Saving Mr. Banks

There is no doubt, this is an excellent movie.Part of its skill was leaving me, a non-American - a Brit - with the unsteady feeling of having been conned; an echo of how Mrs Travers herself may well have felt as, in the end, the mighty dollar won. Again and again we see Travers making a stand for her precious Mary Poppins - no music, no animation, no mother as a silly suffragette, no Mary Poppins cavorting. Whilst we, the viewers, are painfully aware that ALL of the things that were important to Travers were to be mown down by Disney's sanitization and homogenization "machine". We are witness to the fact that the substance and powerful core of Travers' first Mary Poppins book were chewed thoroughly and broken down into pap. Artificial colour and flavour were then added - all of the soul-nourishment gone.Travers needed the money, and Disney knew that.Because of that one fact, the Mary Poppins film was made, and it was an absolute travesty. Even as a child watching that film was unnerving, as I had grown up with the books. Julie Andrews was an excellent choice to play Mary Poppins, but her character was warped and twisted and without substance as saccharin barley-sugar. The Mary Poppins film's excellence ended with the casting of Ms Andrews, unfortunately.This film is skewed to a very American narrative. Neatly demonstrated by the arrogant assumption that Travers could not actually be weeping because her beloved book was being cheapened and destroyed for the sake of hollow entertainment. It hurt MY heart to watch the Mary Poppins film, I cannot imagine the deep pain and devastation it must have caused Travers to watch the Mary Poppins film's premiere showing. Instead, this film implies, Travers must've been weeping because it brought her back to memories of her father . How clever of Walt to know and to "fix" that in the Mary Poppins film, and reassure her of that fix as they are watching the premiere together. My guess is that Mr Disney was far too astute to believe Travers would be weeping for any other reason than his betrayal of her precious creation (no amount of payment legitimises or exonerates that).That moment in this film is truly squirm-worthy.Other than this one oddly bum note, the interactions on all levels between Disney and Travers are wonderfully authentic, and eminently believable, and place this film into the "excellent" category. All of the interactions across the board, and many of the insights, are beautifully crafted. Both Emma Thompson and Tom Hanks are at their best. They create a beautiful juxtaposition between Disney's charming, warm exterior and clear, cold, business-like interior, his use of authentic personal narrative for manipulation towards his agenda, and Travers' spiky, critical coldness and her deeply feeling sensitive interior never to be brooked or used in any way dishonourably. It is a pertinent reflection of the pros and cons of the American and British characters respectively, their strengths and immaturities - even in the fact of the deep vulnerability of both characters, managed outwardly in very different ways.So yes, this is a film about the triumph of the mighty dollar. A movie about how Walt Disney got his way and ruined yet another precious children's story. However, that doesn't take away from the fascinating, informative interactions between Travers and Disney, and the other characters, or the excellent film-making. It is interesting to note that the only person without an agenda in regards to Mrs Travers is her driver - and, in true Hollywood style, he is one of the fictional characters in this film.It is most definitely worth watching.

As unusual as sliding up the banister, P.L. Travers abject herself working alongside Walt Disney and his merry crew, the Sherman Brothers and Don DaGradi to bring Marry Poppins from the east winds to the sunny west screen. Given the rights to review the script before filming, Travers seized every opportunity to criticize the music, wardrobe, and even Disney himself in hopes to give her precious "Marry Poppins" the justification on how she wrote the story and the message it evokes. With two powerhouses of storytelling, Disney and Travers are on opposites ends on what Marry Poppins is about. And without explanation she leaves Disney and his crew to find the answer and who P.L. Travers is. And in an ironic turn Travers is lost herself with Disney.The amazing supporting cast: Colin Farrell, Bradley Whitford, BJ Norvak, Jason Schwartzman, Kathy Baker, Ruth Wilson, Paul Giamatti and Melanie Paxson were all spectacular and held their own with Emma Thompson and Tom Hanks. The film did a wonderful job portraying the Sherman Brothers musical and amazing talents in songwriting and DaGrati visual script writing. A memorable scene was the introduction to the song "Let's Go Fly a Kite" that would no doubt make the audience lips utter the lyrics. There was also a nice relationship between Travers (Thompson) and Ralph her cab driver (Giamatti).The story behind the making of Disney's "Marry Poppins" was enjoyable and a major flashback to the first time you had seen the movie. It was exciting to see how Travers was treated at Disney studios with cake and tea and what the Disney staff went threw to please her. Travers was not an easy person to talk to let alone be friends with. She had a strong attitude forwards everything and there was anger and humor in it and that mostly came from Emma Thompson's performance. There were many appealing part of the movie like how the songs were written (Spoonfull of Sugar) and Travers relationship with her father. And like the original Marry Poppins books, there was some dark elements that in turn became life lessons. Although the film left out Disney's avoidance to Travers's suggestions (hence her disapproval of the animation) the film shows hers dismay but was somewhat ambiguous; either she cried over the film or how it reminded her of her father or the songs.There is no doubt that the movie dramatizes Travers's experiences with Disney but it doesn't ignore who Travers was. Like Disney she is ruthless, complex, critical, and imaginative when it comes to storytelling. "Saving Mr. Banks" is a character film depicting Travers's troubled childhood in Australia through flashbacks while connecting them to her odd personality and her literature skills. Most importantly these flashbacks are tremendously key factors for her inspirations of "Marry Poppins." The Banks family in the books are Travers's family- moreover- the people they are not. And for Travers, it is like giving her family away especially to a man who color- wash everything even the darkest time. She is obligated to be very critical to the filmmaking process since she wants the "gravitas" within the script. While Disney is a key opponent to persuade Travers in giving him the rights, he is not fully flushed out as he could had been but his presence on screen is effective. Unlike Travers, Disney likes making a spectacle of himself adding on to their everlasting clashes. The scene with them at Disneyland was a marvelous colorful historic experience and a throwback to what is known as a "simpler" era. One of the highlights of the two is their conversation at Travers's home, giving the audience a poignant look into Walt's childhood, but there could had been more to Disney than what was shown in the film.It is interesting that the characters in the movie can relate to one another and connects to the Banks family or the "Marry Poppins" book. Even though the characters such as Robert Sherman, Ralph, Disney, Travers and her father cover their dark experiences with a whimsical element with their own talents shows their flaws and their achievements. "Saving Mr. Banks" uncover these characteristics and uncovers the lost aspects to ones self and letting it go.The production of a beloved classic has been known for years but to just read it and to hear about it was nothing comparable to to see it on screen. It was not magical but real thus giving the gravitas of what P.L. Travers has been wanting for her book on screen.

Very good movie about Walt Disney and Mary Poppins

This is a lovely film, crass, brash Americana meets post-colonial stiff-upper-lippiness! Tom Hanks does a great job of playing a kindly Uncle Disney version of the eponymous Walt, all paternalism and Apple Pie but Emma Thompson is the total show-steeler with her rendition of the psychologically damaged, ice-maiden that's PL Travers.Through flash-backs PL Travers early life traumas are spilt for us delicately, stitching together a picture that sees the slow destruction of the deified figure of her father into the alcoholic shadow he became. We see him fail, repeatedly, we see these events impact on her mother all the while in the present of our story, 1960s America, we see Walt Disney and writers of the motion picture screenplay for Mary Poppins trying to melt PL Travers icy heart. She needs to sign the rights over so the movie can be made and she is extremely sniffy about some of the frivolous directions they seem to have taken her character.This is a quality movie, gentle, thought-provoking and effectively braiding its stories set in different timelines neatly and completely in a way that was very satisfying. We all know that PL Travers relented and Mary Poppins got the Disney treatment and in one of the most touching moments in the film we see Emma Thompson's character crying buckets as the bank manager dad returns at the end to sing and dance enthusiastically ready for kite-flying. The epitomy of fatherliness and good times absent from her own upbringing and the antithesis of her own dad's ignominious ending. Of course, truth and biography have been tweaked here to make a more complete story I'm sure, but it has been done in such a loving and respectful way that both Disney and PL Travers emerge as sympathetic figures.Well worth a couple of hours of your time.**** (Four stars)

This really was a stunning performanceby Emma Thompson as PL Travers, the author of Mary Poppins, who tries to be persuaded by Walt Disney (a convincing Tom Hanks) to sign the film rights of her book to him so that the musical may be made. As an opponent of musicals, Dick Van Dyke and in particular animation, this requires a lot of effort. Disney is using every trick he can muster in order to get that signature.The film reminds me of 'Titanic' in that we know the ending, but enjoy the performances as we go towards it. The sequences of Travers' early life in Australia were somewhat of an intrusion, but necessary when Disney uses this to remind Travers of her father. Colin Farrell is not my favourite actor, but was passable in this.Hanks' portrayal of Disney made him come across as a rather unscrupulous character. Was there any truth in what Disney said? He could have been saying anything in order to get that signature. I found myself very much on Travers' side, wanting her not to sign, although we knew the inevitable.'Saving Mr Banks' is a movie well worth seeing for the performances of the two leads. I think it might have been even better had it not been made by the Disney studios, and instead a neutral one. It is well known that PL Travers despised the finished production of 'Mary Poppins' and continued this view right until her death. The movie glossed over this; this was a major mistake and gave the impression that it was a fictional story loosely based on real events.

I bought this for my (elderly) Mum for her birthday as I thought she would really love the subject matter (having loved Mary Poppins although I can't remember the film very well and maybe need to see it again) and as it stars Emma Thompson and Tom Hanks. The story is fantastic - this cankerous, interfering (slightly stupid) woman who is unable to see the merits of the efforts of those who trying to make a film of her book. This brings her right into contact with Walt Disney, played by Tom Hanks as a kindly man with a very warm heart. She also meets the composers who struggle to impress her with their wonderful tunes and ideas. It is hard not to want to shake the woman for her rudeness and her lack of any understanding - and her extreme coldness. But her relationship with her driver and her flashbacks to her childhood (her father played by the delicious Colin Farrell) show a tender side to the character which redeemed her somewhat although really I still wanted to slap her for most of the time. It's slow and seems to need 'something' else - a little more Tom Hanks? More of the 'warmed up' Emma Thompson (so superb when she 'gets' the song about kite flying, 'Let's Go Fly A Kite')? Or a greater hold on the scene where she finally gets to see the finished film ...?/ Her scenes with Disney/Tom Hanks are sheer joy (especially when he takes her to Disney Land at the scene where he finally persuades her to sign the contract) and somehow we don't get enough of them - or maybe they are greater for being lesser?This is very much a character led film rather than story led which is what I prefer although it has to try far harder when it relies on simply on great acting.For those who hung around until the titles (I do hate it when people leave cinemas when the titles are running) - would be rewarded by hearing the genuine tapes of the conversations recorded at the start and can hear just how annoyingly pedantic she was. I gather there is one living author who created a similar type 'control' when her books where filmed but it is just rumour and I can't say who it was!We'd just watched 'Quartet' the week before and loved it so much that this film fell by one mark. Good, very good, but not great.

The Disney Studios are currently on a milking spree of their biggests hits and adaptations on their own history. To the latter category belongs Saving Mr. Banks. As far as I'm concerned this was an original and well scripted choice, but I fear for a project like Maleficent, due next summer. What will be next? A dramatisation of the studio's 1989 renaissance with The Little Mermaid? Tommy Lee Jones as the Big Bad Wolf?If you are a down and out Disney fan you have presumably been aware of the hassle that preceeded bringing Mary Poppins to the screen, but unless you studied the material you are unlikely to know Disney tried to obtain the film rights of P. L. Travers's books for twenty years, how she travelled to Hollywood (here the films begins), sat in during sessions, being a pain to poor Don DaGradi (screenwriter) and the Sherman Bros (composers). The deadlock between Disney and Travers is captivating and funny. Moreover, it gives Saving Mr. Banks its subject: Her being in desperate need of the money and him, overzealous, having green-lighted the film already before she had sold the screen rights.Curiously enough, despite Travers (played by Emma Thompson) being overly fussy and a downright nuisance most of the time, you sympathise with her cause. Perhaps surprisingly so did her mighty 'opponent' Walt Disney (Tom Hanks), as he imparts to an employee: `I fought this battle from her side too' - referring to attempts to buy Mickey Mouse from him. Disney, of course aware of Travers's near destitution, is gentlemanly enough to not really stress it.Obvious is that the end result of Mary Poppins as film ended up being everything but `empty pap,' as Travers feared. Yes, there are songs, yes there are pinguins - but without the ongoing efforts of her creator Mary Poppins could have ended up superficial - or so at least this film has it. However judge for yourself: In the multiple Oscar-winner Mary Poppins's magic remains wonderfully restraint, happens around her rather than served up happily, which might have occured had Travers not challenged and forced DaGradi to draw from the corners of his creativity.In Saving Mr. Banks we are treated to flashbacks of Travers's preteen years in Australia's outback: A mother she never warmed to, and a father (Colin Farrell), for whom she felt quite the opposite. Gradually she becomes aware of the darker side of her beloved Travers Goff, an alcoholic, who in his dying days doesn't shrink from using the girl to get the booze. Aunt Ellie arrives to set things right - and somewhere along the transition from Helen Goff to P. L. Travers we are made to understand that the earlier rejected stern aunt ("You promised you'd make everything right") becomes sublimated in Mary Poppins, although that happens off screen. The role of father Mr. Banks/Travers Goff then turns out to be pivotal - with such a title we could wait for it. His overlong, dramatic nightly walk to the bank in the Mary Poppins film is now explained.The pleasant amount of dialogue between Disney and Travers accommodates Hanks and Thompson's acting - which is brilliant. Nevertheless, Hanks's portrayal leaves that of Thompson behind. Much of his `lines' are conveyed through his facial expressions, which in itself are those of a boss used to not giving away anything by them - and Hanks is a master at getting them right. His initial approach to procure the rights, `having made a promise to his children he simply has to keep,' ricochets off Travers's armour. This is something Disney, aside from being used to get what he wants doesn't comprehend, presuming using a promise to a child to be a trump card (the reason why Travers is immune is for this motivation becomes clear, but a comment addressing it ended up in the deleted scenes). After this, the stage is set. The supporting cast is strongest where there are no flashbacks concerned: Paul Giamatti as chauffeur Ralph should be mentioned first, but then Whitley Bradford, B. J. Novak and Jason Schwartzman as the hapless trio of DaGradi and the Sherman Bros all deserve applause, as does Melanie Paxson as Dolly. Sound and picture quality of the Blu-ray are very good, and the extras include some deleted scenes and a small making-of, involving the one surviving Sherman Brother Richard. For the sentimentalists among us (that's me as well) `Let's Go Fly a Kite' is included with said Sherman taking place behind the piano in the exact spot the song was composed 50 years ago. The whole cast and crew are present, as opposed to a single dry eye. Praiseworthy. Saving Mr. Banks's finale is devoted to its 1964 premiere, concluding the story of a story - how the film about the flying nanny was made. I couldn't help but thinking of what poor Mrs Travers would have thought of the musical, happily many years away from the film.

This is a really lovely movie about how Disney got Mary Poppins onto the big screen and about the woman who wrote it. Tom Hanks plays the fun loving, affable Walt Disney. He wasn't all sugar and spice, but this film doesn't paint him to be - he was after all a business man. But it does show his determination to create the perfect version of this movie that he could (but then let's not forget it is a Disney move!!! so he's hardly going to be portrayed as a villain). Emma Thompson plays the much less likable PL Travers who wrote Mary Poppins. I'm sure very few people even realised Mary Poppins was a book before this movie, let alone who wrote it, Thompson's Travers comes across as hard, and unlikable. Overall a really enjoyable sunday afternoon type of movie