Saving Mr Banks DVD

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.

I have like Mary Poppins ever since I was a child and saw the movie in 1964. I think I threw my kids a little crazy watching it when they were young. I still enjoyed it. Not sure how accurate this is in the making of Mary Poppins but it’s a good story.

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.