Serving up this steaming pile of
Celebrity Gossip
Gay Politics
Gay News
and Pointless Bitchery
Since 1995

Saving Mr. Banks

Charming trailer for the probably white-washed history of Disney's adaptation of Mary Poppins.

Tom Hanks IS Walt Disney.

Emma Thompson IS PL Travers.

Jason Schwartzman and BJ Novak ARE the Sherman Brothers.

Ruth Wilson, Colin Farrell, and Rachel Griffiths play Travers' mother, father, and aunt, respectively, in flashbacks.

And a fact that will definitely not be touched on, Travers was bisexual.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 23601/15/2014

It wasn't even on my radar until I saw the trailer, and now I'm looking forward to it.

I'm sure Hanks and Thompson will score Golden Globe noms at least.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 307/12/2013

Ugh I HATE titles like this where the first word is a verb!!!

by The Voice of the Nightreply 407/12/2013

Colin Farrell seems to be trying to keep a low profile lately. I wonder if he's purposely trying to do this so he can maintain a more sedate lifestyle and sobriety. Or has he fallen out of favor in HW?

by The Voice of the Nightreply 507/12/2013

Travers three big problems were the sweetening of Poppins as a character, the songs, and the use of animation.

Rewatching Mary Poppins when older, one thing that totally went over my head as a child about Poppins was how strangely cold and passive aggressive she could be. Even having a tape measure that says 'practically perfect in every way' for HER height strikes me as a bit fucked up.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 607/12/2013

[quote]She stipulated in her will that no Americans be involved in bringing the Disney film to the stage

She apparently stated outright that the Sherman Brothers waren't allowed anywhere near it.

Perhaps the fact that it's rated PG-13 means that they're willing to let it be slightly darker.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 707/12/2013

"The Mary Poppins in the book wasn't especially sweet."

I haven't seen the stage musical (and don't intend to), but I gather the Mary in this case is colder than Julie Andrews' version.

Or it may have started out that way in London and changed by the time it got to NYC.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 807/12/2013

I'm not clicking on a Disney link, thank you very much.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 907/12/2013

Here it is embedded from YouTube on Jezebel.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 1007/12/2013

[quote]Ugh I HATE titles like this where the first word is a verb!!!

I wish they could have used the title of Travers' biography "Out of the Sky She Came," but I doubt it would have worked with Disney's no-doubt sunnier version of what happened between the studio and Travers.

Victoria Summer, the actress playing Julie Andrews will probably look astonishing like the real thing even without much make-up.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 1107/12/2013

Why is Hanks using a southern accent when Disney had a very distinctive mid-west accent?

by The Voice of the Nightreply 1207/12/2013

Because he is too drunk and too rich to learn a new accent, R12.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 1307/12/2013

Well, Thompson sounds like she's doing a very Received Pronunciation version of her own accent, even though Travers was Australian.

Also, I find it odd that she insisted on being called "Mrs. Travers" even though A) she never married, and B) PL Travers was a pen name anyway.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 1407/12/2013

[quote]The Mary Poppins in the book wasn't especially sweet.

Neither was the Mary Poppins in the movie. Julie Andrews' MP gets a lot of flack for this, but as R6 pointed out, she was cold, passive aggressive, narcissistic, and a bit of a killjoy. Rather, it's Andrews' Maria from THE SOUND OF MUSIC that is sickeningly sweet and sentimental.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 1507/12/2013

Sounds like movie the Mormons will live.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 1607/12/2013

[quote]She stipulated in her will that no Americans be involved in bringing the Disney film to the stage

Seems as if J.K. Rowling took a page out of Travers' book (pun intended, I guess) when she stipulated that her Harry Potter characters only be played by Brits after an American (Liam Aiken) had been originally cast. Bitches, both!

Imagine if American authors/filmmakers insisted on the same? No Brits/Aussies would have acting jobs since they always seem to play Americans and American icons (the recent Batman, Spider-Man, Superman franchises).

by The Voice of the Nightreply 1707/12/2013

[post by racist shit-stain #3 removed.]

by The Voice of the Nightreply 1807/12/2013

She sounded like a real bitch. Adopted a kid and didn't tell him he had a twin brother.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 1907/12/2013

They used some, but not all of the Shermans' songs in musical, but new songs were added with music by George Stiles and lyrics by Anthony Drewe, who, per Travers' will, were British.

And Julian Fellowes, of Downton Abbey fame, wrote the book.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 2007/12/2013

[quote]I thought the Sherman Brothers wrote the songs?

They did for the movie, but then they got some unknown Brits to write additional songs for the stage adaptation.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 2107/12/2013

I'm not buying Tom Hanks as Walt Disney.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 2207/12/2013

[quote]She sounded like a real bitch. Adopted a kid and didn't tell him he had a twin brother.

Well, Walt Disney wasn't exactly a mensch either, but there's no way Walt Disney Pictures would allow the man himself to be portrayed as the guy who ratted out animators to HUAC.

This is just a nostalgia piece, and as long as they don't take too many liberties with the story, and if the performances are good, I'll be happy.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 2307/12/2013

TWEE

by The Voice of the Nightreply 2407/12/2013

I saw the stage version and have no memory of it except the end when they hoisted the actress up on a pulley and dragged her in the air. I was hoping this would mean the show was over, and it did. I may have slept through part of it. I am not one of those who "magic of the Broadway stage" types.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 2507/12/2013

[quote]I wonder if a proper Disney biopic will ever be made.

Considering how iron-fisted the Mouse is, they'd have to do it without using any copyrighted materials. I doubt that could ever work.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 2707/12/2013

If you don't think there's at least something a bit sinister about Mary Poppins, check out this trailer, recut to make it look like a horror movie.

Also, for all her hatred of the movie, I wonder if Travers ever considered that without Walt Disney, it's entirely possible Mary Poppins would been forgotten.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 2807/13/2013

[post by racist shit-stain #3 removed.]

by The Voice of the Nightreply 2907/13/2013

[quote]Ugh I HATE titles like this where the first word is a verb!!!

I like how you choose your issues, R4.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 3007/13/2013

Leonardo di Caprio would make a great young(ish) Walt Disney in a bio-pic

by The Voice of the Nightreply 3107/13/2013

R26 I thought I read some where that Clooney is trying to get one made. As another has said, I doubt it will happen though. I've been to the Walt museum in San Francisco and while it was interesting (especially the early family history) there is so much they would leave out to just make to make it seem as if he were some saint.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 3207/13/2013

And because the scenes taking place at the 60s-era Disneyland, I had to include a link to Yesterland.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 3307/13/2013

I would never have described Andrews' Mary as "sweet." Among other things, she gaslights the children by telling them they didn't really see what they just saw. When they tell her what a fun day they had at the park (the animated sequence), she tells them she doesn't know what they're talking about. Ain't nothing sweet about that.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 3407/13/2013

Then you may love this movie, R4, because the first word of the title is a gerund, not a verb.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 3507/13/2013

Hilarious, R34. She also teaches them that toys and clothes can be made to pick themselves up and put themselves away. Not to mention the way she wins the children's love and trust then abandons them forever on about two minutes' notice.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 3607/13/2013

I think I am finally at the point where I just can't watch a movie with Tom Hanks in it.

How did that happen!!?

by The Voice of the Nightreply 3707/13/2013

It looks interesting, if only to see how they portray them. Hanks is too big a start to make me believe him as Disney. Emma Thompson looks good as usual.

I agree with VOTN, it's doubtful anybody but old Brits would remember MP today if not for the movie.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 3807/13/2013

[quote]I wonder if Travers ever considered that without Walt Disney, it's entirely possible Mary Poppins would been forgotten.

I only knew of Mary Poppins from the movie. Didn't know it was based on a book for girls.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 3907/13/2013

I read most (if not all) of the Mary Poppins books when I was a child, and here, three decades or so later, I'm finding it hard to remember much about them. Of all things, the only detail that sticks out in my mind is Mary taking the children to see a woman who broke off her own fingers and they were made of gingerbread. So it's kind of hard to see it on the shelf next to Alice in Wonderland (with Lewis Carroll's puns and mathematical jokes), Peter Pan (JM Barrie's story that even if children have to grow up, they don't have to stop believing in magic), or, to site a more recent example, Harry Potter (which aside from being full of similar puns as Alice and containing the classic Joseph Campbell archetypes is also a morality play about friendship, bravery, intelligence, sacrifice, and decency).

And--I may die for this--I actually feel the same way about MGM and The Wizard of Oz, which also departs significantly from the source material.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 4007/13/2013

I'd have cast John Waters as Walt Disney.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 4107/13/2013

Now THAT'S a movie I'd pay to see, R41.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 4207/13/2013

R37=Rita Wilson

by The Voice of the Nightreply 4307/13/2013

[quote]Leonardo di Caprio would make a great young(ish) Walt Disney in a bio-pic

Ryan Gosling looks more like him.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 4407/13/2013

Apparently, I'm not the only who thinks so. Here's a poster for a fake Disney biopic that someone made:

by The Voice of the Nightreply 4507/13/2013

In the late 1920s producer Charles Mintz screwed Disney out of Oswald the Lucky Rabbit as well as most of his animation staff in an unsuccessful bid to gain control of the Walt Disney studio. Disney responded by inventing Mickey Mouse and becoming openly distrustful of Jews ever after. That's why it would be touchy to make a Hollywood bio-pic about Walt Disney.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 4607/14/2013

[quote]they got some unknown Brits to write additional songs for the stage adaptation.

And not one song comes close to the marvelous ones The Shermans wrote.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 4707/14/2013

The stage version of Poppins is a piece of shit. Walt Disney knew what he was doing when he cut some of Travers' crappy ideas (like Mrs. Cory) out of the film. The new songs by Stiles and Drewe can't hold a candle to the Sherman originals.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 4807/14/2013

[quote] I'm not clicking on a Disney link, thank you very much.

Why? What have they done to you?

The film looks good. I want to see it.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 5012/01/2013

Walt Disney was a racist and anti semite

by The Voice of the Nightreply 5112/01/2013

What really bothers me is his willing testimony toward the HUAC hearings in the 1940's and 1950's.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 5212/01/2013

Does to. Hanks play Walt as an anti Semitic ,hitler loving fascist? He was you know.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 5312/01/2013

[quote]Considering how iron-fisted the Mouse is, they'd have to do it without using any copyrighted materials. I doubt that could ever work.

No honest biography will ever be made. If you doubt this, consider the strange case of Cornelius Vanderbilt Wood, the actual designer and driving force behind Disneyland.

Not only does his name never appear in any book about Disney or Disneyland, he has literally been airbrushed out of all the photos. Disney has been burying any trace of him since he had his falling out with Walt back int he 1950's (for daring to take some of the credit), and if you want any help from the corporation, even the use of photos, you do not mention C.V. Wood.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 5412/01/2013

Lucas Hnath's play A Reading of an Unproduced Screenplay About the Death of Walt Disney is a great portrait of a self-righteous narcissist. That is the Disney I want to see on screen.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 5512/01/2013

[quote] Walt Disney was a racist and anti semite

He clearly loved the Sherman brothers who wrote all the songs for Mary Poppins and they loved him...so he couldn't have been a full blown anti-semite.

I've been watching the extras on the Poppins DVD.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 5612/01/2013

r51 and r53 are correct. My parents never took us to Disneyland or Disneyworld because Disney was an avowed racist and jew-hater. It's documented and I'm sure this whitewash of a movie will not portray him correctly.

Anyone who claims to like Disney or has visited Disneyworld or Disneyland is extremely evil and racist.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 5712/01/2013

[quote]Anyone who claims to like Disney or has visited Disneyworld or Disneyland is extremely evil and racist.

Wow. Guess you don't vacation much in Germany then?

by The Voice of the Nightreply 5812/01/2013

[quote] And not one song comes close to the marvelous ones The Shermans wrote.

The Sherman brothers had "ghost writers." Even they didn't write very much of their own stuff.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 5912/01/2013

MARY POPPINS out on blu-Ray this month.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 6012/01/2013

[quote]Anyone who claims to like Disney or has visited Disneyworld or Disneyland is extremely evil and racist.

This is retarded for many reasons, not least of which: many black people and Jews like Disney or have visited Disneyland. Are they racist and evil?

by The Voice of the Nightreply 6112/01/2013

r62, I do not notice the song similarities at all in the ones you mention!

by The Voice of the Nightreply 6212/01/2013

[quote] I do not notice the song similarities at all in the ones you mention!

I'll bet there's a lot you 'do not notice'.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 6312/01/2013

Oh, sorry. I didn't get the memo about having to agree with you at all costs.

I'll get back in line. (gag).

by The Voice of the Nightreply 6412/01/2013

Bullshit R59.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 6512/01/2013

Yes, r61.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 6612/02/2013

Sorry to disappoint you, R67, but I know several people who have worked with the brothers over the years.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 6712/02/2013

Saw it at a preview screening last week and Emma Thompson is, not surprisingly, excellent in it.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 6812/02/2013

Ugh, looks sappy. They just grafted the same old 'uptight Brit learns to relax from wacky American' story onto a biopic. Because it's Disney though, instead of learning said lesson from getting fucked she rides a merry-go-round.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 6912/02/2013

[/italic] You have really thought about this, R72.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 7012/02/2013

Two questions:

What was the result of the Supercalifragilisticexpialadocious lawsuit?

Does anyone remember the Sherman Bros. 1920s pastiche stage musical from the 1970s?

by The Voice of the Nightreply 7112/02/2013

While she had a series of passionate crushes on men there is a suggestion that she had lesbian tendencies, given the intense and often tempestuous relationships she forged with women. In 1939 when Travers was well into her 30s she adopted one twin. She waited 17 years before telling the boy he was adopted and had a sibling.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 7212/02/2013

Coming soon to NBC Daytime: "Saving Susan Banks," starring Eileen Davidson in multiple roles and Jon Lovitz as Ken Corday.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 7312/02/2013

I hate Jason Schwartzman with the heat of ten thousand suns.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 7412/12/2013

Absolutely loved this movie. Way more than I thought I would.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 7512/12/2013

YIKES!

I thought the movie was dreadful. Yes, a mostly great script, completely fucked over by overwrought direction and cartoonish, Disney-fied performances.

I love Emma Thompson but she is forced to play one "grumpy lady" note until the very end of the movie when she is magically transformed at the premiere.

And every issue that Travers adamantly raises: no music, no animation, casting choices, is interestingly brought up and then ignored without telling us how Disney convinced her otherwise.

Tom Hanks plays Disney like a bemused buffoon and looks potted throughout and wears the worst wig imaginable. All of the wigs are wiggy, including Colin Farrell's.

I couldn't help but notice that Tony Walton was never mentioned by name as the Production/Costume Designer of Mary Poppins, even though we see copies of many of his original sketches on display throughout the action of the film. But as far as I could see, he doesn't even get a credit at the end of the film.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 7612/16/2013

Not being a MP scholar nor having seen the movie in forever I could not figure out why they used that title. I kept wondering who the hell Mr. Banks was and what they were saving him from. Only after I did some digging did I find out he was the patriarch of the family. Seems like a poor choice and without all the media blast would it find an audience.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 7712/16/2013

Why does this film have a PG-13 rating?

by The Voice of the Nightreply 7812/16/2013

The movie had the audacity to sentimentalize this woman's blinding neurosis. Fuck everybody concerned with this poison.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 7912/16/2013

Travers hated the finished product.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 8012/16/2013

[quote]Why does this film have a PG-13 rating?

Because the film was honest about Walt Disney's chain smoking. Apparently, inhaling on a cigarette is worse that sex and/or violence. Though, as was pointed out in another thread, it was probably intentional to get the PG-13 rating. Anything less is considered box office poison. It is sort of interesting that they were so accurate about his smoking and so dishonest about the rest of the story.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 8112/16/2013

What was her blinding neurosis?

by The Voice of the Nightreply 8212/16/2013

R82 #1 on that list is completely wrong. In the film, Mary Poppins is not a smiling, cheery person. She is strict, a bit of a killjoy, and somewhat bitchy. She certainly has her tender moments, but they're few and far between. I think people get her confused with Julie Andrews' other "singing nanny" role -- Maria von Trapp in THE SOUND OF MUSIC, who is indeed sweet and fun-loving.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 8312/16/2013

[all posts by pathetic racist, sexist, anti-semitic, homophobic flame bait troll removed (but you might want to not encourage it in the future because it will be back because you keep giving it what it wants and it really does not believe any of the things it types), ISP notified with full text of all posts.]

by The Voice of the Nightreply 8412/16/2013

[quote]she was promised she would be a creative consultant.

Is this correct? Everything that I have read in the past said that Travers had script approval. That is very different than being a creative consultant. Which is correct?

The creative consultant title is often a way for a business, (any business, not just the film industry), to gag the creator of the material. The title implies that the person supports the business, but since the person is under the employ of the business, he/she cannot speak openly about the project with approval.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 8512/16/2013

Sorry, without approval....

by The Voice of the Nightreply 8612/16/2013

Alice "Color Purple" Walker is a fanatically anti-Israel, pro-Palestinian zealot. Can we hate on her the way Walt is loathed?

by The Voice of the Nightreply 8812/16/2013

Yet Tom Hanks as Walt is only seen smoking once and it's so quick, if you blink your eyes, you'll miss the ciggie.

This is a potentially fascinating story that should have been made by any studio but Disney.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 8912/16/2013

r105 you are a godsend to this thread--

by The Voice of the Nightreply 9012/16/2013

I can't stand Tom attention whore Hanks and Emma Thompson. Every time they do a film portraying someone in films now a days, they actors are too on like they make the person who they are portraying like they are in a musical. Why did they make a movie on this subject in the first place? Hollywood doesn't know what they are doing anymore.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 9212/16/2013

I've read in some recent article (can't remember where so I can't link it), that in reality Travers had already signed the contract before flying in to meet with Walt, and all the squabbling after that was in the context of her contactual role as creative consultant. If, as someone up-thread said, that the movie shows the fights, but not the resolution of how Walt got his way, maybe this was why. Walt already had complete authority over the movie adaptation.

But I don't know whether this is at all true, of if the article's author was just incompetent.

Anyone know better?

by The Voice of the Nightreply 9312/16/2013

I can only think Emma ad Tom got paid a shitload to make this dreck.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 9412/16/2013

That is ridiculous J.K. Rowling and Travers didn't want Americans involved. We have British actors portraying Americans in American films constantly. Just recently, the Bonnie and Clyde made for TV film, Bonnie was played by a British actress, really? The British constantly bitch about Americans yet, they fly over here to grab any and all the opportunities Americans give them in the film industry and the news stations. Yet, J.K. Rowling has a ride based on her books in Universals Studios which she, I'm sure receives tremendous sums of money, what a jackass!

BTW, Tom Hanks sucks as Disney. He didn't do his homework and I think Tom is a jerk for portraying Disney as a showman. I read a no holds barred biography on Disney and the author mentioned the negatives and positives of Disney.Disney was physically abused by his father and they lived on a farm with lots of animals. When his father would beat him, he would run away and sit near the farm animals pretending that they spoke to him and they were confronting to him. The author said Disneyland is a psychological reflection of Walt Disney's childhood.

BTW, Walt Disney loved the characters, the children and the child like fun. Probably because his childhood was dysfunctional and he didn't receive a real childhood.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 9512/16/2013

[all posts by pathetic racist, sexist, anti-semitic, homophobic flame bait troll removed (but you might want to not encourage it in the future because it will be back because you keep giving it what it wants and it really does not believe any of the things it types), ISP notified with full text of all posts.]

by The Voice of the Nightreply 9612/16/2013

[quote]I can only think Emma ad Tom got paid a shitload to make this dreck.

They'd throw a lot of money at two stars who both have two Oscars and who are capable of opening a picture?

How could they have done such a thing?

[quote]That is ridiculous J.K. Rowling and Travers didn't want Americans involved.

I believe you'll find that the first two Harry Potter films were directed by an American, and the third by a Mexican.The screenplays of all eight films were written by Americans as well. Her only stipulation was that they only use British and Irish actors, and I think that was ultimately a wise decision.

I honestly have the impression--and I still haven't seen the movie yet--was that Travers was just a bitch.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 9712/17/2013

This may have been posted but Travers hated the Sherman Bros. score. She wanted vintage British music hall songs used.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 9812/17/2013

R91. What'ssssh wrong with shhhhmoking?

by The Voice of the Nightreply 9912/17/2013

r121 that is the biggest problem with the film.

Emma Thompson plays that one grumpy grouchy unreasonably bitchy note until the last 10 minutes when she has some unexplained miraculous reversal.

It's very tiresome. And then Tom as Disney is never really seen winning her over with any substantial arguments or charm other than forcing her to ride on a merry go round with him (which she disdains, of course).

In the beginning, you think how will he win her over? What will be the trick Disney pulls, as we all obviously know the film got made just the way he wanted it made. What turned her around?

It's all really left unexplained and undealt with. A true wasted opportunity.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 10112/17/2013

R34 and others got it right. Go back and watch Mary Poppins now as an adult. Mary Poppins in the film is not all that sweet. It's very uneven. On the rooftop (Step in Time) and during the cartoon fantasy segment (Supercali.....) are the only 2 times she's actually nice. Otherwise, she's actually quite cross and even insulting. Go back and look at the Tea Party on the Ceiling segment or the fact that the kids tell her how much they enjoyed the day at the races and she accuses them of lying and threatens to call the police on them---even though she knows the children are telling the truth.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 10212/17/2013

Is Walt Disney portrayed as the antisemitic, racist he truly was, or is this a complete work of fiction?

by The Voice of the Nightreply 10312/17/2013

Sounds like in 1964 the world could still accommodate Walt's worldview, bit it's Travers' cross miserableness that informs our world.

Shame.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 10412/17/2013

You people do know that there are completely well-adjusted, happy people who don't care for the Disney aesthetic, don't you?

by The Voice of the Nightreply 10512/17/2013

[quote]Is that why Walt was prepared to make an anti-Nazi WWII musical in place of this one

R108, do you have a link to this unmade film, or know anymore about it? It sounds interesting.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 10612/18/2013

Bedknobs and Broomsticks?! Really? What a disappointment after that build up.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 10712/18/2013

Tom Hanks accent stinks and he is so on. BTW, who dose Colin Farrell play?

by The Voice of the Nightreply 10812/18/2013

R131, Farrell plays Travers' father, who inspired the character Mr. Banks in the Poppins books.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 11012/18/2013

A Disney film about the making of a Disney film. Who thought this was an interesting idea, especially since Disney never tells the truth?

by The Voice of the Nightreply 11112/18/2013

Irving Thalberg wanted Disney at MGM. Disney contributed a Mickey Mouse Technicolor segment set to a poor Arthur Freed song "Hot Chocolate Soldiers" to MGM's HOLLYWOOD PARTY, which tanked at the box-office.

Disney basically mistrusted MGM, fearing the loss of creative control, but really lost all interest (if he had any) after HOLLYWOOD PARTY.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 11212/18/2013

Every book I've read about Disney has had the same half dozen quotes to show his anti-semitism, but to be fair they all concern either the bankers who he thought were out to fuck him, or the other studio heads who very definitely were out to fuck him. There's next to no evidence that he had any particular problem with Jews as a people.

His life was one long fight to get the money to do what he wanted to do, and there's a reason that when he built Disneyland he put that little cannon in the square on Main Street and pointed the barrel directly at the Bank of America branch inside the park.

As far as hating the other studio heads, they did everything they could do to put him out of business and limit the distribution of his movies. When they did distribute his movies they never failed to horse him around on the distribution fees they charged. He was always on the outside looking in.

I'm not defending him, he certainly had a dark side, and there's ton of skeletons in his closet (even more in his brother Roy's), but I don't think it's fair to pigeonhole him as anti-Semitic.

Besides, you want to talk about a real anti-Semitic nut job, go a few miles north of Disneyland and look at the Knott Family.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 11312/18/2013

Disney actually tried to buy Knott's Berry Farm at one point. I don't know if this was before or after they aborted their plans to build the Long Beach park to go along with their acquisition of the Queen Mary (which they had to take in order to get control of the Disneyland Hotel away from Bonita Wraither).

by The Voice of the Nightreply 11412/18/2013

Bonita Wrather? Nancy Drew owned the Disneyland Hotel?

by The Voice of the Nightreply 11512/18/2013

[quote]Bonita Wrather? Nancy Drew owned the Disneyland Hotel?

Yep, her husband built it, and she got it after he died, and Michael Eisner bought out Wrather Corp around the time she passed away.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 11612/18/2013

[quote]Bonita Wrather? Nancy Drew owned the Disneyland Hotel?

Yep. They sold off all sorts of pieces to get the thing open.

One of the greatest deals in history was Art Linkletter agreeing to MC the opening ceremonies at Disneyland in exchange for the Kodak film concession at the park. Just ponder that one--the man had the exclusive rights to sell and develop film at Disneyland for 10 years. Made a fortune.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 11712/18/2013

Speaking of the Disneyland Hotel, that was one of the places Patty Hearst and the Harrises hid out while on the lam.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 11812/18/2013

Best Picture and Best Actress bet the farm.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 11912/18/2013

[quote] Tom Hanks IS Walt Disney. Emma Thompson IS PL Travers.

When did this nonsense start? Was it with "Diana Ross IS Billie Holiday"? Hanks is not Disney. Thompson is not Travers, no matter how brilliantly they play them.

Arguably, in "West Side Story" Natalie Wood WAS Marnie Nixon. (She sure as hell wasn't Maria.)

And I understand that in "Inside Llewyn Davis" Justin Timberlake is MARY Travers (according to Janet Maslin), but that's an entirely different thing.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 12012/18/2013

[quote]One of the greatest deals in history was Art Linkletter agreeing to MC the opening ceremonies at Disneyland in exchange for the Kodak film concession at the park. Just ponder that one--the man had the exclusive rights to sell and develop film at Disneyland for 10 years. Made a fortune.

I can do one better: Florida was so desperate to get Walt to built Disney World there, they bent over backwards giving him concessions. As far as I know, the Walt Disney Company still has the right to build a nuclear power plant on its land if they so choose.

[quote]Best Picture and Best Actress bet the farm.

Nominations, probably. Wins, I doubt. But the Academy LOVES to nominate movies about movies, which is why there were all those inexplicable nominations for Hugo the other year.

[quote]When did this nonsense start?

My guess is "Judy Davis IS Judy Garland." I started using it here when HBO started advertising for their "The Special Relationship," and it's just been something I've done whenever I've started a thread about a movie or show that's about real people.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 12112/18/2013

[quote]Speaking of the Disneyland Hotel, that was one of the places Patty Hearst and the Harrises hid out while on the lam.

John Lennon formally broke up the Beatles while staying at the Polynesian Resort at Disney World.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 12212/18/2013

Well, no, Voice of the Night. You didn't originate it; it was the ad campaign for Lady Sings the Blues, which preceded your claim about Judy Davis by decades.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 12312/18/2013

I didn't think I had originated it, I just think that may be where I picked it up.

"Lady Slings the Booze" pre-dates me by more than half a decade, so...

by The Voice of the Nightreply 12412/18/2013

[quote]I can do one better: Florida was so desperate to get Walt to built Disney World there, they bent over backwards giving him concessions. As far as I know, the Walt Disney Company still has the right to build a nuclear power plant on its land if they so choose.

Yeah, it is scary the autonomy they were granted by the State of Florida, but almost as shameful is the power they used to have over Orange County, CA, and especially the City of Anaheim. The Anaheim Ichthyological, Sour Mash & 5-Card Draw Society was an annual bribe Disney sponsored:

by The Voice of the Nightreply 12512/18/2013

[quote]That would have been some feat, as WDW opened in 1971 and the Beatles broke up a year earlier.

Formally broke up. John signed the paperwork dissolving the band at the end of December 1974. Whilst staying at Disney World.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 12612/18/2013

Theda Bara is CLEOPATRA!

by The Voice of the Nightreply 12712/18/2013

Anyone who thinks the film will get many Oscar nominations hasn't seen it.

And I don't care how many Golden Globe nominations it got.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 12812/18/2013

[all posts by pathetic racist, sexist, anti-semitic, homophobic flame bait troll removed (but you might want to not encourage it in the future because it will be back because you keep giving it what it wants and it really does not believe any of the things it types), ISP notified with full text of all posts.]

by The Voice of the Nightreply 12912/18/2013

[quote] John Lennon formally broke up the Beatles while staying at the Polynesian Resort at Disney World.

Are you sure it wasn't in front of Jasmine Guy's house?

by The Voice of the Nightreply 13012/18/2013

He was going to do it at Lucille Ball's house, but Gary talked him out of it.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 13112/18/2013

I saw the Mary Poppins movie as a kid and found it charmless and seemingly endless. I was a kid who didn't get taken to the movies often and had been really looking forward to it.

In fact, I recall that everyone in my 4th grade class thought the film was a dud. I haven't seen it since and recall it as an overly-long mishmash of outdated 1940s-like animation and unsatisfying live action. It was too long for kids to have to sit in a movie theater.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 13212/18/2013

It was said upthread that Alice Walker is an antisemite because she didn't let The Color Purple get translated into Hebrew.

As a Jew who doesn't support the Israeli apartheid, I don't think that makes her an antisemite.

I also don't fault Walt Disney for being antisemitic. Was it right? No. Was it common for men of his age. Absolutely.

I don't think it's fair to judge someone who has been dead for 40 years with today's standards.

And I have never ever heard that the Sherman brothers used ghost writers. What would be the point? Finally, did anyone see that awkward documentary on them where they talked alot about how they weren't close but never about why they weren't close?

by The Voice of the Nightreply 13312/18/2013

[quote]I saw the Mary Poppins movie as a kid and found it charmless and seemingly endless. I was a kid who didn't get taken to the movies often and had been really looking forward to it... In fact, I recall that everyone in my 4th grade class thought the film was a dud.

Sweetie, did you and your classmates have to wear helmets when they took you out?

by The Voice of the Nightreply 13412/19/2013

PL Travers liked the pole AND the hole.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 13512/19/2013

I saw Saving Mr. Banks yesterday and found it absolutely delightful. One of my favorites of the year. Emma was wonderful, as I expected she would be, but I was pleasantly surprised by Tom Hanks.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 13612/22/2013

[quote]Disney had it right hating the Jews

Two words: Michael Eisner

by The Voice of the Nightreply 13712/22/2013

[quote]I saw Saving Mr. Banks yesterday and found it absolutely delightful.

I saw it today and agree. The funny thing was that there was audience applause at the end. I saw "American Hustle" on Friday. No applause.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 13812/22/2013

Saw it Saturday and was very pleased.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 13912/23/2013

Let me get the plot of the film straight - the REAL Mary Poppins was Brenda from Six Feet Under, not Julie Andrews?

by The Voice of the Nightreply 14012/23/2013

Not the REAL Mary Poppins but she definitely was the inspiration for the character, R165.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 14112/23/2013

A Disney version of what they said happened but didn't really happen as they said it did. Lovely fictional movie perhaps.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 14212/23/2013

The trailer was cookie cutter sentimentalized American garbage. Trust it to star Tom Hanks. Sick of these fucking mortality play movies, as if Emma Thompson isn't allowed to remain neurotic and has to find a resolution and catharsis and throw herself at the shrine of the Great American Family if she can't, well, she'll be punished (like Glenn Close was in Fatal Attraction).

Damn this film and damn you all for seeing it.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 14312/23/2013

r168 reviewed the movie by seeing the trailer.

Nice job.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 14412/23/2013

I saw it on Saturday and I loved it. I cried for at least the last half hour of it. I especially loved Col Farrell - he is such an under-appreciated actor.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 14512/23/2013

Saw it tonight. It was the best movie I have seen this year. Like him or not, Tom Hanks was great as was Emma Thompson and Colin Farrell. A must see.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 14612/24/2013

Yes, this was our Christmas movie...and there was a lot to like about it. Total "Disney version," but stood on its own as a story. Almost all the acting was pretty good (though I found Paul Giamatti the least believable character).

And yeah, some of the best work Colin Farrell's done.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 14712/25/2013

Got into an interesting discussion about it with some FB friends, whose reaction ranged from enjoying the "break the bonds of your past" message (though really, Disney's whole life was about recreating a nicer past for himself) to the friends who were disappointed at the pinkwashing of Travers. Disney mentions his wife & daughters constantly, and Travers is shown living alone, when she actually had a partner and a son.

And I just didn't expect any better from Disney..."the Disney version" has long been understood as a simplistic, cleaned-up version that avoids things that might "offend" people.

I mean, they didn't even show Walt smoking in the film...though the constant cough was meant to be a precursor to the lung cancer that killed him.

And with all that, somehow the film managed to convey the process by which artists take their personal truths and use them to rewrite their own pasts.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 14812/26/2013

[quote]I mean, they didn't even show Walt smoking in the film

I listened to an interview with Tom Hanks (I don't remember where) and he said that for them to show Walt actually inhaling cigarette smoke would have meant an automatic R rating.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 14912/26/2013

Travers walks into Disney's office unannounced where he was putting out a cigarette and made it clear that he was pretty much a closet smoker because he had an image to maintain.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 15012/26/2013

Thompson was fantastic. She is one of the greats. That scene at the Mary Poppins premier? Beautiful. She deserves an oscar nom.

Hanks was also very good, and I loved Paul Giamatti, who was also one of the very few good things in that boring Downton Abbey christmas special. Didn't care for Farrell or most of the flashbacks. I understand why they were there but the execution wasn't very good. The pacing in those scenes was off and nothing was really interesting.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 15112/26/2013

The Oscar for Julie Andrews was inevitable, right? It's a really weird win. She's charming and effective but hardly "Best Actress" material. She was miles better as Maria but I guess the whole "My Fair Lady" fiasco gave her the win.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 15212/26/2013

I thinks Hanks is incorrect on that. The MPAA does take smoking into rating consideration but a film won't get an automatic R because of it.

I think it's because Disney doesn't allow smoking in their films. If Disney still had their Touchstone shingle I'm sure smoking would be shown in general. They're so protective of Walt's image I don't think they'd ever show him actually smoking.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 15312/26/2013

Except,R175, Walt was hardly a closeted smoker. I knew him and he smoked in public all the time. This is a modern revision of his life.

R178, the MPAA makes a distinction between holding a cigarette and inhaling. Actually showing a person inhaling on a cigarette will get an R rating, but it has to happen more than once. (I want to say four times, but I can't remember.)

by The Voice of the Nightreply 15412/26/2013

The movie doesn't hide that he smoke. They don't show it but he does say it almost at the end: "I don't want to encourage a bad habit"

by The Voice of the Nightreply 15512/26/2013

I really liked this film and didn't think it was very "Disnified" at all. As a matter of fact, the scene when Mrs. Tavers enters the hotel room to find it festooned with Disney merchandise is rather creepy in a tongue-and-cheek way. For being a Disney film, it's a very slow burn and quite intellectual.

Tom Hanks is OK but he's actually more supporting than lead. This is Emma Thompson's film. It isn't a biopic of P.L.Travers, although a lot of it is her backstory as a child in Australia. The only weak part of the storyline, I think, was the fluffy backstory with the father and daughter, until it begins to unravel.

Emma Thompson most definitely deserves an Oscar nomination. She's really good.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 15612/26/2013

Loved Thompson but couldn't stand the goddamn flashbacks which kept on torturing us throughout the entire movie. What was that accent that Farrell was using...Irish? Australian? Awful.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 15712/26/2013

Hanks is on the short lists for a supporting oscar nom. Is he that good here?

Thompson's nomination is pretty much in the bag at this point.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 15812/26/2013

I've always just been a fairly lukewarm Tom Hanks fan, but I definitely think he deserves a supporting Oscar nomination. He did a great job. (Emma, of course, was fabulous.)

by The Voice of the Nightreply 15912/26/2013

It's definitely Thompson's film. Hanks, honestly, barely registers here. He's in a handful of scenes, but Thompson and Giamanti steal the show.

I was surprised by how truly good it was. I even cried at the end, which I certainly wasn't expecting.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 16012/26/2013

Why does Disney keep calling PL Travers Pam when her real name wasn't Pamela, as we find out in end when it's revealed by her passport?

Where does he infer Pam or Pamela from?

by The Voice of the Nightreply 16112/26/2013

R186, she picked the name Pamela for herself.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 16212/26/2013

[all posts by tedious, racist idiot removed.]

by The Voice of the Nightreply 16312/26/2013

[quote]Ugh I HATE titles like this where the first word is a verb!!!

It's a gerund, not a verb.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 16412/26/2013

A gerund is a verb form.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 16512/26/2013

A gerund is a verb form USED AS A NOUN.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 16612/26/2013

"A gerund is derived from a verb by adding the suffix -ing. [bold]The result is still a verb,[/bold] and it exhibits ordinary verbal properties, such as taking objects and adverbs. Example: In football, deliberately tripping an opponent is a foul. Here the verb trip occurs in its gerund form tripping, but this tripping is still a verb: it takes the adverb deliberately and the object an opponent. However, the entire phrase deliberately tripping an opponent, because of the gerund within it, now functions as a noun phrase, in this case as the subject of the sentence. So, a gerund is still a verb, but the phrase built around it is nominal, not verbal."

(R.L. Trask, Mind the Gaffe! NY: Harper, 2006)

by The Voice of the Nightreply 16712/26/2013

Also, it's not clear from the context whether "Saving" in the title "Saving Mr. Banks" is meant to be a gerund, a verbal noun, or a present participle.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 16812/26/2013

Watch for the porno version, "Shaving Mr. Banks."

Expect "shaving" to be a gerund.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 16912/26/2013

[all posts by tedious, racist idiot removed.]

by The Voice of the Nightreply 17012/26/2013

Not to change the subject....

I haven't seen Pollyanna since I was a kid, but why doesn't that movie get more love? It never seems to be on TV or revived in theaters.

It's a mystery to me why Disney has never made it into a stage musical....it would seem a natural, especially with its young independent heroine.

Is it not as great as I remember?

by The Voice of the Nightreply 17112/26/2013

someone do a best film poll

Saving Mr Banks

America Hustle

12 Years a Slave

Wolf of Wall Street

Philomenia

Blue Jasmine

by The Voice of the Nightreply 17212/27/2013

Don't forget Gravity and Captain Phillips.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 17312/27/2013

Disney was a satanist, pedophile and ran an evil empire.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 17412/27/2013

SAVING MR BANKS is really depressing. Emma Thompson's character biting behavior gets really tired (it's funny at first) and the backstory of her childhood is horribly depressing. Her dad was an alcoholic, mom was suicidal. The film does a nice job of explaining why PL Travers cried throughout the premiere of MARY POPPINS (not out of hatred of the movie, as the anecdote suggests). But it's a total downer and not for kids.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 17512/27/2013

[quote]I listened to an interview with Tom Hanks (I don't remember where) and he said that for them to show Walt actually inhaling cigarette smoke would have meant an automatic R rating.

So if TITANIC were released today it would get an automatic "R" because Rose and Jack are shown smoking and inhaling cigarettes (at different times) and there's a scene with the men smoking cigars and drinking brandy? Never mind that Rose's nude scene and showing her tatas, which didn't threaten its PG-13 rating at the time.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 17612/27/2013

So let me get this straight...after Mr. Disney's poignant visit to Travers' London home where he convinces her, via dime store psychology, that Mr. Banks will be "saved" he then doesn't invite her to the premiere? What a bitch.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 17712/27/2013

Well, he planned to invite her to the London premiere, and knowing how much she hated LA - hated the U.S. period, in fact - he probably zip assumed sh wouldn't be interested in coming back for it.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 17812/27/2013

[quote]But it's a total downer and not for kids.

Oh, sounds like it might be good.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 17912/27/2013

Disney was worried that she would say something negative at the LA premiere. As he said, he was protecting the movie. Notice that she walks into the premiere without anyone stopping her to say a few words.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 18012/27/2013

What I liked about Hanks's performance is that you could certainly see that genial Uncle Walt was definitely a thin veneer, and the hard-driving businessman was just under the surface.

Interesting that a man who grew up poor and abused by a tyrannical father made it his life's work to create the myth of the happy American family that drives so much of the fundamentalist/right wing today. (And and whose original character was taken from him created the company that's responsible for a significant portion of today's copyright laws).

And no, this movie is definitely not for kids.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 18112/27/2013

[all posts by tedious, racist idiot removed.]

by The Voice of the Nightreply 18212/27/2013

[quote]Are people really that fucking dense?

(Do you really need to ask?)

by The Voice of the Nightreply 18312/27/2013

R207, I read an article of people taking their families to see WOLF OF WALL STREET on Christmas and expressing disappointment and disgust. There was even a Dad who took his 7-year-old son. I don't think people read reviews for the most part.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 18412/27/2013

Am I the only one who thought that B.J. Novak as Robert Sherman was hot?

by The Voice of the Nightreply 18512/27/2013

yes you are

by The Voice of the Nightreply 18612/27/2013

I resent Emma Thompson and Tom Hanks thinking its 1995 and people want them headlining these type of sentimental movies as a means of flogging the brand. The world has moved on from this, the culture has changed.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 18712/27/2013

[quote] I resent Emma Thompson and Tom Hanks thinking its 1995 and people want them headlining these type of sentimental movies as a means of flogging the brand. The world has moved on from this, the culture has changed.

In a world where Sandra Bullock won an Oscar for The Blind Side your statement simply doesn't make any sense.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 18812/27/2013

Travers loathed sentimentality (and it was her main objection to Disney adapting her books). She would have hated this, especially the ending where Travers cries during the movie. She cried all right, but not for the reasons given here.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 18912/27/2013

[quote]Loved Thompson but couldn't stand the goddamn flashbacks which kept on torturing us throughout the entire movie.

There's a reason why the film is called Saving Mr Banks. Without the flashbacks, there's no point to the movie at all. Although, it's a completely fictionalised version of Travers life, which was far more complex than this film could convey.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 19012/27/2013

[quote]people taking their families to see WOLF OF WALL STREET on Christmas... There was even a Dad who took his 7-year-old son.

Ha - idiots!

by The Voice of the Nightreply 19112/27/2013

I could see people making the mistake that this was more suited for families than "The Wolf of Wall Street." The ad for this film looks very corny. Wall Street is synonymous with business and greed, so why would anyone take children to that - even if you knew nothing about the movie.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 19212/27/2013

[quote] Interesting that a man who grew up poor and abused by a tyrannical father made it his life's work to create the myth of the happy American family that drives so much of the fundamentalist/right wing today.

More common than one might think. Ponder Henry Ford--he made his fortune and then spent the rest of his life building Greenfield Village and trying to recreate the rural America his automobiles and factories did so much to destroy.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 19312/27/2013

Colin Farrell was one hot DILF in the movie.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 19401/02/2014

I bet both Farrell and Hanks will get Supporting Actor nominations and Emma's a lock for Best Actress.

As much as I hate myself... I loved this movie.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 19501/02/2014

I feared it would be twee and unengaging, but found it the opposite. Emma Thompson is captivating, and I found the movie emotionally rich clever, and very moving.

It's almost a Spielberg movie, just not annoying, but rather Hollywood A-list filmmaking at its best. I loved it.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 19601/03/2014

Was surprised that a Disney film would poke so much fun at the Disney brand.

Also glad the movie highlighted so much of what endures from the '64 film, the marvelous Sherman Brothers score.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 19701/03/2014

Loved it. Cried like a baby.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 19801/03/2014

I had no plans to see this movie but decided to from word of mouth.

Best movie I saw all year. Emma is wonderful, as is, Tom.

For those of you with unresolved familial issues especially with a father, this movie will make you cry like a baby.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 19901/03/2014

[quote]Colin Farrell was one hot DILF in the movie.

How much screen time does Farrell have? Odd that he isn't in the trailers or the ads, and unless I've missed it, he isn't lifting a finger to promote this.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 20001/03/2014

Colin is in it a lot...happily. As gorgeous as ever.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 20201/03/2014

[quote]Funny thing Saving Mr. Banks was directed by the same guy who did the DL hated the Blind side...

Amazing what having a good script can do.

I mean, the Blind Side was schmaltz that was elevated by having a likable star and a couple of good supporting performances.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 20301/04/2014

Ironically, the screenwriter's next job is adapting Fifty Shades of Grey.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 20401/04/2014

Colin Farrell was perfectly cast -- his relationship with that beautiful little girl was spot on, and his off-screen persona added a wistful element of lost promise, sort of like John Barrymore, but far prettier, in a way that a young girl would so readily romanticize.

Hanks wasn't acting so much as impersonating, but he did a good job of that. I wondered whether his first appearance (seen on a TV screen) wasn't actually using Disney's voice.

And Emma Thompson was sublime. What an intelligence. And -- when it's called for -- radiance. Helena Bonham Carter?????? That might be the stupidest thing Kenneth Branagh ever did.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 20501/15/2014

This movie bored me rigid.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 20601/15/2014

At least SOMETHING got you rigid, R235.

by The Voice of the Nightreply 20701/15/2014
Loading
Need more help? Click Here.