Mary Poppins in London

[Sarangel]

The Producers lost star Richard Dreyfuss days before its first performance. Billy Elliot was forced to cancel its first provincial run and delayed its London opening.

And Andrew Lloyd Webber's Woman In White was panned by the critics.

All in all, it has been a decidedly awkward autumn for London's new batch of mega-musicals - with one exception.

Mary Poppins is poised to fly into the West End, propelled by the best advance word-of-mouth buzz London has heard for years.

Its preview run in Bristol closed this weekend, and the £9 million show - which has been conjured up by legendary impresario Sir Cameron Mackintosh and Disney theatre boss Tom Schumacher - will have its first performance at the Prince Edward Theatre on 6 December.

Advance box office sales have reportedly topped £12 million, a figure Sir Cameron insists is not correct. He will not say what the real figure is but does describe it as "bloody good".

These are the first production pictures of Laura Michelle Kelly and Gavin Lee, who will take the roles of Poppins and Bert, first made famous by Julie Andrews and Dick van **** in the 1964 film classic.

Sir Cameron told the Standard: "From the first night in Bristol the audiences have been responding to the show in a tremendously strong way.

"That reaction is up there with what I saw with some of my other big shows, somewhere in between Phantom and Miss Saigon. We've been tightening the show, crafting it and making the kinds of changes you can only do once it is in front of the audience. Now it is ready for London."

He added: "Tom and I have approached this by putting what we want on the stage, then stepping back and letting the public decide. Now we're coming to London we want audiences - and the critics - to come and discover the show for themselves.

"That is why we haven't been doing saturation advertising. Word of mouth is the most important thing. All my big hits have had a similar genesis. It is the show itself that makes people react, makes people tell their friends - hype doesn't do anybody any good."

Although weekend performances are booked out for months ahead, there are still tickets for what seems set to become the biggest hit of 2005 available. Mary Poppins is directed by Richard Eyre and the musical's "book", based on P L Travers, has been written by Oscar-winner Julian Fellowes.

It has taken 11 years for Sir Cameron to bring the flying nanny to the stage. He acquired the rights to the original books in 1993, but always knew the songs from the brilliant Disney film would be vital for any production of Poppins - and Disney refused to play ball.

Then three years ago Sir Cameron met Schumacher, they struck a deal and the real work began. The critics will have their say at Mary Poppins's press night on 15 December but - despite his determination not to make predictions - Sir Cameron knows he has a hit on his hands.

He said: "I couldn't be prouder." For information - and box office details - see www.marypoppins themusical.co.uk.

 

[wilki32]

Lets hope Bert has sorted out his London accent!!!

Anthony

 

[Beachangel]

My boss is going to see it in December. I may just renew my passport and head over the pond myself!

Btw, another blockebuster from the UK heads to Broadway in March......Chitty Chitty Bang Bang!

 

[NLK]

My DD and I went to see Chitty Chitty Bang Bang in Oct. We loved it and had a great time. As soon as the music started playing everyone started singing and singing LOUD. It has been running for over 3 years so it seems like it's doing well, and had some big English stars in it. I think that they might have to work on it alittle more to really make it shine and for it to do really well here. We did walk by the theatre where Mary Poppins is playing, they have adds for it everywhere. I spoke to someone in the office who said things weren't quite ready and somethings still needeed work. I wanted to see both shows but, we were very happy to Chitty Chitty Bang Bang. I would love to see it when it gets to Broadway.

 

[Safari Queen]

Had a chance to see Mary Poppins while on business in Bristol. It was very entertaining. Lots of clever special effects and excellent flying which I'm sure looked much better further back in the house (I was in the front row). The smoke effects got a bit out of hand, but my audience thoroughly enjoyed it. However, if you love "I Love To Laugh", prepare for disappointment. It's not there. The performances were satisfactory, but short on true magic. Still, worth the ticket price if you have little people to bring.

 

[Micca]

I am enthused about the initial reviews, but no " I Love To Laugh"??? That is such a highlight in the movie

 

[ravengirl]

As we only live down the road we went to see the production twice and we both found it magnificent and full of magic
Doing some business in london in January and taking neice (12) and nephew(9) this time around, I cannot wait to show them this as they have never been **dusted** by anything disney, they have never even heard of mary poppins!

 

[frozone]

Had a chance to see Mary Poppins while on business in Bristol. It was very entertaining. Lots of clever special effects and excellent flying which I'm sure looked much better further back in the house (I was in the front row). The smoke effects got a bit out of hand, but my audience thoroughly enjoyed it. However, if you love "I Love To Laugh", prepare for disappointment. It's not there. The performances were satisfactory, but short on true magic. Still, worth the ticket price if you have little people to bring.

I was just taking about this with friends over the holiday...they predicted this song would get the big heave-ho. How did they handle the jumping into the sidewalk scenes- puppetry? lighting effects?

 

[stal]

from what i have read, it is not the film of mary poppins on stage, rather using the songs from the film with changes to the story. i think...

 

[Greg K.]

Here's a review I found, from the Times of London. It opened there on December 15th, and looks to be a huge hit. I can't wait until it crosses the pond!

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/printFriendly/0,,1-245-1405202,00.html

From what I've read, there are several new songs, by a different song-writing team, and significant differences from the film: no dancing penguins, a somewhat darker tone (the Banks' marriage is in trouble), a scene where the children's toys attack them, and the addition of a character (lifted from the Travers' books) who is a a nasty Nanny -- the very opposite of Mary Poppins.

 

[dcentity2000]

Seen lots of reviews in merry (ie. wet) old England and they are all singing it's praises - seems like a smash hit.



Rich::

 

[Teris]

What you have to keep in mind, is that Disney fans are going to compare this version of Mary Poppins with the 'Disneyfied' version that starred Julie Andrews and Dick Van ****.

There was even a disclaimer by the show's producers warning parents that the show may frighten very young children.

This show is not being done to be sappy, but is more true to the orginal story written by a very young Pam Travers. I think she was around 9 years old or something when she wrote Mary Poppins. That in it'self is amazing to me. So bear in mind, that this show is more true to how the story was originally intended to be.

I am going to see it in January, and can't wait I am not a huge fan of the Disneyfied version of Mary Poppins, so I am curious about this one. It has gotten great reviews here.

 

[wdw_dine_junkie]

We have tickets for the Woman in White and Mary Poppins in July. I can't wait!

 

[rocketriter]

The New York Times generally liked the London show, but called it "Supercalidarkrevisionist."