Disney's Mary Poppins Returns

[The Guard]

What are the odds this does really well on Christmas, and what’s its potential box office if it does?

 

[AResistor]

I used the term Millenial incorrectly since 20 somethings really aren't relevant to the point I or others were making in reference to knowledge about the Poppins character among children of today.

I'm literally talking about children who are between 4 and 10 years old, not 20 or early 30 somethings. While they may be parents who grew up with Poppins ,and may come out to see MPR, they aren't really the audience Disney wants to get interested in the Poppins character in 2018.

It’s still incorrect usage especially since it now sounds like you were trying to call people under 10 years old millennials? (Unsure if that’s what you’re saying, since my original post was generalized rather than to you - since many confuse the age range). But, there is a difference between saying that Millennials don’t know Marry Poppins and saying their kids don’t...

In order for one to make a point one can follow it’s important to say what one means.

 

[AResistor]

What are the odds this does really well on Christmas, and what’s its potential box office if it does?

I actually think this film will do better Christmas Day. In my area at least, it looks like it’s going to be the most crowded day for it.

I doubt that’ll be enough to save it at the box office though. But, maybe it’ll bring in more than the second day. This doesn’t need a sequel though and Disney is economically solid, so there’s nothing for audiences to lose from it not doing well in this case.

I just don’t think it has that “wow” factor, just nostalgia for families sharing part of their childhood over the holidays. I personally chose to hold this one off until Christmas Day though since it seemed to be the one out now that is the most Christmasy and it wouldn’t surprise me if other people did similarly.

I would have thought, and Disney did too, that Lin’s involvement would have helped here due to Hamilton.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

It's a holiday musical. It is going to have very fine legs. It is going to make plenty of money.

 

[Sithborg]

Saw it, generally enjoyed it. Probably would have enjoyed it more if I wasn't developing a headache. I feel there was a bit too much Lin Manuel Miranda.

I also think I have a thing for Emily Blunt as Mary Poppins.

 

[Lily Adler]

Saw it, generally enjoyed it. Probably would have enjoyed it more if I wasn't developing a headache. I feel there was a bit too much Lin Manuel Miranda.

I also think I have a thing for Emily Blunt as Mary Poppins.

Donald Trump in tennis shorts or leaning against a cold locker should help.

 

[AResistor]

Donald Trump in tennis shorts or leaning against a cold locker should help.

With making someone queasy?

 

[Lily Adler]

With making someone queasy?

That's the spirit.

 

[terry78]

Gurl bye.

 

[Sithborg]

Looking at how steady the Tue and Wed numbers seem to be, I think calls of it's failure were clearly too early.

 

[Iceman]

Mary Poppins is much more of a family Xmas movie than Aquaman or Bumblebee. I don't find this to be overly surprising. But if it holds well after 1st Jan then that will definitely be significant.

 

[The Guard]

I thought it was a solidly made film and had its moments, but overall was pretty mediocre, and in trying to recapture the same story and character points from the first film, it ends up being much less than it could have been.

Emily Blunt is a very good actress, and I liked a lot of her take on Mary. They didn't really do much of anything with Mary Poppins as a character, which could have set this film apart from the previous one. She's still just sort of a force of nature in the children's lives who is there to occassionally sing an instructive song.

Michael is just sort of a static, generic character, and there's nowhere interesting for him to go. He's useless without his wife and he's forgotten how to be a kid. Okay. Where have we seen that before?

I'm not sure what they were doing with Jane.

I think this was a misstep for Lin Manuel Miranda. He's a heck of a composer/lyricist, but he's not super talented as an actor or a singer. He's succeeded on Broadway because he's positioned himself to succeed, but he disappeared in this cast, even with moments designed to spotlight him. A lot of his stuff just felt perfunctory. He should have done less of his shtick, and something new. Trying to be "another Bert" with no really compelling connection to that character was a mistake. And all the film's mistakes flowed from that reliance on nostalgia. The filmmakers seem to misunderstand what made certain elements of the original so good to begin with.

For instance, "Spoonful of Sugar" doesn't work because of the influx of magic into the children's lives...it works because of the influx of magic on an intimate scale. It's scratching the surface of what Mary Poppins can do, and where we can go. When you dive into a CGI waterworld chock full of magic in her introductory sequence, there's really nowhere to go from there.

"Step in Time" didn't work just because it was a big choregraphed musical number. It worked because it was a big musical number on the expansive rooftops of London where the chimney sweeps risked their lives rather recklessly to express their joy. And there's a dash of magic to it. And other people saw it happening and reacted to it. A relatively contained wannabe number like "Trip the Light" simply doesn't have the charm, the energy, or the interesting choreography to compete.

I think the movie just needed a bit more thought and effort put into making it into its own animal.

 

[Mandon Knight]

Got over the $100m mark....

Mary Poppins Returns (2018) - Box Office Mojo

 

[pixen]

I thought it was a solidly made film and had its moments, but overall was pretty mediocre, and in trying to recapture the same story and character points from the first film, it ends up being much less than it could have been.

Emily Blunt is a very good actress, and I liked a lot of her take on Mary. They didn't really do much of anything with Mary Poppins as a character, which could have set this film apart from the previous one. She's still just sort of a force of nature in the children's lives who is there to occassionally sing an instructive song.

Michael is just sort of a static, generic character, and there's nowhere interesting for him to go. He's useless without his wife and he's forgotten how to be a kid. Okay. Where have we seen that before?

I'm not sure what they were doing with Jane.

I think this was a misstep for Lin Manuel Miranda. He's a heck of a composer/lyricist, but he's not super talented as an actor or a singer. He's succeeded on Broadway because he's positioned himself to succeed, but he disappeared in this cast, even with moments designed to spotlight him. A lot of his stuff just felt perfunctory. He should have done less of his shtick, and something new. Trying to be "another Bert" with no really compelling connection to that character was a mistake. And all the film's mistakes flowed from that reliance on nostalgia. The filmmakers seem to misunderstand what made certain elements of the original so good to begin with.

For instance, "Spoonful of Sugar" doesn't work because of the influx of magic into the children's lives...it works because of the influx of magic on an intimate scale. It's scratching the surface of what Mary Poppins can do, and where we can go. When you dive into a CGI waterworld chock full of magic in her introductory sequence, there's really nowhere to go from there.

"Step in Time" didn't work just because it was a big choregraphed musical number. It worked because it was a big musical number on the expansive rooftops of London where the chimney sweeps risked their lives rather recklessly to express their joy. And there's a dash of magic to it. And other people saw it happening and reacted to it. A relatively contained wannabe number like "Trip the Light" simply doesn't have the charm, the energy, or the interesting choreography to compete.

I think the movie just needed a bit more thought and effort put into making it into its own animal.

These are exactly the issues I had with the film.

There were moments that made no sense to me. The balloons at the end when Mary Poppins was nowhere to be seen. Why are they floating? It makes no sense.

 

[DocHolliday]

this Movie will easy make a Billion

lol

 

[Silvermoth]

Loved it, Emily blunt is superb and a multicultural cast makes it all the better. I wonder if they’ll make another one?

 

[Deck Rickard]

I liked this film a lot. Emily was the perfect Mary and Lin-Manuel was great as the heir apparent to Bert.

My only issues were that some of the musical numbers went on a tad too long, and the one with Lin-Manuel and the other lamp lighters just felt thrown in as a callback to the original film and a chance to give him another spotlight. I felt his character would have been better served there to have a big musical number supporting Jane and her labor movement (which was where he had been going right before that). It would have also added to their budding love story and given Jane more to do.

I also agree that it was strange to have Mary kind of absent towards the end of the film. She was more or less off to the side for most of the third act and I don’t know why they didn’t at least let her sing in the finale. That aside, the film is incredibly charming and I’d love see Mary and Jack come back for another adventure.

 

[Silvermoon]

 

[writer0327]

Looks like this won't even crack $300M worldwide

 

[Elayis]

If they'd kept the budget down the film would be doing fine as it's pulling typical numbers for a musical. But it boggles my mind that Disney blew $130 million on a Mary Poppins sequel. For the people who've seen it, can you see that dollar figure on screen? Does it look like it cost the same as both Ant-Man films?

 

[Spider-Fan]

I felt like you could see where the money was spent.

 

[Drizzle]

Got around to seeing this today with the girlfriend. It was good, but I definitely got that Force Awakens vibe from it in that it followed many of the same beats from the original. Each song was a companion piece to a song from the original. "Can You Imagine That" was the new "Spoonful of Sugar", "Trip A Little Light Fantastic" was the new "Step In Time", "Nowhere to Go But Up" was the new "Let's Go Fly A Kite", etc. Which would have been fine, but none of the new songs held a candle to the originals. That being said, Emily Blunt and Lin-Manuel Miranda were brilliant in it, with the latter especially being a show-stealer. It also warmed my heart to see the cameos from

Spoiler

Dick Van Dyke and Angela Lansbury

.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

I have read everywhere that the songs in this movie aren't good but I didn't feel like that at all. I do think the songs didn't have catchy tunes that will catch the fancy of the young crowd but they aren't bad or even boring. I thought all the songs were rich in lyrics. 'The Place Where Lost Things Go' (I think this one is quite hummable) & 'Nowhere To Go But Up' were excellent songs. While I also really liked the 'A Conversation' by Ben Whishaw.

I didn't like 'Underneath The Lovely London Sky' by Lin Manuel Miranda at the beginning and I thought the rest of the movie (songs) will be a slog to get through. But even he gets a lot better afterwards and I really liked what he did during the 'A Cover Is Not The Book' duet with Blunt and later in 'Trip A little Light Fantastic'.

 

[Blitzkrieg]

Did anyone else get the feeling that Blunt's performance was overhyped in here. I liked her in the movie but she didn't really have much to do. She was more or less a peripheral character and I feel that she was an afterthought outside of the song and dance sequences.

She also seemed very cold and distant at times. I hafta blame the writing here because I felt she acted smug and talked sass all the time but showed very little warmth.

 

[Gold Samurai]

Previously, Variety reported that only Black Panther’s “All the Stars” and A Star Is Born’s “Shallow” would receive performance time during the ceremony.

This has been changed and now “The Place Where Lost Things Go” will in fact be performed on the Oscars and a special surprise guest will be singing it.

I'm glad they're allowing other nominated songs a chance.