Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Angela Chilling" data-source="post: 155036" data-attributes="member: 33">Mary Poppins Returns. It was an ok film but a disappointing remake. All the ingredients were there to make a great film and in some ways it's almost a remake rather than a sequel and doesn't quite pull it off successfully. Although all the songs and scenes are original, so much of it was clearly inspired by the 1964 film. So for example, there is a song where the chimney sweeps dance energetically (like Step in Time), there's a scene in which Meryl Steep plays an eccentric relative of Mary's (not unlike her Uncle who had tea on the ceiling) and instead of jumping into a chalk drawing they jump into the pattern on a bowl and engage with cartoon characters (not unlike Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious). I thought Emily tried a bit too hard to be practically perfect in every way and came across slightly unnatural or even fake. It made me appreciate just how good Julie Andrews was in the original. However, the main failure of the film was that the songs were all instantly unforgettable. Maybe it a film that young children will enjoy more.<img src="http://www.cheste.es/sites/default/files/styles/imagen-300/public/u15/el-regreso-de-mary-poppins-poster-empeliculados.co_.jpg?itok=B9u0xCHu" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " style="" /></blockquote>

Poison your name this Hallowe'en