Why I Saw It: You had me at Tom Hanks playing Walt Disney.
Cast: Emma Thompson is pretty great. We can all agree on that, right? Basically, she is the opposite of Karen Eiffel, the uptight, wet blanket, P. L. Travers, the author of Mary Poppins. She is so good too. I was expecting a completely one-note character and was pleasantly surprised. Tom Hanks as Walt Disney is unfair. Why don't you just cast Dustin Hoffman as, I don't know, Lenny Bruce (...what's that? They did? Good god! How have I not seen that?!). Hanks is able to pull off Disney which is tougher than it sounds. Those are some big shoes to fill. There are some people out there hoping for a darker look at Disney. I could not agree less. I found this to be a very appropriate look at him for this movie. Paul Giamatti has a surprisingly emotional turn as Travers' driver in L.A.. Bradley Whitford, B.J. Novak, and Jason Schwartzman are the screenwriters that work with Travers and are mostly there for so laughs and for Travers to have someone to foil. Colin Farrell is Travers' father in flashbacks and does a solid job.
Plot: Apparently, Travers was not the easiest woman to work with. The movie retells the final stages of Disney courting her for the rights to Mary Poppins and the development process of the story. The movie has one major flaw as far as I am concerned. It doesn't approach the flashback scenes, of which there are many, with anywhere near the interest it does in the movie's present. The flashbacks are absolutely vital to the story but they almost always were a drag to watch. Everything in the movie's present I enjoyed greatly. I've heard this described as "a crowd pleaser", which sounds a little diminutive. Then again, that's exactly what it is. It broaches some darker themes but never gets too bogged down in them and offers a small glimpse into the days of Walt's Disney.
Elephant in the Room: This sure seems pretty whitewashed. If you enjoy this movie, do yourself a favor and don't read up on the actual events. Disney and Travers rather famously clashed and the movie makes is seem more cordial than it apparently was. If you are looking for the dark side of Disney, you won't find it. First of all, why would Disney release a movie like that? More importantly, that wouldn't serve the story at all.
To Sum Things Up:
I ate this movie up.I'm a sucker for just about everything it did. The look at Disney studios in the 60s. The script writing process. Walt Disney in the flesh. By the time it ends, it leaves you in a good place and that's all I wanted from it. Simply put, if you have any affection for the Disney company, especially its history, there's plenty to enjoy.
Verdict (?): Weakly Recommend
No comments:
Post a Comment