• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

News Mary Poppins Returns trailer

The Nth Doctor

The Nth Doctor

Wanderer in the Fourth Dimension
Premium Member
I could've sworn there was a thread about this upcoming film already, but I couldn't find it. The trailer for the film was released today and it's practically perfect in every way:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Having grown up on the original, I was very hesitant about this sequel, but after the casting and on-set photographs came out, I felt reassured. After seeing this trailer, I'm genuinely excited. It hits all of the right nostalgic notes and I think Emily Blunt will do an excellent job as Mary Poppins. Plus, she has Julie Andrews' blessing!

I also love that they're using traditional 2D animation of the 60s instead of using state-of-the-art 3D CGI animation.

And is it just me, but does the film feel like, due to some of the action sequences and the inclusion of Angela Landsbury, it's also a spiritual sequel to Bedknobs and Broomsticks (which also starred David Tomlinson)?
 
Well, it's like not anyone is expecting historical accuracy from a film with flying nannies, singing animated penguins, and TARDIS-esque carpet bags. ;)
 
Not really sure how to feel about this. I don’t get the whimsy feel of Emily Blunt as Mary Poppins but it’s only a trailer so I’ll have to see the movie before critiquing. I don’t really think a sequel was necessary but we live in a world where sequels and remakes are the thing to do, I guess.
 
Is that the Angel of Death I see there? She should feel right at home here since she was in Bedknobs and Broomsticks.
 
Last edited:
Nyotarules said:
The Empire was still alive and kicking
Click to expand...
That's true, but I don't recall Mary Poppins being about British Imperialism. It's a fantasy about the importance of family and one's inner child. Being set during the age of the British Empire doesn't equal a rah rah Rule Britannia movie.
 
How on Earth is this thread more focused on the British Empire than a whimsical children's musical? :wtf:

Janeway’s Girl said:
Not really sure how to feel about this. I don’t get the whimsy feel of Emily Blunt as Mary Poppins but it’s only a trailer so I’ll have to see the movie before critiquing. I don’t really think a sequel was necessary but we live in a world where sequels and remakes are the thing to do, I guess.
Click to expand...
A sequel is certainly not necessary, but now that it's been made and we're given a glimpse of it, I can see it working quite nicely. It follows the common turn of children losing their imaginations and sense of fun after growing up that we often see in extensions of childhood classics like Hook (I'm an unforgiving defender of that film) and most recently Christopher Robin (I haven't seen it yet but I expect I'll enjoy it).
 
Last edited:
Emh said:
A sequel is certainly not necessary, but now that's been made and we're given a glimpse of it, I can see it working quite nicely. It follows the common turn of children losing their imaginations and sense of fun after growing up that we often see in extensions of childhood classics like Hook (I'm unforgiving defender of that film) and most recently Christopher Robin (I haven't seen it yet but I expect I'll enjoy it).
Click to expand...

I'm getting Return to Neverland vibes (which took place during WWII).
 
Emh said:
A sequel is certainly not necessary, but now that's been made and we're given a glimpse of it, I can see it working quite nicely. It follows the common turn of children losing their imaginations and sense of fun after growing up that we often see in extensions of childhood classics like Hook (I'm unforgiving defender of that film) and most recently Christopher Robin (I haven't seen it yet but I expect I'll enjoy it).
Click to expand...

For what it's worth, I do not understand the hate Hook gets. Julia Roberts' performance is not a reason to damn the entire film.
 
I was a big fan of the books which I read as a kid. But I don't recall being that impressed by the original movie. Back then I wasn't much into musicals so maybe that was the problem. I've also never been a Julie Andrews fan.

But this trailer looks good. I'm a big Emily Blunt fan and if Lin-Manuel can do any wrong, I haven't seen it. There were multiple books, so a sequel makes sense. The thing I liked most about the books was the fantasy. If the new movie has that, I'm sure I'll like it.
 
I think it looks fantastic, but I've been excited about it since it was first announced. I don't think the casting could have possibly done any better than Blunt.

Emh said:
How on Earth is this thread more focused on the British Empire than a whimsical children's musical? :wtf:
Click to expand...
WQFbahM.jpg
 
Like the Wizard Of Oz, there were many more books than the original movie was based on. A Mary Poppins sequel could have easily happened in the late 1960's.

This trailer certainly has an old-school feel to it. The look, the animation. This might be the first proper sequel to a movie, ever ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top