Saving Mr. Banks

[roliepolieoliefan]

I would not take children to see this movie. The dramatic scene with the mom is very inappropriate for children, and the last few scenes the father was in were very graphic, as well..

I literally just got home from seeing the movie 1/2 hour ago with my 10 yo DD and 15 yo DS and have no idea what dramatic scene was inappropriate for children.

The scenes at the end with the dad were mild IMOP!

All 3 of us thought the movie was wonderful!

Question for whoever seen it::::

At the end when the movie is showing at the premier and Pamela starts crying. Walt leans over and says something and Pamela said something back to Walt. What did she say? The whole theatre laughed and DS and I didnt know what she said.

 

[Lorelei Lee]

I literally just got home from seeing the movie 1/2 hour ago with my 10 yo DD and 15 yo DS and have no idea what dramatic scene was inappropriate for children.

The scenes at the end with the dad were mild IMOP!

All 3 of us thought the movie was wonderful!

Question for whoever seen it::::

At the end when the movie is showing at the premier and Pamela starts crying. Walt leans over and says something and Pamela said something back to Walt. What did she say? The whole theatre laughed and DS and I didnt know what she said.

You didn't understand why the mother was in the water?

 

[roliepolieoliefan]

You didn't understand why the mother was in the water?

Oh that!

Yes I did. I guess it didnt hit me as being inappropriate for my 10 yo.
Though I dont sensor too much for my kids.

 

[pat fan]

Oh that!

Yes I did. I guess it didnt hit me as being inappropriate for my 10 yo.
Though I dont sensor too much for my kids.

She said she hated animation.

 

[roliepolieoliefan]

She said she hated animation.

Thank u!

 

[tvguy]

It was rated PG-13 so clearly the rating service felt it might not be appropriate for anyone younger.

I enjoyed it. While there are the tapes of the time Travers was in Los Angeles working with the Disney folks, the movie is a mostly fictional account of how a fictional movie was made from a fiction book influenced by the author's childhood.

 

[roliepolieoliefan]

It was rated PG-13 so clearly the rating service felt it might not be appropriate for anyone younger. .

Yea I got that but :

Maybe its just me but Saving Mr Banks was mild compared to something like White House Down with the same rating.

I know the rating service have their reasons and u know better than me TV guy , but things Ive heard on shows like 2 broke girls and two and half men are worse.

The family went to dinner tonight and we were telling DH all about the movie. We all loved it, something I definetly want on DVD.

 

[NotUrsula]

It was rated PG-13 so clearly the rating service felt it might not be appropriate for anyone younger.

I'm surprised that you would say that, given the industry that you work in. Producers will have the director deliberately ask for a PG-13 on a film that they want adult audiences to want to go see. It is widely-known that younger adult audiences (that coveted 25-39 demographic) will be less likely to wish to see a film that is rated G or even PG, and I would think that would be an especially problematic issue on a film with Disney's name directly attached.

These days, straight PG is almost pablum, compared to the issues depicted in PG films back in the 80's, especially films aimed squarely at tweens, like the work of John Hughes.

FWIW, my 84 yo MIL says that she will not see it, as it hits a bit too close to home. Her father had long-term tuberculosis along with a drinking problem, and died young in almost exactly the same manner as Travers Goff.

The viewers most likely to be disturbed by SMB are not children, but women in a select club (of which I happen to be a member): Daddy's Girls whose fathers died young. My sisters and I cried through just about every moment of it.

 

[zoemurr]

We saw it last night and did enjoy it. But a whole bunch of the movie was "made for movie" stuff. Obviously, since it was a Disney movie, it portrayed Disney in a great light.

However, there is something to be said that PJ Travers never allowed Disney to touch her stuff again, even putting it into her will. Disney wanted to do a sequel, but she would never again allow Disney or anybody affiliated with the movie to touch her stuff again.

She was horrible, but Disney was not the understanding saint they portrayed either.

It was a good film as a fictional film.

SPOILER:

I'm surprised more people are not calling Disney out. He did none of the things he promised her he would do. (Except change the ending.. but I think they liked that best as well.)

Yes, she was a PITA. But she had every right to have a huge say in that movie and he stepped all over her feelings. If JK Rowling had said, "no animation" I don't think she would have just been dismissed. I don't understand why she wasn't given a viewing before the premier. Seems Disney intentionally shut her out. She was a strong woman trying to protect the only part of her life she was proud of. I read somewhere that now Disney had tarnished her fictional character in the MP movie, and her life in this new movie but acting like she was ok with it. Interesting perspective.

She apparently cried tears of hatred, not joy, as she watched the premier ashamed and ignored. I did not like how the "Disneyfied" the ending.

 

[WebmasterMaryJo]

I agree that she wasn't happy with the movie, and she may not have been invited to the premiere, but I am not sure that she was ignored.

I'm not saying that W. Disney was enthusiastic about her being there, but I think if she were ignored, these pictures wouldn't have existed:

 

[zoemurr]

Interesting. I wonder when those were taken. From this biography they didn't speak until after the show. "The première was the first Travers had seen of the movie — she did not initially receive an invitation, but had embarrassed a Disney executive into extending one — and it was a shock. Afterward, as Richard Sherman [played by Jason Schwartzman in Banks] recalled, she tracked down Disney at the after-party, which was held in a giant white tent in the parking lot adjoining the Chinese Theatre. "Well," she said loudly. "The first thing that has to go is the animation sequence." Disney looked at her coolly. "Pamela," he replied, "the ship has sailed."

 

[goofinoff]

wraps up my sentiment. I loved Emma's acting but I did not like the Travers character at all. As I said before, I really couldn't find a reason for her disdain and condescension. Babies on planes, drivers who are professional, perfect strangers, all targets of her nastiness. I know Walt was no saint but god bless him for really wanting to take on this book. I would have booted her and her book back across the pound.

The Travers "character" was a real person. That's just how she was in real life. Emma Thompson's portrayal was fantastic and is Oscar deserving!!!!!

I took my daughters to see it today (11 & 13) and they had no problem with the "dark scenes". They thoroughly enjoyed it. We've watched Mary Poppins together since they were little so it's a special memory for us.

 

[holycow]

Yes, she was a PITA. But she had every right to have a huge say in that movie and he stepped all over her feelings. If JK Rowling had said, "no animation" I don't think she would have just been dismissed. I don't understand why she wasn't given a viewing before the premier. Seems Disney intentionally shut her out. She was a strong woman trying to protect the only part of her life she was proud of. I read somewhere that now Disney had tarnished her fictional character in the MP movie, and her life in this new movie but acting like she was ok with it. Interesting perspective.

She apparently cried tears of hatred, not joy, as she watched the premier ashamed and ignored. I did not like how the "Disneyfied" the ending.
Last edited by zoemurr; Today at 06:53 PM.

Then why did she even entertain the idea of going to Ca? She was broke and needed money. Her books were not read by anyone any more.

If Disney had not of made the film she would have been forgotten.

 

[goofinoff]

I forgot to mention that people in the theater were applauding at the end of the movie. I don't think I've ever been to a movie where that has happened. My kids thought the actual audio tapes at the end were so cool.

 

[tvguy]

I'm surprised that you would say that, given the industry that you work in. Producers will have the director deliberately ask for a PG-13 on a film that they want adult audiences to want to go see. It is widely-known that younger adult audiences (that coveted 25-39 demographic) will be less likely to wish to see a film that is rated G or even PG, and I would think that would be an especially problematic issue on a film with Disney's name directly attached.

These days, straight PG is almost pablum, compared to the issues depicted in PG films back in the 80's, especially films aimed squarely at tweens, like the work of John Hughes.

FWIW, my 84 yo MIL says that she will not see it, as it hits a bit too close to home. Her father had long-term tuberculosis along with a drinking problem, and died young in almost exactly the same manner as Travers Goff.

The viewers most likely to be disturbed by SMB are not children, but women in a select club (of which I happen to be a member): Daddy's Girls whose fathers died young. My sisters and I cried through just about every moment of it.

Actually, the industry I work in is the reason I say that. On the news end these days, we are VERY family friendly when it comes what we talk about and show. Anything that could be inappropriate has to have a warning before hand, and the video we show is sanitized. We even had a debate over whether showing a needle going into someone's arm while getting a flu shot was too disturbing to show.....ultimately the video was cut so you see the needle going towards the arm, but not the actual needle stick. 30 years ago that wouldn't even have been questions.
I have to admit, the entertainment side has looser rules, but after watching some old Dean Martin roasts on Youtube, even Family Guy is generally less offensive.

 

[Geoff_M]

I forgot to mention that people in the theater were applauding at the end of the movie.

I've personally seen this spontaneously happen even at our local theaters. Not often, but perhaps five or so times in my life. I always wonder why this happens, or who their applauding to... the projectionist? Usually it's a "block-buster" type film that's just been released. IIRC, the last time I saw this was for the first Harry Potter film.

I think this would happen frequently at Hollywood premiers given the fact that the audience knows that the people that made the film and the actors are usually in attendance.

 

[asta]

I forgot to mention that people in the theater were applauding at the end of the movie. I don't think I've ever been to a movie where that has happened. My kids thought the actual audio tapes at the end were so cool.

There was applause at the end of the movie when I saw it. It doesn't happen often so I think the movie is touching people in a special way.

 

[mumto3girls]

People applauded in the showing I saw Saturday night as well. It was by no means everyone, but a significant number.

 

[NicoleWinchester]

No one left the theater until the credits were over. I've never seen that before. There were no applause though. Maybe it's a regional thing.

 

[tajz90]

Just about everyone stayed through the credits, but no applause.

We've been in movies where the audience applauded before. Independence Day got a standing ovation from a packed house.
Not a single person moved until the lights came up for Schlinder's List, but I believe that was more out of respect than the interesting tidbits offered during the credits.