Disney looking into sequel of Mary Poppins

[rteetz]

http://variety.com/2015/film/news/mary-poppins-new-disney-rob-marshall-1201593194


Come on Disney why mess with a good thing?

 

[JustCallMeMommy]

To get the most bang for their buck, they should plan ahead and simultaneously make a movie about remaking Mary Poppins.

 

[DDLand]

I think this sequel should be all right, but Mary Poppins is one of Walt's most striking legacies. They need to tread carefully.

 

[luisov]

I personally think Disney's recent re-makes have been tasteful and well executed, except for Malificent which, despite its great visuals, wasn't a good representation of the masterpiece that is 1959's Sleeping Beauty. Mary Poppins is arguably one of the most iconic films ever created, so hopefully if this film happens at all, they'll hire a great director and cast to do justice to the original piece. One thing is for sure: there isn't any other Julie Andrews out there.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

It's an awful idea...

My views on any and all things aside...somethings belong trapped in their own little pocket in time.

Mary poppins was probably the single greatest achievement of the Walt Disney era...he died right after. You just can't go back.

But then again...they tried to reinvent the wizard of oz too...

 

[Polydweller]

It's an awful idea...

My views on any and all things aside...somethings belong trapped in their own little pocket in time.

Mary poppins was probably the single greatest achievement of the Walt Disney era...he died right after. You just can't go back.

But then again...they tried to reinvent the wizard of oz too...

Walt died two years after its release not right after but that said I agree it's an awful idea. This is an iconic film and all they can really accomplish is to undercut the original. That's something they should never want to do. Besides, as many news and fan sources are suggesting, whose asking for this? Nobody!

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Walt died two years after its release not right after but that said I agree it's an awful idea. This is an iconic film and all they can really accomplish is to undercut the original. That's something they should never want to do. Besides, as many news and fan sources are suggesting, whose asking for this? Nobody!

I consider 2 years "right after" In the context of animated movies...

Reality is that was really the "last movie" of his professional life... At least on that kinda scale.

This is more quick and easy...

Eisner got fileted for the "cheapquels" on VHS...

Iger will get roasted for the live action plugins after they hatch a few stinkers... Which is inevitable.

 

[Reddog1134]

I actually like seeing new interpretations of classic things.

And if it's horrible, it doesn't affect my appreciation of the original.

 

[adam.adbe]

Reality is that was really the "last movie" of his professional life... At least on that kinda scale.

No love for Jungle Book?

 

[Eoghann]

So from the article it's not a remake or a reboot, more of a sequel?

I'm more open to these sorts of things than most people, but the original sets such a high bar, it's hard to see a way they won't fall short.

 

[lockedoutlogic]

No love for Jungle Book?

I suppose...

But from what I recall reading...Mary poppins was a focus for Disney...while he seemed to lose some of his day to day interest in animated features after sleeping beauty.

I might have interpreted that wrong though

 

[DDLand]

Remember this isn't a remake, but a whole new story based in the same universe. I think they just have a lot to live up to.

 

[DDLand]

I personally think Disney's recent re-makes have been tasteful and well executed, except for Malificent which, despite its great visuals, wasn't a good representation of the masterpiece that is 1959's Sleeping Beauty. Mary Poppins is arguably one of the most iconic films ever created, so hopefully if this film happens at all, they'll hire a great director and cast to do justice to the original piece. One thing is for sure: there isn't any other Julie Andrews out there.

Well said. 100%

 

[lockedoutlogic]

Remember this isn't a remake, but a whole new story based in the same universe. I think they just have a lot to live up to.

I just don't think everything is able to be "updated"...

I can't see how a mid 20th period piece can translate to the more cynical now.

Fairy tales are timeless because their setting is entirely fantasy...don't see that with turn of the 20th century London.

 

[rteetz]

It's an awful idea...

My views on any and all things aside...somethings belong trapped in their own little pocket in time.

Mary poppins was probably the single greatest achievement of the Walt Disney era...he died right after. You just can't go back.

But then again...they tried to reinvent the wizard of oz too...

I completely agree. I think Saving Mr. banks was a great movie to plus Poppins but a sequel done today I just don't think is a good idea.

 

[rteetz]

No love for Jungle Book?

Is that trailer out yet? I believe it was supposed to come out today.

 

[minnie mum]

I just don't think everything is able to be "updated"...

I can't see how a mid 20th period piece can translate to the more cynical now.

Fairy tales are timeless because their setting is entirely fantasy...don't see that with turn of the 20th century London.

I'm having trouble following your logic. The original movie was set at the turn of the twentieth century or at least pre WWI. If the sequel takes place 20 years later, that would place it in the 20s or 30s. Why would this make it less possible for fantasy?

To put another pin in that balloon, I'm pretty sure Harry Potter is pure fantasy, but it was set in modern day England. Worked for me.

But given how beloved the original Mary Poppins is, I can't help but think that the whole project is fraught with minefields. Not the least being the casting of the principal characters and the new songs. Trying to equal, never mind top the original score will be really difficult. And if they fail, they'll be tarred and feathered.

 

[adam.adbe]

Is that trailer out yet? I believe it was supposed to come out today.

I'm trying to pretend it isn't happening, but Fast has this:

http://www.fastcocreate.com/3051059...k-footage-in-most-appropriate-medium-possible

My understanding is that the trailer goes live today, but they're obviously on track to miss that.

 

[rteetz]

I'm trying to pretend it isn't happening, but Fast has this:

http://www.fastcocreate.com/3051059...k-footage-in-most-appropriate-medium-possible

My understanding is that the trailer goes live today, but they're obviously on track to miss that.

Actually I'm very interested to see what they do with this movie. I think it has great potential.

 

[DLM1980]

I know it won't happen, but if they were to do a sequel to my beloved Mary Poppins, then I want it produced using the same style and techniques that was available back then. None of this computer generated imagery. Break out the water color pictures and do visual effects from it's time.