Mary Poppins

By this I mean the classic 1964 Disney film, right before the 1965 R&H “The Sound of Music”. 

            It’s London in 1910.  The Banks family sees yet another matronly nanny quit abruptly, unable to manage the two children, Jane and Michael (Karen Dotrice and Matthew Garber).  The father, Mr. Banks (David Tomlinson) is too busy working at the bank, and the mother (Glynis Johns) is too busy as a suffragette, i.e. tireless advocate of getting women the right to vote, to look after or raise the children herself; thus a nanny is necessary.  Along comes Mary Poppins (Julie Andrews) to set things right.  Her supernatural abilities are complimented by a charming and talented chimney sweep, Bert (Dick Van Dyke).  She even brings the children to defuse Uncle Albert (Ed Wynn, the voice of the Mad Hatter from Disney’s Alice in Wonderland) whose incessant laughter has put him up near the ceiling.

            The big sequence in the film is the excursion into Bert’s chalk painting.  Bert and Mary enjoy a meal at the penguin-staffed restaurant while the children enjoy the merry-go-round.  “Supercalifragilisticexpialadocious” is explained at length, until a downpour in real life brings the group back to reality. 

            Mr. Banks disapproves of Mary Poppins’ supernatural supervision, but she calls his bluff by manipulating him into bringing the children to the bank with him on her day off.  Panic ensues when the children prove immune to the bankers’ ecstatic description of compound interest and investment in infrastructure – the head banker (played by Van Dyke himself in heavy makeup) snatches the boy’s “tuppence”, and the boy’s reaction sparks a run on the bank.

            Predictably, Mr. Banks is fired, but with some advice from Bert in chimney sweep mode, eventually realizes that children are children and his role as father has to take that into account.  Finally he’s “saved” and flies a kite with the children, and the bank staff – also flying kites – notifies him that not only is Banks not terminated, he’s made partner.  “And there was much rejoicing…”

            I just imagine MP flying off from London in 1910 and re-emerging in a convent in Salzburg, Austria, in 1937, just in time to rescue another family in need of a wonderful nanny.   Mary Poppins and Fraulein Maria have almost identical roles and missions:  rescuing children from an emotionally distant father.  Obviously, “The Sound of Music” was a true story and “Mary Poppins” was fictional.   I do prefer Julie Andrews as a brunette, and her 1910 attire is more flattering than the outfits she wears in Austria. 

If you enjoyed that, you may also enjoy…

Saving Mr. Banks (Blu-Ray).   Mr. Banks is, of course, the father of the two children in “Mary Poppins”.  This is the story of how Walt Disney (Tom Hanks) managed to persuade Pamela Travers (PT) (aka Helen Goff) (Emma Thompson) to give him the rights to make the story into a movie, despite the fact that the movie would add in music and animation and substantially change many elements of the story.   The movie suggests that Disney finally persuaded her to agree, but it seems that in real life, Disney managed to get her sign off but gave himself the final word on the adaptation.

            So… it’s 1961, and Disney has invited Mrs. Travers to L.A. to supervise some of the work on the film, which has begun despite the fact that PT has STILL not signed off on the rights.  Paul Giamatti plays the Disney-assigned limo driver and BJ Novak (from the US “The Office”) is one of the writers.  But the film cuts to flashbacks of PT herself, as the young girl Helen Goff, in Australia in 1906.  Her father, Travers Goff (Colin Farrell) is an unsuccessful bank manager, dreamer, drunkard – a hopeless bohemian type who can’t seem to survive as a round peg in the square hole of turn-of-the-century Australian banking. 

            At every turn, PT is rude, abrupt, contemptuous and arrogant.  She insults everyone.  She insists on changes everywhere – even when the writers point out that their material comes right out of her books - and pretty much vetoes what we know to be the best elements of the film.  Disney makes concessions here and there, but for his part seems equally determined that the film WILL emerge consistent with his own vision – complete with music and animation – and on his terms.  So it’s a battle of wills between him and PT. 

            Although the enthusiasm of the creative team and the honesty of the chauffeur make some headway into penetrating PT’s extremely gruff and intolerant exterior, they can’t prevent her from petulantly returning to London without signing off on the movie rights.  It takes a personal, surprise visit from Walt himself, and a deep, meaningful conversation in which Walt explains that he does in fact understand Mr. Banks is meant to be none other than Travers Goff, which finally breaks down PT’s resistance and induces her to sign.

            Really:  if you’re going to watch “Mary Poppins” again, no matter how many times you’ve seen it, do yourself a favor and watch this film immediately thereafter.  Hanks has a remarkable ability to dial back the smaltz in his roles and give just enough realism and grit so we don’t vomit up the sugar.  Thompson, of course, plays her as an arrogant bitch we can’t stand.  No wonder she (Travers) was never married, and her only son was adopted; she may have been a lesbian.

            Normally I’m the type who goes back and reads the original source material – as I did on “The Wizard of Oz”.  In this case, I’m less inclined to do so.  The movie seems to indicate that the original character was closer to PT’s gruff but competent aunt.  Granted, the movie was also calculated to make Disney look good at the expense of PT herself.  Perhaps Disney ripped Mary Poppins away from Travers and turned her into a warm, affectionate supernatural being who children might actually love.  In that case Disney not only “saved Mr. Banks”, but also saved Mary Poppins from being the same, cold, heartless bitch that Travers was.  Disney and his writers had children: Travers never did.  Every now and then a film adaptation actually improves on the original story.