Mary Poppins' Return is Welcome but Unnecessary

While never a fan of the original Mary Poppins I won't deny its innocent charm and cinematic legacy as it holds a place near and dear to many. I wouldn't think that this, of all Disney properties, would get a sequel so late in the game. Fifty-four years later to be precise! I thought this only applied to Harrison Ford movies. Yet here we are, nostalgia is the biggest cash-grabber hence the numerous live-action remakes from Disney and the ones yet to come.

Set in 1935, a few decades after the events of the last film, the Banks children are all grown-up. Jane (Emily Mortimer) is a rally leader like her mother, and Michael (Ben Wishaw) works at the bank like his father while looking after his three kids Annabel, John and Georgie (Pixie Davis, Nathanael Saleh, & Joel Dawson). Michael's wife recently passed away and the family are forgoing a crisis at the bank, leading to the return of Mary Poppins (Emily Blunt).

Mary Poppins Returns deals with a special message of an adult who has lost his childhood until his children and a familiar old friend remind him of that wonder. Unfortunately, Christopher Robin did it first and so did Hook back in the nineties. This wouldn't be a problem but the movie copies the exact story line of Christopher Robin especially in the third act with a chase scene in London, and a final confrontation in an office. Did I mention that both movies are a continuation of a classic Disney movie dealing with childhood rediscovery?

It doesn't help that the movie feels more like a remake than a sequel. Mary Poppins takes the kids into an animated wonderland, the father not tolerating her peculiar ways, visiting Mary's cooky relative, Jack the lamplighter (Lin-Manuel Miranda) is basically Bert despite the different name, a dance number in the dark, the list goes on and on.

It's well-cast, particularly with Wishaw, though Colin Firth and Meryl Streep could have been cut out as their characters are exaggerations of their original counterparts they are loosely based on and add nothing to the story. Emily Blunt is witty but is no Julie Andrews who embodied the role and won an Oscar for her portrayal of the magical nanny. I will admit I smiled seeing 91-year-old Dick Van Dyke, the only returning cast member albeit in a different role. Angela Lansbury also makes a quick appearance despite having nothing to do with the original. She did star in Disney's  Bedknobs and Broomsticks from 1971 that in many ways is similar to Mary Poppins in terms of mixing live-action and animation with Lansbury playing a magical guardian who looks after some kids. It's nice seeing these two legends but both cameos happen at the very end.

It all looks gorgeous from the live-action/animation mix, performances and heartfelt moments but we already have the original that did all that. It was impressive because it was at a time where such techniques were thought to be impossible become possible. It was done with old film making magic that is now common today. This could have worked in a different story, and not on one that is already so familiar.

Known for his Broadway look, I'm sure director Rob Marshall went out to make a good film and I'll give him credit for trying but the final result feels more Into the Woods than Chicago. Good cast, good scenery, and good special effects but everything else doesn't click. Even the music is passable at best, and forgettable at worst.

Your mileage may vary with Mary Poppins Returns even for fans of the original. Some will enjoy this nostalgic revisit, but I won't be surprised if some aren't.

Final Verdict: C-