Remove ads

Mary Poppins Returns

Shanejayell

Shanejayell

Yuri Fan without a Pause
Pronouns
He
So Disney is making Mary Poppins II: Poppin HARDER.



I was googling the series and was surprised to discover that Mary Poppins' author HATED the original film. Possibly even loathed it.

Story of how Mary Poppins author regretted selling rights to Disney to be turned into film

So... a question: Does Disney have a moral obligation NOT to continue the series since the author hated it? Or is it a case of You sold the rights and now Disney can do whatever?
 
:???:

What was there to hate about a magical nanny?

The supermodel looks maybe? I remember a modern movie in a similar vein where the magical nanny looks like a medieval depiction of a witch>

Edit: Fully read the article. Yea she was screwed over. But I did enjoy the film as a kid.
 
Last edited:
My dad grew up with Mary Poppins and he's pretty excited for it....

On the topic of Mary Poppins... I do feel very conflicted. I feel it's as excellent film, but I greatly sympathize with the author for being tricked...

the film about the making (Saving Mr. Banks)... while it was amazing it featured a drinking, smoking and scheming Walt Disney, it was kinda terrible they made it seem like she liked the film a little when the truth was she hated it so much she cried (in despair)...

But yeah, it's a.... it feels complicated.
 
As the author has passed away, I assume either Disney had the rights from the original deal, or they negotiated with her estate.

If it was her estate, did THEY have a obligation to follow her wishes and say no....?
 
Shanejayell said:
As the author has passed away, I assume either Disney had the rights from the original deal, or they negotiated with her estate.

If it was her estate, did THEY have a obligation to follow her wishes and say no....?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Her estate has/had the obligation to make money for her heirs or the purpose it was created for. Unless she left a will explicitly forbidding a deal with Disney that is.
 
LOL at her reflection checking her out.

Fun question: What's Mary Poppin's middle name?
 
Eliar said:
Her estate has/had the obligation to make money for her heirs or the purpose it was created for. Unless she left a will explicitly forbidding a deal with Disney that is.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The author's stance on the film also eventually softened, stating that it was a good film in its own right even though it was a bad adaptation of her books. I'm sure that affected any decisions by her estate.
 
I'm glad to see that it's keeping up the tradition by having an incredibly talented American with a background in musicals not knowing what an actual Cockney accent sounds like.
 
Gotta say it, you can reaaaally feel Lin-Manuel Miranda's influence on some of the music numbers. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Overall, grand film, wish author didn't get screwed in intellectual property, enjoyed it thoroughly, but it's not as good as the original. Very whimsical.
 
TheMaskedReader said:
Gotta say it, you can reaaaally feel Lin-Manuel Miranda's influence on some of the music numbers. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Overall, grand film, wish author didn't get screwed in intellectual property, enjoyed it thoroughly, but it's not as good as the original. Very whimsical.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Where the heck did you get that from? The fact that Disney in the original movie did not have Mary Poppins be a "Harsh Disciplinarian" (as in, using corporal punishment among other things) on the children? How she threw a fit at the opening night and derided it while embarrassing Walt as well as the actors and actresses in front of most of Hollywood's Bigwigs? Declaring that she found the original film so damn awful that she was going to try and make it impossible for another American to ever create something based on it?
 
Harry Leferts said:
Where the heck did you get that from? The fact that Disney in the original movie did not have Mary Poppins be a "Harsh Disciplinarian" (as in, using corporal punishment among other things) on the children? How she threw a fit at the opening night and derided it while embarrassing Walt as well as the actors and actresses in front of most of Hollywood's Bigwigs? Declaring that she found the original film so damn awful that she was going to try and make it impossible for another American to ever create something based on it?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I feel like the author's intent should always be regarded in adaptations of the works, especially if script approval was supposed to be given to them (at least, the way I read the article in the OP). Certainly, I enjoy the original movie, but I can still enjoy content and dislike certain aspects of the making, especially if authorial intent/direction is disregarded. Also, beyond behavior, I can find an action distasteful both for precedent it sets and for it's own morality, regardless of reaction by the hurt parties.
 
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top