My biggest issue is the unnecessary villain, a greedy banker who tries to take the Banks' home from them with no good motivation to do so. He's truly just a stereotypical mustache twirling bad guy, and the story could have been done almost exactly the same without his brand of cruelty. Similarly, a wild chase scene in the animated sequence seemed to only serve the purpose of getting the children back home after their adventure.
Of course, I can't go on without discussing the music. I found the songs to be a lot of fun, but certainly not on the same level as the originals. However, they are growing on me more and more with each listen. It's hard to compare, though, when I have been singing the originals for such a long time. I do think overall that the new material written for the Broadway show was better than what we are offered here, but I'm sure in time, I'll be singing these too. My favorite is probably "Trip a Little Light Fantastic" which is an answer to 1964's "Step in Time" with the lamplighters or "learies" leading the way instead of the sweeps. "A Cover is Not the Book" is lively and a bit naughty, although the lyrics flew by so quickly, I couldn't quite catch what they were saying! It was strange to see Mary perform a number like this though- a bit like seeing her play Nancy in "Oom Pah Pah" from Oliver. "Can You Imagine That?" from the children's first adventure made me smile. It reminded me somewhat of "The Age of Not Believing" from Bedknobs and Broomsticks, not in the tone which is a lot more playful, but in that the children thought they were too old for such nonsense.
I recommend seeing the original again before seeing this new one. It is absolutely filled with loving nods to it's predecessor. There are bars from the famous songs woven into the score at key moments. There are references in the props- both Mary's snowglobe and the kite that Mr. Bank repairs make appearances. If you look closely, there are photographs of George and Winifred Banks on the mantel. And best of all, there are cameos. Keep an eye out for Karen Dotice who asks Jane for directions and then replies with "Thanks, sincerely!" Of course, the very best cameo is from Dick van Dyke himself, as the son of the character he made a cameo as in the original! They even credit him at the end the same way as before, using the scrambled letters. He still has it, and how lucky and grateful we are that we still have him with us! Julie herself declined to appear as she wanted this to be Emily's show without distraction which I understand, but it would have been a thrill to see her. In her place, though, we have another Disney legend we are honored to still have with us, Angela Lansbury- featured in the finale as the balloon lady. She even gets to sing! If you don't leave this movie feeling lighter than air yourself after that, your heart must be stone.
So, as you can tell, this long time Mary Poppins fans was won over. I've already bought the soundtrack, and I'm quite likely to take this movie home once it's available. While it may not be perfect, it's a worthy follow up of a beloved icon.
