Mary Poppins Returns - Flopping at Box Office

ha ha, would LOVE for this to flop. Hated the original too as a kid.

Hope Aladdin and Lion King flop too. Sick of the blatant money grabs.

There will be no happiness in the Blunt household this Christmas, only tears for days.

Agreed. Could not believe how bloodless that live action "Beauty and the Beast" was. Turned it off after half an hour. Just awful.

Blunt is a big part of the problem. So NOT a movie star but they keep foisting her off on us. Get a clue.

The Mutcracker flopped???

(That old adage: "Whatever IT is, she hasn't got IT.")

Have been looking forward to seeing MPR since early Summer. Will see it next Wednesday.

Oh come on, LMM needs to shoulder some of the blame too, who going to buy Puerto Ricans in 1930’s London?

Ask Michelle Gomez' parents in Scotland.

Emily Blunt in homely. Ugliest smile I've ever seen.

[quote]who going to buy Puerto Ricans in 1930’s London?

Kevin Spacey would rent them.

Emily B has a lovely singing voice and her RP is perfect.

Emily Blunt doesn't work as a Julie Andrews type. They should have gone with a more comic actress. NOt that I can think of anyone for the part.

I can’t fucking stand her

They should have cast Claire Foy. Same type, better actress.

Emily Blunt is not the same person as the Julie character.

She is Julie with decades more of experience.

She is perfect.

Wrote this elsewhere but I literally wanted to kill her in "Devil Wears Prada". A great actress would've run with that role and made her a fun bitch. Blunt just made her a bitch. Who keeps hiring her? For leads?

Please, Oscar, ignore her yet again.

I hated the original, too. So fucking long and episodic. #deathtodisney

Are you kidding me !? Blunt in Prada gives one of the most iconic and hilarious supporting performances in film history. It’s why a career was deservedly handed to her on a silver platter afterward,

Mary Floppins

[quote]Have been looking forward to seeing MPR since early Summer. Will see it next Wednesday.

What kind of adult feels this way about a Disney movie for children?

it will be the turkey that miss blunt cooked.

bitch got no IT

Poor M.

Poor G (as always). See you on February 22... I'm sure it will be just like old times, especially when the winners are revealed.

Will LMM be drummed out of Hollywood? Will he come crawling back to Broadway?

R27, don’t be a fool. No one’s drumming Lin out of Hollywood; they’re all desperately trying to land Hamilton rights. Until that dust is settled, Lin’s the most powerful man in Hollywood. Once it’s settled, that’s when we’ll learn what they really think of him.

we shall not rest till mean old megalopolis Disney is bankrupt !!!!

The Disney methodology used to be that everything they create is rooted in the story. Now their live-action movies are just vehicles for showing their ability to create visuals and to show off their diversity representation. The stories have become irrelevant and eventually that will hurt their brand and box office.

Ha ha! Where's blunt the cunt pr shills now? She is not a star and never will be. I hope her husband is cheating on her with the rock.

Lady Gaga could have set the world on fire as Poppins. Original songs and enough of her Little Monsters could have been worked in to make this work. Her name recognition alone would have guaranteed full houses.

R21 is under the impression that film was invented in 2005.

[quote] Wrote this elsewhere but I literally wanted to kill her in "Devil Wears Prada". A great actress would've run with that role and made her a fun bitch. Blunt just made her a bitch.

She said in an interview a few years ago it was her role in Prada that made her an icon among the gays. Judging from the posters at DL, I can see why they loved her in that role, they relate to her.

r23, an adult that goes to a lot of G and PG movies and watches a shit load of coming attractions.

As a child, Mary Poppins and Hook created my idea of what beautiful London townhomes should look and feel like. The original had such a fantastic vibe: cheery and exciting, but a bit melancholy. You always have the impression that there’s something old, powerful, and little creepy at work. The dark waltz of Chim Chim Cher-ee, the haunting chorus of Feed the Birds, with the ancient spires of St. Paul’s in the background. The imagery was so perfect.

Now, one would get arrested for feeding the birds.

"Boids, dirty, disgusting boids"

man I hope it flops, her hubris on tv is astonishing when interviewed.

Can't stand her and why they keep pushing her as sexy is beyond me. You could open a beer bottle with those chompers.

Really happy to see this flopping, hope it continues.

R12 made me LOL.

R30, I agree. And I think the idea always at the forefront is “future tie-ins and merchandizing”. Can we make fruit snacks shaped like this character? Is it cuddly enough to translate to plushie? Will adults want to buy them, too?

Instead of telling a good story, they’re shrinking brains to extract the maximum dollar amount with manipulation.

I saw her in my local Supermarket years ago she is very good looking in person much better than on screen.

Her husband is HOT! What did she do to deserve him?

Agree with R15. EB comes off as cunty, which doesn't seem very Mary Poppins.

I was 6 and saw the original Mary Poppins. I remember being totally upset she left at the end....how could she leave those children? Now she's back with no explanation of where she's been and why she hasn't aged. Julie Andrews was Mary Poppins. This Blunt woman is cold as ice and I didn't like her interpretation. Something that showed she wasn't more than a practitioner of black magic would have been nice.

R30 hell yes.

Mary Floppins.

The preview made the movie look painful to watch. I feel sorry for parents that have to take young ones to the movie. Good luck.

You people are idiots. The movie isn't a flop. Kids are still in school, their parents are running around like chickens with their heads cut off as they feverishly prepare for Christmas and no one has time to go to the movies. When the dust finally settles on Xmas day and people actually have the time, they will flock to the movies and MP will be one of those movies they attend.

she must have fukd someone to land the job ,,, or her hot hubby did. so many other more deserving and talented bitches could have done the role justice

[quote]she must have fukd someone to land the job ,,, or her hot hubby did. so many other more deserving and talented bitches could have done the role justice

I can't think of any who would have been much better. Give us some examples.

I’m not, R48, but I liked the idea of Claire Foy in the role as someone mentioned in one of these threads...

Disney is not too concerned. 2019 will be a record breaking yr for them. Probably gonna make 10 billion in movies alone.

R51 Who gives a shit that their soulless crappy popcorn movies will make money?

I thought this thread was about MP "flopping", R52

oh honey cant u see Angelina jolie flyin around in that dam umbrella, fingering lin's cute butthole like she is prone to do...

gaga would have been unreal awesome. would have lent too much talent and fun to a Disney film tho, known now for their shit.

Nene would sass the thing up ….

What a delightful thread. Matt the Loon talking to himself over and over and over and over.

Meryl thinks the world of Emily Blunt. Blunt is a stupendous actress:

Then, she was entirely flabbergasted when Meryl complimented her on her role of Emily in The Devil Wears Prada, soon after they wrapped filming. "She burst out of her trailer and the wig was off—she was just Meryl—and she was in a puffy jacket, and she was like, 'You were so great'," Blunt recalled in an interview for Today. "And I just started to like weep."

From what I'm reading online, the consensus seems to be that the movie is very, very "average."

Saw it Wednesday night. Thought it was pretty great. Tuneful, fun and looks spectacular.

who is matt

Saw it last night, and like it. I'm not a big Emily Blunt fan, but I thought she did well in the part. The movie is not tanking at the box office according to Box Office Mojo it's outperforming major musicals released in the last 4 years. It's anticipate the movie will run well in to 2019 (as musicals tend to have longer theatrical runs). It will come in second over the xmas holidays and bring in $55 to $60 million.

This movie will also do well internationally.

[quote]who is matt

You don't want to know. A loon with an irrational hatred of Mary Poppins (the original) who's been stinking up DL threads for years, especially theater threads. He also makes shit up. Like saying "Mary Poppins Returns" is flopping at the box office. You may have noticed the OP provided no link.

FEeD the BIRDS .. TUPPENCE a BAG.... 🎵🎶

There’s a loon with irrational hatred for this “Matt the loon”, I think it might be Krasinski himself taking a break from his Grindr.

DL's resident ABCDisney/Marvel shill at R47 hard at work.

[quote]As a child, Mary Poppins and Hook created my idea of what beautiful London townhomes should look and feel like.

Me too..and then I went to school and made a friend who lived in one.

nonetheless, blunt still a fukwad with zero talent who coast on her puss

[quote]Can't stand her and why they keep pushing her as sexy is beyond me. You could open a beer bottle with those chompers.

She had them fixed "American Style" - now she can't stop flashing them.

I can't stand Emily Blunt she comes off as a cold fish. Rumors are she has fucked around behind John Krasinski's back for years.

her humiliating display of attempts at musicality on james corden

she had to eat Julie Andrews out to get her 'blessing'

She was beautiful before "America".

Saw this last night, I just couldn't buy Blunt as Mary Poppins. They should have went with Clair Foy.

or emma Roberts

Blunt is very cold and rude. She seems like a bitch. Can’t stand her in interviews.

I remember at the Oscars when a group of them were picked to run across the street to the movie theater to surprise a group of movie goers that Blunt was hugging and saying hi to other actors chosen and when Lupita went to give her a hug Blunt sort of looked past her and went to the next actor.

But will it make as much $$ as BATB? No. So it's a flop.

Foy and Blunt should have switched roles: Foy would have been a warm, quirky, but still badass Mary Poppins, and Blunt would have nailed Lizbeth Salander's cold ruthlessness.

I read that Blunt once killed a man in 2011 but it was hushed up by big money.

I imagine if she killed someone it was by accident.

John Kranzinski is so “avg guy hot”. Great genes too: he’s tall and thin, seems to not be balding. And he doesn’t seem to have a Bah-stin accent. He’s sarcastic too. He’s basically Jim Halpert IRL. She’s done well for herself.

Blunt is cold and unlikable, the complete opposite to Julie's warmth and likable self. Her marry Poppins was not authentic.

Miriam Margolyes as an old wheezing, fat, flatulent Mary would have been HILARIOUS!

Right on, R84. But that wouldn't have been a Disney film, maybe Mike Leigh.

[quote]They should have went

Oh, DEAR.

Chrissy Metz should have been Mary Poppins.

r87 Are there enough umbrellas in the world to keep her aloft?

I love Emily, but I don't love the idea of this sequel. At all. Apparently many agreed with me.

OP is mentally ill to be this obsessed.

He is Matt the Salinas Loon. The other anti-Poppins is a painted European clown.

F&F stat

OP is so Aspie deranged that he has to lie.

From Deadline:

“Meanwhile, Disney’s Mary Poppins Returns amid the competition of a big fish in the marketplace last night and Bumblebee remains quite very solid, with $4M at 4,090 locations, down 17% from Wednesday, for a two-day take of $8.8M. She led all films in regular release last night. Rotten Tomatoes has stamped Poppins with a 77% Certified Fresh score.”

[quote]I read that Blunt once killed a man in 2011 but it was hushed up by big money.

How awful!

Schools not out yet OP. I was a manager, the week before Christmas is dead, people shopping, going to parties. Movies open just to secure screens. The day after Xmas all Hell breaks lose.

Who is this caftan detective who has been trolling DL lately claiming every OP is Matt the Zionist?

It’s not Matt the Zionist, it’s Matt the Loon (as you well know, r94). Matt the Loon loathes all things Poppins and has a hard on for a horrible film called Bedknobs and Broomsticks.

It is also conservative, and rants endlessly against liberals (or anyone he judges as being anti-Israel) on several online sources.

The poor deranged thing is mentally ill and an Asperger’s patient. Please pray for it.

Poor OP. The thread he was using to foment haye against middle easterners was deleted. Buh-bye, OP!

R91, Mary Floppins is projected to make $23 million this weekend. That’s even less than Blunt’s prior flop, The Girl on the Train.

The way better reviewed Bumblebee and Spider Man might BOTH beat Mary Floppins this weekend.

Right now, sources are seeing Disney’s Mary Poppins Returns with a $6.2M first Friday and a projected 3-day of $20M-$23M; by Sunday it’s five-day could be only as high as $32M.

Matt the Loon IS Matt the Zionist. The caftan detective is on the job though!

Mary Poppins in the books is a bitch--the kids love her, but she's a bitch with magical powers who occasionally shows a soft spot, but mostly a proper bitch. Emily Blunt is good casting that way. Lin-Manuel Miranda, not so much. Michelle Gomez's father was Portuguese--i.e. European--so more likely to show up in Scotland than a Puerto Rican in 30s London who's a lamplighter, but that's part of Disney's diversity thing. It can't be worse than Dick Van Dyke's cockney accent.

So Nutcracker flopped? Didn't realize it had opened.

And 'Aquaman' easily beats Mary Floppins, Bumblebee and Spider-Verse.

Even though Aquaman is ugly?

I think this will only be flop by Disney standards. The holiday season gives these family movies a huge boost. See last year's The Greatest Showman, which opened in the same slot as MPR. Showman opened under $20 million and finished with $175 million.

However, since Disney gets a greater return on capital with its films, they have a higher threshold for success than other studios. Any other studio would probably be satisfied with these numbers.

For the cunts who be cunting:

Also r104, Variety said that the first day's take at tne box office is a great start, so not the flop OP is willing into existence through sheer power of cuntiness.

She deserves it! Mary Poppins raped me with her umbrella when I was just a small child! Boo-hoo MeToo!

As you know, r106, Ms. Poppins' brolly is sentient. She had nothing to do with you. The umbrella did.

Umm, it's only been open for two days so far, we haven't gotten the first weekend numbers yet. So ... jump to conclusions much? I was ambivalent about the 1964 movie, but went to see MPR on Wednesday and we all enjoyed it very much. The music, costumes, performances, and special effects were all top notch. I think it will be a hit.

Emily Flop. *Pretends to be shocked* Wow they are so dumb, there is a reason miss Emily has never gotten out of the B-list. She can't open a movie. It was so dumb of them to trust her to do MP. Now she's back to co-starring someone like Tom Cruise.

I predict Oscar chances will be lowered after the soft opening weekend.

Showman had better music and word of mouth - you can’t compare Mary Poppins Returns to that. People aren’t going to be interested in this one ten days from now.

Even the flop Ghostbusters with Wiig and McKinnon opened stronger.

Do people really care about this? Mary fucking Poppins Returns?

DL's Disney/Marvel shills here apparently care as if their lives depend on it - and nonstop shilling it.

Tomorrowland was a bust at $32m three day weekend. That’s 50% higher than Mary Poppins Returns projections.

Mary POOPINS

Do young people actually care about Mary Poppins in the states? I'm 19, from Mexico and I've never seen the original, not interested in seeing that or this sequel for that matter.

‘Aquaman’ to Conquer Box Office With $70 Million Opening Weekend

[Quote] Warner Bros.’ “Aquaman” is pegged for a Friday haul of around $28 million, including $13.7 million from three nights of previews. The tentpole has already generated $332 million from international markets, including $209 million in China in the two weeks before its U.S. launch. Disney’s “Mary Poppins Returns,” the live-action sequel to the 1964 hit, stars Emily Blunt as the iconic British nanny. It grossed $8.8 million at 4,090 North American sites on Wednesday and Thursday. Pre-weekend forecasts predicted at least $35 million domestically in its first five days.

FLOPPINS!

I don't know why she gets so many chances and vehicles. I don't even dislike her, in fact I thought she had real potential when she first came out in "My Summer of Love". Since then she's done nothing as good, but Hollywood continues to give her lead roles in box office bait films despite her lack of results or even potential in them. How many serious musical theatre actresses want to get her for snagging both Mary Poppins AND Into The Woods? She's even in Disney's next adventure film with The Rock. There's also some weird online portrayal of her as being overdue for an Oscar nom. For what?

Anyway, i'm not surprised this is flopping (as well as Christopher Robin et al), but i'm sure they'll bounce back with the 90s nostalgia movies The Lion King (which looks just as animated as the original) and Aladdin. The downside is that it looks like we'll keep getting more CGI heavy, lazy shot-for-shot remakes and less family films / musicals with actual characters.

[quote]Warner Bros.’ “Aquaman” is pegged

I'd pay big bucks to see that.

r109 Do you think Julie Andrews could've opened a movie in 1963? No one cares who's IN "Mary Poppins"- it's about the character and the story.

[quote]Do people really care about this? Mary fucking Poppins Returns?

A certain loon is certainly obsessed with it.

[quote] and less family films / musicals with actual characters.

Oh, dear.

Julie Andrews was very much a draw for Mary Poppins. The whole country knew her because of her turns in My Fair Lady and Camelot when television actively promoted Broadway stars. Not to mention her enchanting turn as Cinderella on network tv. To say that she didn’t pull audiences in to Mary Poppins is well, poppycock.

Beauty and the Beast made SEVEN times what MPR is projected to make this weekend.

[quote]Beauty and the Beast made SEVEN times what MPR is projected to make this weekend.

Yet MRP made more on its opening night than that dreadful Jackman/Efron Barnum film did on its opening night this same time of year last year. And that film was a hit.

[quote]Anyway, i'm not surprised this is flopping

It's not flopping. It's not going to be the huge hit Disney was hoping for but it's going to return its investment and more.

Transformers!

So Ghostbusters with Kristen Wiig, Tomorrowland, Beauty and the Beast , and Christoper Robin all outperformed Mary Poppins Returns..

How the fuck is this a hit?

iM NOT OFF ME MEDS BUT IM WRITING TO WARN YOU THAT WONT BE THE LAST TIME THAT DISNEY BRINGS BCK THAT BRITISH HAG!!! SHELL COME BACK FOR YOU SOULD WITH THST FUCKING UMBRELLLA1!11!

Love that British hag. AND her plain but hunky husband.

SHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.

I WAS TALKING ABOUT MARY BUT OK

Her husband is so delicioues I would love to have his ballsack in my mouth...

Biggest box office stinker of 2018

Beauty and the Beast made 8x what Mary Floppins will make opening weekend

You can't compare Beauty and the Beast and MPR because of the time of year. Nothing does the business in the three weeks before Christmas that films do in spring/summer. Hardcore moviegoing won't kick in till the 26th, which is when that turd "The Greatest Showman," that everyone had pegged as a flop, suddenly went off the charts.

Even Aquaman's take this weekend is dramatically less than it would have been if it had opened on Memorial Day weekend or during the summer. But again, it will pick up to expected levels by the last few days of the year.

[quote]There’s a loon with irrational hatred for this “Matt the loon”

That makes no sense. There can only be rational hatred for Matt the Loon, because he has given everyone so much cause to despise him. Go read some of his rightwing rants on his Facebook page if you aren't feeling the hate for him yet. He's a racist, conservative pig on top of everything else.

I do wonder from time to time, which is more annoying? The troll or those who keep feeding IT attention?

So there's a Puerto Rican who looks like a Puerto Rican. In England. In the 1930s. And he raps.

Which drugs are you on R32?

[Quote] It's not flopping. It's not going to be the huge hit Disney was hoping for but it's going to return its investment and more.

Ah, but when 'Justice League' made back its investment AND MORE, you said it was a flop, Disney/Marvel shill.

[quote]Ah, but when 'Justice League' made back its investment AND MORE, you said it was a flop, Disney/Marvel shill.

This is such a lazy, bankrupt style of argumentation. If you can't win an argument without creating a straw man out of thin air and assigning its hypothetical point of view about some completely unrelated topic to the person you're arguing with then you have already lost.

Grow up. Nobody likes an internet troll. Donald Trump has made sure of that.

Bumblebee buzzes past Floppins!

Paramount’s Bumblebee made more than the Emily Blunt British nanny tonight, $8.3M to $6.9M. The yellow VW-robot is eyeing a $22.6M weekend in the range where we saw it, while Poppins is eyeing $22.3M.

Only my culturally D list friends are planning to see Floppins at a theater.

A Wrinkle in Time outgrossed Floppins opening weekend.

[quote]Showman had better music and word of mouth

Showman had terrible world of mouth. Don't rewrite history. It's what is called a "Sleeper".

[quote]Beauty and the Beast made 8x what Mary Floppins will make opening weekend

"Beauty and the Beast" opened in the spring and didn't have comic book competition. It also had higher ticket prices for 3D and IMAX, both things Poppins doesn't have. OK?

174 million versus 22 million opening weekend. I’m sure there are many, many other factors other than ticket prices and seasonality to explain the divergent opening weekends of Beauty and the Beast versus Floppins.

Kids don’t want to see Floppins!

Higher ticket prices and seasonality alone do not explain opening weekends divergent by 150 million!

Kids wanted to see Beauty and it had legit buzz. Floppins appeals to musical queen adults only.

Beauty and the Beast was an Oscar nominee for Best Picture from the 90's; Mary Poppins was released during the Johnson Administration that seems cheesy AF.

We’re comparing it to last year’s Beauty and the Beast, dear. Not the animated version from the 90’s.

Oh Variety bombed on these predictions in September wit the exception A Star is Born.

Emily is a Certified Flop. She's only been like in 3 films which grossed more than 100m, she's not even the lead in those. Very annoying how many chances she keeps getting. But after this massive failure I would be shocked if she gets a lead role again. She's better in supporting characters. Also Oscar talk is hilarious. As previously said, for what???

Lol and this was pushed hard. A long with being hyped hard. Guess Mary Poppins wasn't as popular as the Poppins fans says it was

They should have had Meryl in more of it to ensure it was a hit!

Interesting article

Emily Blunt stars as the magical nanny in the sequel, which is expected to make around $55 million during the Wednesday to Sunday frame and a $75 million domestic haul by Christmas Day. December releases traditionally see smaller opening weekends that tend to leg out during the holidays as audiences turn out in droves during the week. It’s the first time since 2014 that a “Star Wars” movie hasn’t carried the end of the year, so studios are hoping a number of titles can help carry the weight.

I'm still shocked Beauty and the Beast made any money. That has to be one of the most passionless, boring movies I've ever seen. Emma Watson looked like she was confused, bored, and struggling with the notes the entire time. It was embarrassing to watch. Mary Poppins Returns is easily a much better movie. At least all the actors seem confident in what they're doing.

These movies feel directed by machines. Not an original thought or shot for 2 hours. Truly filmmaking by committee. Who even directed this piece of shit? Almost no star directors anymore.-------------------------

Loved it

who made those fukkin hats that are too small for her big head???? makes the whole movie OFF

git edith head stat

It's 1963 forever!!! Isn't it? Maybe not? Just a spoonful of sugar...

I'm surprised Angela Lansbury is in it, because I'm surprised Angela Lansbury's still alive. Must be truly ancient by now.

R156 is right--film-making by committee--I've gotten wary of any trailer where there's kind of a pointless diversity--i.e. you're supposed to pretend that you don't notice that the lamplighter's Puerto Rican or Herr Drosselmeier is black in 19th Century mittel Europe--cuz, hey, diversity, but not so diverse that you bother to build a character that works with a particular actor. Or, god forbid, not rehash some old European or British tale but do something fresh. Disney will do new stories with animation--Moana, the Pixar films--but their live-action stuff is stale.

I think Emily Blunt is actually an excellent choice for Mary Poppins, but the film sounds horribly formulaic--each part of it matches to something in the wonderful original, but doesn't measure up to it. It's gutless and risk-averse, though it still sounds better than The Nutcracker and the Four Realms, which sounds like an awful mess--mostly because Disney didn't want rats as villains. Ugh.

In some ways, Mary Poppins Returns reminds me of the new Halloween movie. It was so caught up giving us little tongue in cheek nods to the original that it forgets to actually tell an interesting story.

Are you trying to invoke the Halloween 2018 Troll?

He's convinced that JLC is winning the Lead Actress Oscar for her role in this movie.

In its opening in '65 The Sound of Music made $50,000 its first entire week total. That's $800,000 today and would be considered a beyond hopeless bomb.

That'd be rich. I love Jamie Lee, but she was phoning it in during the latest Halloween. I actually thought her performance in H20 was far more interesting and nuanced. Of course, they wrote a real human being in that movie and not some stock Sarah Connor wannabe.

Oh, you must be one of those "Recovery" A.A. Cult zombies, R165.

[quote]I'm surprised Angela Lansbury's still alive. Must be truly ancient by now

But still spry enough to dance on Lucille Ball's grave!

I can't stand Emily Blunt. She clearly studied all of Kate Winslet's 90s movies and copied her persona. It's pathetic really. She's like Jayne Mansfield to Kate's Marilyn Monroe.

Well Dame Julie's dancing on Audrey's grave so why not? And who knows maybe someday Carol will be dancing on Babs' grave.

I wanted the chance to dance on Bette Davis' grave, but the damned flu got me!

Well Queen Elizabeth is still cutting a rug over Diana.

They should have had made Poppins older and and gotten a screen veteran to come in and work their magic.

This would have been a fabulous finale film for Liza Minnelli, who can do a great cockney accent. Plus she's an accomplished dancer.

r150 Should have hired Lady Gaga instead.

Bumblebee is edging out Mary Poppins at this weekend's box office.

Mary Poppins Burns

Mary Poppins Triumphs!

[quote]This would have been a fabulous finale film for Liza Minnelli, who can do a great cockney accent. Plus she's an accomplished dancer.

These days, she can barely walk, ffs.

[quote]This would have been a fabulous finale film for Liza Minnelli

No. Just no. Liza Minnelli is so feeble now that the only thing she could do would be to sit in a chair the whole film. And even if she were in peak form, she's a horrible choice for Mary Poppins.

It doesn't help that Peter Ellenshaw didn't work on this film.

Why are there three threads saying this movie is a flop? It is looking at a $35m opening in five days, and then will keep making more cash through Christmas and into January.

There are three threads because the Poppins Loon, Matt Anscher, is insane. And there's also the anti-Blunt loon, a nutcase from Europe, who chimes in.

Mary Floppins makes 21 million on 4000+ screens opening weekend

Beauty and the Beast made 174 million on 4000+ screens opening weekend

Any questions?

"There’s a loon with irrational hatred for this “Matt the loon”,

Hahahahaha!

Well, birds of a kind.

Hopeful this turgid box office will kill any chances od making a sequel to this mess. Blunt keeps insinuating in interviews that Disney is preparation for even more Mary Poppins returning.

I blame Meryl.

G concentrate on your own box office success. Or lack thereof.

Meryl concentrate on getting your saggy clit off the floor first.

gaga would have been mad fresh energy..

blunt is so bland n fug

I loved the movie! And I will probably see it again. That said, MPR is not "practically perfect in every way." It's got some problems. First, the kids never got their bowl back from Cousin Topsy. Hey, Rob Marshall, you left a loose end in your plot! That better not be the excuse to make a sequel! Second, the supposed conflict of the story (we're going to lose our home!) is the same contrived plot of a million B movies. This of course leads to the final chase scene (we have to get to the office by midnight!) so Dick Van Dyke can come out of nowhere -- because of course an old man just happens to be at the bank after midnight -- to not only give the villain his comeuppance, but also to let the Banks family know that the money was there all along. Lame! My advice to all -- don't go to this movie expecting to make any sense of any of it. Simply enjoy it as a series of well-made music videos.

it may make some money but it wont be huge...

to say its formulaic is like saying the titanic had a hole in it.

VERY, TO THE POINT OF REGURGITATION

It is not doing too hot.

The year is essentially over and the board is cleared until M. Night Shyamalan’s Glass on January 18), but just because The Greatest Showman pulled Titanic-worthy legs last Christmas doesn’t mean every major musical will do so. If [Mary Poppins Returns] picks up, then I’ll happily eat crow. But if it doesn’t then we must wonder if Disney moved it from Christmas Day (where it would have ruled the roast like Les Miserables) to build word of mouth heading into Christmas or merely to hurt Aquaman and Bumblebee. Either represents an interesting strategy, especially if it works.

Disney’s flip Christopher Robin made more opening weekend ($24m) and had a higher per screen average. It has 73% on RT versus 77% MPR.

Can someone PLEASE explain why MPR has more Oscar buzz than Eighth Grade, Crazy Rich Asians, Destroyer, Can You Ever Forgive Me, First Reformed, Cold War, heck even Bumblebee?

Disney/$$$. One reason we are enjoying the idea of it flopping.

Because the original is such a classic and was one of the most Oscar-nominated films in history.

R194, so why nominate a remake with mixed reviews and cold reception at the box office?

I think all the buzz happened before the reviews.

The pre reviews buzz was excellent. But the reviewer didn't like it so it's not good.

'reviewers'

MPR was expected to make 70m - conservative estimate in it’s first week.

Into the Woods made 64m and Les Miz made 73m in their first weeks.

It looks liked Mary Poppins edged out Bumblebee to get 2nd place at the box office this weekend.

It’s tracking about 40% lower than expected which makes me think this will not have Greatest Showman legs.

It’s that twee and earnest muppet face on Lin-Manuel Cantstandya that’s fucking everything up, he’s like a bag of empty peanut shells onscreen. Horrrrrrubbbbbuhhllllllleeeeee!

I put Blunt in the same category as Rebecca Hall, although Blunt is prettier (Hall had fucked up teeth when she first started acting in American films - see Please Give by Nicole Holofcener where she looked rather homely, especially next to someone like Katherine Keener). Neither have what it takes to be a movie star, which has less to do with acting ability and more to do with what an actor projects on and off the screen. But which actress can open a film these days? I don't think that even Bullock can pull it off anymore.

I loved Blunt in Prada and a small part she did in Charlie Wilson's War, and I liked her a lot in Sicario, but I would never choose to watch a film just because she's in it.

Rebecca Hall is nothing special either but at least she has an upper lip.

Hall, Blunt and Carey Mulligan are all in the same bland, boring, English oatmeal sameness.

[quote]Can someone PLEASE explain why MPR has more Oscar buzz than Eighth Grade, Crazy Rich Asians, Destroyer, Can You Ever Forgive Me, First Reformed, Cold War, heck even Bumblebee?

Except for Crazy Rich Asians, none of the films you list has huge buzz just as a film. (Bumblebee yet to be seen)

Eighth Grade - the movie sank. Good reviews didn't help it. Why should there be Oscar buzz?

Crazy Rich Asians - there's buzz in the few categories it could expect.

Destroyer - it's not even released yet. Nicole has plenty of buzz.

Can You Ever Forgive Me? - it's a "soft" movie, but still has a lot of Oscar buzz, and McCarthy and Grant are shoo-ins for nominations, and probably the film itself is, too.

First Reformed - not widely loved at all. Will be lucky for Ethan to get his expected nomination.

British actresses don't cross over that well--the grand dames do--since they manage to look older, but also attractive, but of the younger actresses, only Kate Winslet and Keira Knightley strike me as actual stars.

So Blunt’s next movie is... another Disney franchise wanna be??!

Jungle Cruise with The Rock. Based on an amusement park ride. Out July 2020.

Who the hell is she fucking at Walt Disney?

Eighth Grade was a hit indie...

A24 released the film in July, and it went on to make over $13M at the box office, making it the boutique distributor’s tenth-best earner and one of the highest-grossing indies of the year. For Fisher, the experience of seeing the film hit theaters came with at least one other surprise: return ticket-buyers.

im watching Dirty John, why the hell does that boring vanilla fug Connie britton have a career. what a mealy mouthed snore, she look like she hit wid da old ugly stick...

Gross I hate Mary Poppins.

I can understand Matt the Loon hating this. After all, someone with a giant talent like his doesn’t suffer lesser art gladly.

R76 I hope you are joking

There is too much excess in the cinemas now that it becomes tiring. everyone has their own little cinematic niche but the onslaught of these overly done films gets tiring (for me at least). if its a cute, quirky, harmless and fun flick I would watch but id watch this probably at the dollar theater, if that. was never a fan of the original too, maybe because I was forced to watch it one of these

The hate for Emily Blunt here is a real WTF to me. I don’t get it, and think there’s something wrong with these people.

I can understand a meh attitude about her, but downright hate? You guys need therapy.

It’s. because they want her husband,, R214.

Christmas box office doesn’t really start until 25th/26th. MPR may will flop but the weekend before Christmas is always slow. Just like that JLo movie will close out the holiday season a hit - it’s just that it’s target demographic is busy pulling Christmas together.

I have heard mixed reviews about MPR. Some great reviews from people who really loved it too.

R214, she comes across arrogant in all of her interviews. I’m sick of the manufactured “power couple” bullshit where John Krasinski feels the need to tweet about crying at her movies to drum up publicity for them. She’s never successfully carried a movie, yet Hollywood always paves a yellow brick road for her with plum parts that should go to other actresses. And yes, I also hate that she clearly got work done on her face (nose job) post-Prada to bolster he career and no one talks about it.

She’s just not a movie star. She’s over privileged in Hollywood. It really is similar to the Brie Larsen hatred on the DL. If Blunt made a niche for herself playing bitchy supporting roles, I’d probably accept her fine.

R214 nails it. The completely irrational hatred of this woman (see R217) is ridiculous. But this is DataLounge, where way too many people have a vested interested in innocuous movies, singers, actors failing miserably.

In this case, it's pretty much the one person. The Aspie loony tune known as Matt.

R218. What vested interest would there be? That makes no sense.

Oh no, Hollywood will realize you can't remake something older than 50 years and expect to have a huge built-in audience.

Disney spent $250 million on Mary Poppins Returns.

Those who call Mary Poppins “warm”, have you actually read the book?

Think they hate Emily now? Wait until she bests Gaga for the Oscar.

Emily Cunt is ovah

R203, I think Rebecca Hall is a stronger actress than Blunt. She was brilliant in ‘Christine.’ She is also prettier, by my standards.

I think Disney thought this was the four quadrant sure fire box office bonanza that makes $350m box office. The problem is kids don’t want to see this and they’re not dragging their parents to see it. It’s only musical theater gay men and older audiences that appreciate Angela Lansbury who are buying tickets.

It’s not a date movie like Greatest Showman so i don’t see how it will have legs.

I'm a Boomer who has fond memories of the original and I definitely plan to see it ... HOWEVER, I won't go until it's been out for a few weeks and the kids are back in school. And I'll bet I'm not the only one who feels that way. That said, a lot of my peers will probably wait until it comes out on streaming or DVD.

R224 That article is hilarious. Basically she just has to win all the awards leading up to the Oscars to gain momentum. Who would have thought?

Bitchy older gay men don't understand why Mary Poppins is bitchier now that she's older.

r230 HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA

Emily blunt is not likable, which is why she will never be a star. She tries so hard and is a huge fame whore and that comes across. Her husband is also in the same lane as her, remember when he did that shitty deplorable movie about Benghazi to try and have his American sniper moment ala queeney bottom Bradley cooper?

Andrews was likable without apparent effort. Except for those who hated her like Matt and Pauline Kael.

I’ve seen your work and Blunt, you’re no Andrews.

Didn't Blunt have a huge hit earlier this year with the movie about the monsters who attack whenever they hear a sound? So if MPR does bomb, at least she had that.

R235. Nobody went to see that for Blunt or Krasinski. Great reviews for a great horror film. I’d be happy if it got nominated. Mary Poppins Returns however should not get nominated for Picture or Actress.

All the stuff Matt the Loon is saying about Emily Blunt now is the same stuff he said about Julie Andrews back when he used to rant about the original.

He's seriously mentally ill, so one can't get too mad.

On the other hand, he's a Trump-loving, racist, trans-hating deplorable, so there is that.

Forget any other potential nominees, including Glenn Close and Lady GooGoo.

The real Best Actress of 2018 has shown up, and it's Matt the Deplorable Loon - in drag!

I think Emily Blunt is a bitch, Mary Poppins Returns is overrated white establishment Hollywood dud, and voted Hillary.

Who is this Matt dude?

NO dice, Matt. We've been on to you for some time now. You use different browsers and pretend to be other posters who are "not" Matt. All in the service of making it seem that there are a lot of people who share your attitude, when there aren't.

R228, The screener has been out there for two weeks.

Darling R214, you obviously don't understand the DL mindset.

R214 DL is therapy.

Disney is now giving away free tickets to fill more seats.

Is this a remake of Nanny McPhee or Mary Poppins?

“Mary Poppins Returns treacle” is referenced by The NY Times in a glowing review for Kidman in “Destroyer “.

kidman whould paint her cooter purple if she thought she would get a nom

she a nom addict

and she fuggggg

[quote]The screener has been out there for two weeks.

Screeners are only available to guild or Academy members, idiot. He was talking about the DVD and streaming release, not a screener.

[quote]Disney is now giving away free tickets to fill more seats.

Disney isn’t giving away shit. Subway is giving away the tickets, which they BOUGHT from Disney.

Just saw Mary Poppins today with my nieces. Nice movie—not a joyous as the original. It’s just another in a line of movies proving Hollywood has no more good ideas— like the live action versions of all the Disney animated movies.

Emily Blunt was great. WTF was Lin-Manuel Miranda doing up there? Totally miscast. Dick Van Dyke makes an appearance and at age 1000, he’s still got it!

R248, Screeners are readily available to anyone who has the right connections, you fucking moron.

MPR is nowhere near as fun as the Greatest Showman. I doubt it will have the same legs.

My neighbor gets screeners from her friend who gets them from his friend. I borrow from my neighbor.

A whole row of kids left midway during the movie. It really has no targeted demographic which is why it’s a $250 million flop.

[quote]Screeners are readily available to anyone who has the right connections, you fucking moron.

Not everyone has "the right connections," fuckface. The prior poster mentioned that he would wait till it was streaming or on DVD, and you mentioned that screeners had been out for two weeks, as if that was an answer for him, but it wasn't, since he wouldn't necessarily have access to one.

If pitiful R255 were able to comprehend basic English, he might have grasped the fact that R228 clearly stated that he would be seeing the movie in a few weeks.

Sorry that you don't know anyone who would have access to screeners, R255. It must suck to be you.

r250 he's up there because he's still going off the Hamilton hype. His fans think anything he's in touches to gold. Not knock Lin-Manual but I am definitely knocking his fans that hype his essence to kingdom come

just saw it. way too long and loud and trys too hard.

amazing they didn't see that blunt does not have IT in the rushes...

very odd movie.

Her ego so big the hats don't even fit.

nuff sed

Why did they cast Lin whats his name?

seems glued in. ill fit, wtf???

Miss Blunt seems like she is in her own movie, apart from the rest...announcing each line like she is staring at the ocean.

People able to sit thru all that shitty singing for 3 hrs????

HOW

I blame Meghan Markle lol

I blame Meghan Markle’s father.

I blame Brexit.

blunt farts a lot.

I BLAME HER FARTS.

Screeners end up on the torrents so yeah, anyone with an INTERNET connection has access to them.

saw it yea, lasted thru 2 songs, its like mcdonalds for the kids.

lyrical crap

Just got back from watching it.

LOVED IT!

Emily was delightful.

There was also a sadness in Mary Poppins this time.

LOVED IT!

It simply doesn't work without Julie Andrews in the lead.

Mary Poppins is a Time Lord

Emily Blunt killed Dumbledore!

She IS the Eye of Sauron!

they were unable to erase one of her farts, when she descends from the kite....rite as she lands...u can hear a queef.

That’s not a queef, it’s Lin-Manuel wheezing.

I was so appalled by the whole thing that I called the police. They said they would like to help, but they’re dealing with all the public nuisance complaints they got in reference to “The Wife.”

Just got the Glenn screener today.

So is the movie Mary Floppins, or nottins?

Is crazy ass OP back with another review article trashing the film or its box office results? Come on, girl. Keep your thread on track.

In holdover news, Walt Disney’s Mary Poppins Returns earned $11.6 million to bring its seven-day total to $50.3m. That’s an 84% jump from Tuesday. That’s solid, but it’s lower than the 95% jump for National Treasure: Book of Secrets and the 100% jump for Jack Reacher. Because the Emily Blunt/Lin Miranda Manuel musical fantasy opened a little soft, Disney was in a position of needing huge legs to get where it wanted to go. And thus far, with the caveat that anything can happen at the end of the year, it’s not getting anything resembling a Christmas miracle. Whether or not Disney would have been better off switching Solo and Mary Poppins 2 (that’s a complicated conversation), I do believe that Disney made a mistake by not opening this one on Christmas Day as initially planned.

The only weakness in the movie is that Ben Whishaw gives a George Bailey character a very British stiff upper lip performance. Your mother is dead, we are losing the house, you nearly made me lose my job, tut-tut. Whishaw doesn't pull the audience into his struggle. Oh, dear, I still have a job during the Great Depression. He should have let it rip during his first song in the attic, but no, the plumbing needs fixing.

Even the housekeeper was more serious this time.

Blunt doesn’t bring asses into movie theaters. You’ve experimented plenty with her Hollywood and “A Quiet Place” was had nothing to do with her alleged star power.

The Music Hall was a tour de force performance.

[quote]The only weakness in the movie is that Ben Whishaw gives a George Bailey character a very British stiff upper lip performance.

I agree that he's a big weakness of the film, but not the only one. Casting people of color as that assistant lawyer and that secretary makes no historical sense whatsoever and ruins the film. Sheer stupidity.

Their skin was too distracting, R284. Did it traumatize you?

So... not a flop then?

r284, the UK does not have American history of slavery and has always been more inclusive. You are talking about a nation whose Queen is head of over two billion Commonwealth people, plenty of POPC there. As a class system, the black banker lawyer could have been the son of some rich African. So, yeah, it can be appropriate. Plus all Brit productions strive for current inclusion. Oh, and r284, g'fukyasef.

[quote][R284], the UK does not have American history of slavery and has always been more inclusive.

Go ahead, pull the other one!

I love it. A magical nanny sings and dances in a bathtub with dolphins. "Black people! Not historically accurate."

R286. Flop. $250 million budget and marketing. Box office on par with A Wrinkle in Time (which opened stronger).

Poppins has made under 75M worldwide, Aquaman is already half a billion.

Matt A the Loon is a deplorable and a racist, so he is undoubtably the one who was traumatized by the people of color in small parts. He probably felt molested by it, the way he did with the first Poppins.

And for the record, it doesn’t take place in the eternally racist US. Things were different for blacks in the U.K. and Europe in the 20s and early 30s than they were in the US.

[quote]Box office on par with A Wrinkle in Time (which opened stronger).

Wrinkle in Time didn’t open at Christmas.

Hilarious that poor OP has suffered the indignity of having this thread grayed out.

Not grayed out for me.

Great Britain was an ally of The Confederacy during The War of Northern Aggression. Great Britain's mills were dependent on Southern cotton and wool.

flop cause they spent way more on it than is known.

yet cut back on costs with tiny hats for her.

ANGELA L WOULDA BEEN BETTER EVEN IN A WHEELCHAIR AS MARY

Name recognition with someone like Gaga, Reba, Cher or Madonna playing Poppins would have made it a hit.

Meryl was sensational in her one big number as cousin Topsy. Lansbury still has a lovely voice. Ben Whitshaw is still very fuckable. The End.

R293, movies opening over the Christmas season have a tremendous advantage. It’s prime time for the box office. Kids are out of school.

A Wrinkle in Time probably opened stronger due to Oprah.

heads will roll over the mismanagement and direction of this movie..

how is it doing in Great Britain?

I think it opened disappointedly in France and relatively well in Italy (but there even Nutcracker has done pretty well and out-grossed A Star in born)

GOOD GOD. TWICE AS MUCH SINGING AS THE FIRST ONE.

INTOLERBLE. FROM THE MOMENT SHE LANDS ON EARTH

What has the ever gracious Julie said? Will there be a special benefit performance like for the stage musical when she attended and everyone who could craned their necks watching her every reaction throughout?

Well I guess there goes Bob Iger's bonus and we can expect another increase in Disneyworld ticket prices on top of the recent December one with 100s of millions of dollars lost on this turkey.

John won't be getting any sex for a long time.

How could they spend 250 million on this!?!?!

Connie Francis would have opened this film big.

lol

2 other films have made more in the same amt of time, world wide...

they spend over 300 mill on it, way over....thought it was a slam dunk

FUK DISNEY

"In second place look for Disney's Mary Poppins Returns to be one of several films to receive a boost compared to last weekend. With this title we're looking for a +21% performance leading to a three-day weekend right around $28.5 million. A look at IMDb page view data shows the film maintaining interest since release, similar to films such as The Greatest Showman, which saw a monster, +76% increase from its opening weekend last year and while the two films don't necessarily compare considering Showman's light debut weekend, the "A-" CinemaScore from Poppins and strong daily performances, which saw its second Wednesday actually outperform its opening Wednesday by +130% suggests this one is on its way to a lengthy domestic run."

Less than 100m gross during the entire Xmas-New Years holiday period for a movie that cost 250m to make and market. It won’t have legs (wobbly ones at best right now) once kiddies are sent back to school. Word of mouth is too underwhelming compared to Greatest Showman which had a hit soundtrack help build buzz for the movie.

Angela was always a Hollywood movie also ran. The wretched Bedknobs and Broomsticks proved she just didn’t have what it takes to anchor a big movie musical. Doing a five minute cameo is perfect for her.

Why was this thread grated out?

That should’ve been “grayed” out by the way.

Probably because the OP is insane. This is at least the third thread he has started or taken over with his Poppins hate.

Disney trolls are here, extolling the imaginary success of this turkey.

ha ha ha ha

Why are you such a nasty fuckhead, OP/r315? I mean really, what do you get out of such nastiness?

Lol, the movie tanked and popped.

I didn't really even like the original.

It's doing very well. A big smash hit.

Emily said she would love to play Mary again.

The movie sucks! I was so disappointed

Julie undeservedly winning the Oscar for the original was nothing more than a rebuke of Jack Warner for not casting her in My Fair Lady.

Even A Wrinkle in Time did better than this

A Wrinkle in Time (2018 film):

Budget: $100–130 million

Box office: $132.7 million

R322 Who deserved to win?

Emily Blunt can't sell movies even with the help of her marriage and her hubby/beard

Mary Poppins Returns

Budget: $130 million

Box office: $82.9 million

I don't understand the repeated comments about how Blunt isn't another Andrews.

That was the point with Blunt's casting. Andrews was not the character described in the original books and this film and any successors are/were intended to go back to the original character in Travers' books, not the sugary characterization Andrews gave in the original film.

Andrews did not recreate the original Poppins and is far too sweet and nice. I still adore her and the first film.

It'll make half a billion when all is said and done. It just has 6 days out. Gimme a break!

Yes, r328, as I posted way back in this thread, MPR is not going to have anywhere near what Disney was originally hoping but it will return its costs with a decent profit overall.

The Food Network has a deal to promote this film. That's why we saw Blunt on Barefoot Contessa and she will also appear on Chopped and Kids Baking Championship.

Emily Blunt like Meghan Markle knows how the business is run. Emily is in it for the long run. She's not going anywhere.

R324, For your consideration . . .

ACADEMY AWARD FOR BEST ACTRESS

Nominees (1965)

Kim Stanley

Séance on a Wet Afternoon

Debbie Reynolds

The Unsinkable Molly Brown

Sophia Loren

Marriage Italian Style

Julie Andrews

Mary Poppins

Anne Bancroft

The Pumpkin Eater

Oh hunny, the budget was well north of 200 million, and that’s BEFORE promotion.

it aint got legs, its returns are less every week.

BLUNT AND LIN ARE BOX OFFICE POISON

Maybe its ok if your stoned a lot, or on acid, but man it was hard to take beyond 25 minutes.... Its like theyr pullin a fat mule up a mountain....

Beautiful music, terrible casting.

I can understand people not liking Blunt because she is not Julie Andrews. Just like Return to Oz was a return to the original material, spme peoplw will not like it on that basis alone,

It appears that MP reflects the signs of the times. Julie was an exuberant post WW1 Edwardian social realignment and Emily is a sober 30s Depression Mary.

Some people are not happy that Liza was not cast. Wherezha Losht Sings Go would have been amazing.

But Emily was superb.

I got the hat. Can I be Mary?

Though not even nominated Hepburn deserved to win for My Fair Lady.

Get the most recent Robert Harris bluray 50th anniversary restoration in the glossy black and silver box. It is jawdropping and I haven't seen the film look this good since I managed to see an original SuperPanavision70 print in the 70s at the late great Warner Cinerama theater in Times Square.

r338, Cage Meat Mary!

It’s probably going to slightly better than A Wrinkle in Time, but much worse than Solo. All three are expensive flops.

International box office for MPR is terrible.

In a quick Thursday box office update for movies that aren’t Aquaman, Mary Poppins Returns earned its third-straight $10 million+ single-day gross, dropping 7% from Wednesday (a solid hold) and entering its do-or-die second weekend with $71m. This is the weekend where the Emily Blunt/Lin-Manuel Miranda sequel has to earn its place as a year-end Christmas release. Judgment on Disney’s risky strategy, both in keeping Solo: A Star Wars Story on Memorial Day and (especially) moving Mary Poppins 2 from Christmas Day to December 19, may be rendered accordingly if it doesn’t at least hold firm to (or possibly improve upon) its comparatively slight $22m Fri-Sun weekend. I’m hoping that I have to eat a little crow come Sunday.

blunt is now box office poison according to variety

Since when did everyone turn into Variety?

This is school vacation across the country.

Let's see how tickets sell beginning next week when the kids are back in school.

Box office has been reported like sports scores for well over a decade, grampa at R344. Everyone talks about it.

R339 Hepburn deserved to win for My Fair Lady.

Hepburn was an awful actress

It's just hilarious how everyone here said that bohemian was going to bomb and a star is born and marry floppins would obliterate it yet br has grossed 670 million vs sib 380 million and Mary Poopins 80 million.

Hepburn did NOT deserve to win for My Fair Lady. It's a boring film, and she brought nothing new or original to it. Of the ladies nominated, Julie was the most logical choice.

Of those not nominated, only Deborah Kerr, for either The Chalk Garden or The Night of the Iguana, would have been a potential winner.

[quote]Julie was the most logical choice

[quote]Of those not nominated, only Deborah Kerr, for either The Chalk Garden or The Night of the Iguana, would have been a potential winner.

I completely agree

I am sure Disney is not happy. They have been hyping this movie up for the last couple of years. Oh, well.

Do you have ANYTHING else to contribute here, Matt A, or is that all you know how to type?

Anyone with reading comprehension can tell that the OP is not Matthew Anscher. He posts NOTHING like Matt.

Matt's posts are always obvious even when he tries to disguise himself. He's not good at hiding at all.

The OP (whom I agree with on Mary Floppins) is a much lazier poster, preferring to just post his glee at the movie's failure. Matt would be much more intricate in his rants.

More than one person are laughing at this flop by Disney, not just Matthew Anscher, who hasn't even had a verified post here in a long time.

[quote] Probably because the OP is insane. This is at least the third thread he has started or taken over with his Poppins hate.

Nice try, hon.

[quote]it aint got legs, its returns are less every week.

Um ... it's only been out for a week.

I am not this Matt person, but why are you fighting with him? Lunatic or not, for all the endless pushing with movie, it is just not the critical or box office juggernaut alot of people, including myself, thought it would be. It is not even slaying in its own backyard in the UK, which is really surprising.

Part of the problem is no memorable/iconic songs. Even people who never have or never will watch the original know Spoonful of Sugar and Supercalifr...

Disney has not disclosed the true amt they spend on all aspects of this flop..

EAT IT WALT!

What is up with this loon OP? This movie has been out for a week and has made $93,000,000. Give it a break, OP. This movie isn't a flop, not by the least bit. All it had was a slow start, but it seems to have picked up momentum.

Mary Floppins

r359, what a card you are...brilliant!

R349, How many on here have seen Kim Stanley's and Anne Bancroft's performances that year?

I have and they were both Oscar worthy, especially Kim Stanley.

Sophia Loren and Hepburn are both very overrated especially Hepburn who was a shitty actress.

For what it's worth, both Julie Andrews and Anne Bancroft won Best Actress Golden Globe Awards that year.

I’ve seen all the nominees for 1964, the most recent being Kim Stanley, about 5 years ago.

“Seance on a Wet Afternoon” hasn’t held up at all. It’s a dreary, dull, overlong little film. Stanley is only okay in it. Very much a Streep kind of performance, though without Streep’s proficiency with accents.

Bancroft is excellent in “The Pumpkin Eater” though her Brit accent comes and goes. She wasn’t going to win, though, so soon after winning for Miracle Worker. Same with Loren, it was too soon after her win the year before Bancroft.

séance/kim stanely still hailed by most critics as one of the alltime great films/actors

I read a bio of her. major drunk/nut who fukd up so many good roles and lost out. but still she is revered. pity she too out of it to do virginia woolf on stage. wow

it depends on how you define a flop. After all worldwide box office, streaming, home video (DVD and Blu-ray) and network licensing fees, the film will return a minor profit and even a more long running one as the years go by.

But in the sense that Disney wanted and expected an immediate huge box office hit, which isn't happening, in that sense the film is so far flopping. I'd give it a few more weeks for a realistic evaluation. Audiences aren't walking out of the theater the way they are for the new Will Ferrell Sherlock Holmes film.

I hope Dumbo doesn't flop as well Eva Green deserves better

Disney wanted a big splashy world wide hit, not an ancillary market, we will our money back eventually one. And people hardly buy Dvds anymore outside of old people. Streaming gets you pennies on the dollar. I don't think anyone hates the movie, but more like they just don't care. Should have spent more time on the soundtrack. That is what spurred Greatest Showman. Plus the romance. Oh, and LMM is miscast. Stage performance does not equal screen performance.

I keep forgetting that Dumbo movie exists even though I do like Eva Green. It looks so sad.

yea, treacly movi, turgid profits

That’s 93 mil worldwide and Disney doesn’t see a majority of the worldwide box office. Domestically it’s quite slow. It won’t make its money back domestically, and it needs to do that to see a profit.

Has Julie said what a charming film it is yet and that Blunt is marvelous?

Or has she been tight-lipped because she does think it is such a stinkaroo and feels even she does not have the stomach to be that gracious?

[quote]That was the point with Blunt's casting. Andrews was not the character described in the original books and this film and any successors are/were intended to go back to the original character in Travers' books, not the sugary characterization Andrews gave in the original film. Andrews did not recreate the original Poppins and is far too sweet and nice. I still adore her and the first film.

Oh, please. Did you even SEE the original MARY POPPINS? Andrews makes a point of playing the character as strict, rather starchy, and no-nonsense throughout MUCH of the movie, only letting the sweetness show through often enough to let the audience understand that that's what she is underneath. This is the whole reason for the great success of the performance. No matter how many people have insisted otherwise, including P.L. Travers herself, Andrews' characterization is not "sugary" overall, and anyone who says so doesn't know what they're talking about and is just repeating nonsense they heard or read elsewhere.

[quote]Blunt is now box office poison according to Variety

I have never understood this concept. How can anyone possibly know if the disappointing B.O. for MARY POPPINS is due to any reaction against Blunt, or for lots of other reasons? I suspect much more the latter, and I just don't get how the disappointment can be blamed on her.

[quote]Part of the problem is no memorable/iconic songs. Even people who never have or never will watch the original know Spoonful of Sugar and Supercalifr..

Well, it's not very likely that the new MARY POPPINS would have "iconic" songs, since the songs are new. So that was a weird comment.

[quote]It depends on how you define a flop. After all worldwide box office, streaming, home video (DVD and Blu-ray) and network licensing fees, the film will return a minor profit and even a more long running one as the years go by.

Of course we'll never know, but I wonder if MPR would be doing better in theaters if it were 15 or 20 minutes shorter? I think that would also have improved it as a film -- I really liked a lot of it but I think there's just a little too much in there as far as plot AND songs.

All the hating Blunt Cunts on this thread need to watch Saving Mr. Banks (fast forward through all the dismal down under stuff).

Also, it was directed by big old 'Mo Rob Marshall. He would never steer Marry Poppins wrong.

R372, you are a fucking moron. Never, ever forget that in your daily life in regards to how stupid you truly are. Anyone with an ounce of sense knows I meant that there are not breakout, hit songs like with the original Mary Poppins or other Disney family musicials from the Lion King to Frozen. Greatest Showman had a big hit soundtrack. Memorable songs that the public liked and sung themselves helped to propel these movies to blockbuster status. It is not that hard to figure out...except for you.

The original couldn't be that great either if I haven't wanted to see it since childhood. I wonder if kids today even still like it or think it's unbearably hokey.

With advertising Poppins must have accrued a budget of 200+M.

Worldwide gross is 103M so far...

Unless it has unexpected legs this will be a loss for Disney.

Andrews performance is amazing because she is stern, starchy, prim, narcissistic, no nonsense, off the wall but never off putting and at all times incredibly charismatic with at moments enormous warmth which are perfectly integrated into the performance as a whole.

It's a tour de force balancing act.

R373- I LOVED Saving Mr. Banks.

I was floored how much I enjoyed that one- even the down under stuff!

2nd weekend is running ahead of the opining by 32%. It’s running long game #s and domestic gross at the end of the weekend will be over 100million. It’ll be in theaters until Easter.

This is officially a troll thread that can join the “A Star Is Born is going to win the Razzies” in the DL dustbin.

I loved mr.bancock too, Emma was deliciously cunty in that film.

Probably not nearly as cunty as PL Travers really was.

R381 Travers was cool

[quote]Great Britain was an ally of The Confederacy during The War of Northern Aggression. Great Britain's mills were dependent on Southern cotton and wool.

Of course but let’s not forget GB established slavery here as an essential part of the southern economy. Anerica’s race problem is entirely Britain’s doing.

Also the Brits treat foreign immigrants like complete garbage, which is why the UK is such a hotbed for homegrown Islamic extremism. Muslims in America feel welcome and like they belong, despite the recent round of Trumpkin assholery. Muslims in the UK joined ISIS in the thousands. Guess why.

I do not know how cunty the real MRS Travers was, but slap a dick under her skirt and Emma could go a cunting with some of the best DL cunts here.

Animation. Animation ? ANIMATION!!!!

"Well, it looks like Walt Disney may have gotten their Christmas miracle. The Emily Blunt/Lin-Manual Miranda musical fantasy earned its fourth-straight day of $10 million+ grosses, earning $10.62m (+58% from last Friday) to bring its cume to $81.5m."

Deadline is predicting that the movie will be at $103 million domestic by the end of the weekend. At a similar point in its run, The Greatest Showman was at $49 million (on its way to a $174 million domestic gross).

This will most likely just end up a mild disappointment for Disney because of the expectations surrounding the film. It's actually starting to look a bit like Disney's Tron sequel, which was released at Christmas and finished with $400 million worldwide off a $170 million budget. That film was just successful enough that a sequel was in development for years before being dropped (at any other studio a sequel would have been made).

Disney will just pair MPR with the original on its new streaming service and be done with it for a decade or two.

R323 You're comparing A Wrinkle In Time's entire gross to MPR after a week of release. That doesn't make much sense at all, does it? MPR will earn more in the UK alone than Wrinkle's entire foreign gross.

The movie will make it's money back non here said it wouldn't, what was said is the movie would turn a profit, since studios only get about 50 percent of the box office from north America and the get even smaller percentage of box office outside the u.s. why do you think movies that make billions of dollars still lose money? Keeping the budget tight is the secret to getting more money from your product. The avengers movies were said to have cost 500 million each yet I didn't see any if those 500 million on the screen in infinity war, so where did it all go? it had what every crappy big superhero movie had nothing history changing so where does that monster budget go?

Christmas vacation started late this year in most school districts, so the kiddos aren't returning to school until Jan. 7--desperate parents will, indeed, be taking them to Mary Poppins Returns.

From the trailer, Blunt looks like she's playing Mary Poppins as a little too upper-class. Mary's imperious, but she's not a duchess.

Travers was a follower of the mystic Gurdjieff--I've often wondered if Mary Poppins was sort of a version of him. She's basically kind of an unknowable guru. While the first Disney film is pretty saccharine and the MPR 1930s setting is actually the right time period for the books, the actors in the first film do do a good job with their parts (well, not Van Dyke's cockney accent)--Julie Andrews understood the stiff upper list proper-nanny bit and she's got that bit of edge and mystery the part demands. What was mostly missing from the film was the Jane and Michael brat factor. Both of them act out at various times and go down magical worm holes from which Mary Poppins has to rescue them--the magical realm isn't all fun and games.

R379 Easter? Its 2018 not 1978 you smug fool.

I'm shocked br is still playing in theaters, no one saw the massive success of that coming.

What's with the Blunt's accent in this film?

Bohemian Rhapsody is really awful I watched it last night I didn't expect it to be this bad it is like a bad parody film.

The pathetic shill that keeps telling people to shut up about this being a flop is hilarious, this movie is awful and it flopped.

R394 Yes it is a flop I feel bad for Ben Whishaw and Emily Mortimer

I expect a bigger drop next week when school starts up. Showman was a date movie. Poppins is a kid movie. It will probably end up 150m domestic gross on 250m plus budget.

R390, the Greatest Showman opened at Christmas last year. It ran until June of 2018. I was being conservative saying MPR would be in theaters until Easter.

And Poppins 10th day gross of 10 million plus is twice what the Jackman movie grossed on its 10th day. And it’s per screen average is almost twice what Showman did the same day.

I’m okay with being smug. Better than being a complete idiot.

Troll thread.

I’m

I'm thinking it will do business with seniors in weeks to come.

R396, School doesn't start next week, it starts the week after--so two more weekends of Christmas vacation and parents desperate to get their kids out of the house. So if it holds steady for the next two weekends, the film will probably do okay.

The Nutcracker and the Four Realms, on the other hand, looks like a true disaster--opened in early November, has made back less than half its production budget. Good. Sounds like they completely hollowed the story out for reasons that had nothing to do with good storytelling.

R396 What does a "bigger drop" even mean in this context? The film is increasing its take this weekend compared to its first. A bigger drop than what?

And a $150 million domestic total based on where it will be after this weekend is a terrible prediction. What about the remaining holiday weekdays?

June? Greatest Showman was on dvd in April, but despite doing fine, no one gived a rat's ass about that film in the present. I hope you are getting handomly paid for all this lying. Poppins was supposed to be s runaway hit, head to head eith Aquaman.

Thr Tron comparison is apt and the fact that this is a not a date movie. Kids have lots of options with Aquaman. Bumblebee and Spiderman.

The kids around me started squirming at an hour and a half. They fixed the clock face on one side but even my son said “there are four faces on the clock”. Just another plot hole. I agree that having Dick Van Dyke pop up out of nowhere was odd. Instead of showing him in a portrait how about introducing him in person earlier in the film? Could have used more big numbers. The fountain dance was very Newsies. I wonder if the songs were weak because unlike B’way there isn’t a long test period (Workshops/out of town runs) to perfect the songs. Not one hit song? Seems odd coming from Disney (think Let it Go). I also got the wierd feeling that the talking walking stick was going to be sold in the lobby for $15.

R388 $50 million went to Robert Downey Jr alone. I suspect a large amount more went others' paychecks since that movie is stuffed with so many big names. Maybe Disney should have sent an offer to Julie Andrews that she couldn't refuse to make a cameo in MPR (I read different accounts on to why she's isn't in it. One suggested, while it may not be true that, they were thinking of using her in Angela Lansbury's role at one point. And yes, she has sung since her surgery: she sang for Disney in the Princess Diaries 2.) At least they could they marketed that, instead of sites running "If you want to see Andrews, go to Aquaman!"

Yes R85. An old wheezing, fat, flatulent Miriam Margolyes as Mary Poppins sounds very much like a Mike Leigh idea.

Because Mike Leigh specialises in ugliness.

Up yours, R374. Of course I knew what you meant, but to say that new songs in MARY POPPINS RETURNS are not "iconic" is stupid, because that's the wrong word. "Not memorable" is fine.

[quote]Andrews performance is amazing because she is stern, starchy, prim, narcissistic, no nonsense, off the wall but never off putting and at all times incredibly charismatic with at moments enormous warmth which are perfectly integrated into the performance as a whole. It's a tour de force balancing act.

Agreed 100 percent. Anyone who describes her performance as simply "sugary" is either a fool or has a very poor memory.

Six people in this thread about this children's movie have misused the word "iconic".

This is an icon—

Julie Andrews is privately telling people Lady Gaga will win the Oscar and t hat Gaga should have played MP.

Gaga is a genius but not suitable for MP.

Does Keira Knightley sing?

I saw it a few days ago. I agree that it was essentially the original repackaged. Lin-Manuel Miranda did a perfectly good job, but I wasn't keen on the portrayal of Mary herself. Emily Blunt just didn't cut it for me. I'm not actually that surprised that it's flopping - not because it's awful, but because I imagine a lot of modern children will find it boring. They're used to superhero films or flashy CGI Disney/Pixar animation.

Also, I must be getting soft in my old age because I actually welled up a bit at the trailer for Dumbo before the film started. I used to be the sort of person who never cried at films, and now I'm getting teary-eyed over a CGI elephant in a fucking trailer.

Disney is misfiring these days with these mediocre movies, i mean who really needed to see a classic like MP remade?

Does Poppins like poppers?

Saw it on Christmas Day with the family, and loved it. Especially the last number.

There is little doubt THE LION KING will be a huge hit. The reaction to the trailer alone is epic. It has the potential to even surpass B&TB given the built-in audience (and their kids). ALADDIN looks less impressive judging by the trailer, but surely it will be successful. Plus, TOY STORY 4 comes late in 2019. Disney seems to be prepping for a banner year, but we shall see how it all plays out. All that said, it seems MPR is not meeting expectations... whether or not it has legs remains to be seen.

Lin Manuel Miranda really? Who at Disney is pushing this guy? Give the gays someone attractive and we might have gone to see this movie

Gay here checking in to say with or without someone “attractive” as a male lead, I and my other friends STILL attended and enjoyed this movie. It has a lot of gay appeal built in based on the musical theatre angle, Ben Whishaw, and Mary herself (not to mention Rob directing another Disney musical after ITW). Please don’t speak for the rest of us, bitter old queen.

[quote]Anyone with an ounce of sense knows I meant that there are not breakout, hit songs like with the original Mary Poppins or other Disney family musicials from the Lion King to Frozen. Greatest Showman had a big hit soundtrack

You fucking idiot, that's because Mary Poppins has a period-sounding score. Lion King, Frozen, and especially Greatest Showman (which is dreadful) depend on contemporary power ballad-sounding songs. There's no way a song from a score like Mary Poppins Returns is going to have a break-out hit in 2018. It's impossible.

r415 Of course a theatre queen like you would defend your hero closet case lin Miranda Estevez Manuel.

[quote]I hope Dumbo doesn't flop as well Eva Green deserves better

That's interesting casting for Dumbo.

Lin is FAR from my hero, trust me. He is somewhat annoying and HAMILTON is not really my thing, though I do respect him for his work. And, he’s pleasant in this to be honest. Just clearing it up, old bitter queen. Theatre queen? Perhaps; I’m an authentic gay.

You Lady Caca shills are EVERYWHERE R407

R407 is lying. Julie Andrews didn't tell anyone that. Are you the painted European clown with the screechy voice, r407? Or the other Poppins/Blunt hater?

What was Julie Andrews opinion of this debacle? I heard she chose voice work on Aquaman over being in this.

Julie is privately telling people the movie is a piece of shit and that despite Glynis always telling her during the original filming she was standing in her light she could have done a better job than Blunt.

She wrote the director on how much she loved it and praised Emily Blunt. She merely chose the other film because her grandson was a fan; she didn’t want to distract from Blunt’s performance and steal the film from her which is very gracious and classy. Don’t bother starting nasty rumors - all of this is searchable.

r424 Get real, she wasn't in it because she didn't want to be in it.

She knew it would not be boffo because she's from that era and that's how they talked.

YOU get real! There are multiple sources stating this. She wanted it to be Emily’s show. She didn’t want people to see her and think “Oh here’s the REAL Mary.” She sent an email to Rob praising it. Case closed.

[quote]Six people in this thread about this children's movie have misused the word "iconic".

I know :-) And I was insulted by one of these morons!

[quote]Get real, she wasn't in it because she didn't want to be in it.

I did read Julie's quote that she declined being in the movie because she wanted it "to be Emily's show." When you think about it, that can be interpreted as a classy statement, but it also can be interpreted as very smug -- as in, "I would steal the movie from Emily in the leading role of Mary Poppins even if I just did a cameo."

I do think it probably would have been a mistake for Julie to be in the movie playing someone other than Mary Poppins -- whereas having Dick playing the son of Mr. Dawes, one of the two characters he played in the original, made sense. But anyway, I'm guessing the real reason she didn't want to be in it is that she doesn't want to appear on screen in an old woman role, and that would have been the only way to get her into the picture.

So.... MPR was the poney they betted on. It was supposed to be huuuge compared to Dumbo 2.0.

What do you think? Do you forsee it as being more succesful than MPR ? It is about a nice, little, bullied elephant ? Everybody can root for that ! And yes, it seems very touching. But... is it the nostalgia in me speaking? Do you think today's children can connect with it ?

Good luck, Colin !

Julie is an old muncher now. Maybe she can team up with her gf Carol and do a Whales of August type movie.

Lin should have presented that furry hole to bring in the gays.

watch the pbs show on walt d, or read the bio whre it shows what a right wing, labor busting asswipe , spillin beans to McCarthy at them hearing goomba he was

hated by true artists that worked for him, he worked them like slaves and underpaid em..

man I hope Dumbo director don't put his icky ex wife h b carter in it, her ass ruins ev thing its in...

Cardi B should have been Mary! And then we’d definitely be in OH MARY territory.

Walt certainly did not underpay. My uncle worked for him in the 50s and was making $1500 a week. That was big money then.

This thread deserves the death it has achieved.

What the fuck is Emily's accent all about though... she sounds like an American attempting an English accent.

Mary Poppins will make 520 million bucks when all is said and done. Emily with The Rock has another Disney movie in the pipeline. She's not going anywhere. Her star will keep on shining

I saw it and the theatre was packed.

It was Meh, could have been better.

r428, I thought it would have been nice if she took the Balloon lady song at the end. The movie needed her. I thought Dick Van Dyke was the best part.

The Balloon Lady supposedly WAS the part she was offered actually. Which even further drives home the previous point made that after 2 hours of Emily, Julie would show up and totally upstage her. I can see why she stayed out - Disney legend Angela Lansbury was a very sweet touch anyway. Almost like a BatB and BEDKNOBS reference with her part/song.

When all is said and done, Emily Blunt will earn cool ass points for taking on a huge role and giving it her all. I mean , you don't see Jennifer Lawrence or Natalie Portman doing these type of roles.

[quote]Do you forsee it as being more succesful than MPR?

I don't know about that but I don't think it's as much of a flop as some are making it out to be. I just saw a report tonight saying it's still hanging on to #2 behind "Aquaman," so that's something. Some people are talking about it as if it's #5 or something. I think it will eventually make its money back.

r410 It's not really a remake.

Interesting that THE LION KING is projected to be huge. I still can't picture how it's going to work to have CGI animals that look like real animals singing. I would think the audience would start guffawing whenever that happened. I guess we'll see.

Loved Underneath The London Sky, Where Lost Things Go, Imagine That, A Cover Is Not The Book and The Music Hall in general. I thought that Turning Turtle was a bit stupid as was the Going Up balloon song. The balloon song was kind of flat to end on. This was not a movie for people with a fear of heights.

Mary Poppins Returns is another one of those movies people claim to like because they refuse to admit otherwise and then a year later everyone admits they hate it.

R429, I’m wondering if people will be put off going to see Dumbo because of how depressing the trailer looks!

The other Disney films released in 2019 will be Aladdin, The Lion King and Frozen 2. The Lion King and Frozen are two of Disney's best-selling franchises ever, so the latter two will almost certainly make a lot of money. Aladdin will probably be successful as well, because I think it'll appeal to a slightly older audience than the others and be marketed as a comedy.

Aladdin will be tricky. Without Robin Williams reprising his role as Genie, I just don't know if the interest will be there in the live action version. Will Smith is a talented comedic actor, but I just don't think his Genie will be memorable as Williams who pretty much improvised 90% of his lines in the original.

Dumbo has a cute little elephant ! But, yes, we can wonder if people in general, and more specifically, the new generation are still interested in touching, vintage stories. We'll see. It seems at least well done.

And no, H B Carter is not in it.

Weekend estimates $28,019,000

for a domestic total of $98,929,758 t

international total $74,400,000 t

overall: $173,329,758

This needs to clear 400m worldwide to be profitable. It will go down 40-50% each weekend after New Year’s to arrive at around 150m which is a bust given the budget and marketing support.

Well the, by traditional DL standards, if it fails as a main stream blockbuster, but has significant main stream appeal, it is an artistic triumph.

I wonder if they'll ever try to remake "Bambi," or would it just be too much for today's snowflake children (and their snowflake parents)?

We need The Hunchback of Notre Dame live action

I hate Will Smith should have cast someone else as Genie like Terry Crews

The Lion King features the death of a parent, R454, so if they're willing to remake that there's no reason they won't try the same with Bambi.

One film that is safe from the remake machine is Snow White & the Seven Dwarves. There's no way to make that one politically correct today.

Disney made Into the Woods and didn’t change it for kids like schools do, so I doubt they’ll make many changes beyond SJW shit like having x amount of POC and non-binary pronouncements.

[quote]I wonder if they'll ever try to remake "Bambi," or would it just be too much for today's snowflake children (

They’ll probably have Bambi’s Mother live in the remake, and rob some poor actor of the chance to do an Oscar-winning grief scene.

R459, Jon Stewart will rescue her.

The Sword in the Stone gets no love.

You would have thought Walt would have hit it out of the park with that story but the man was already in his 60s and was contending with so much else he seems to have had little interest in it. Babes in Toyland is another big disappointment. They both have wonderful moments but on the whole you wish they had been so much more.

There's a non-animated version of The Sword and the Stone coming out, with an English schoolboy (contemporary) pulling the sword out. Merlin is Patrick Stewart, but he spends much of the film disguised as a teenager. The title is "The Kid Who Would be King."

I was hoping for a hot lesbian scene, ideally Mary P and Jane doing a little labia licking for old time's sake, but I was disappointed.

Forget ever having another version of Bambi. It has scarred generations the way the Lion King hasn't. Yes, the father gets killed in LK, but it is remembered for other reasons, and the pace in Bambi is slower too.

word is they may replace her in the rock movie, due to flop poppins...

Everyone always forgets about The Sword in the Stone. Except for the package films, it's the sole animated feature from the Walt era that you never see any merchandise for.

Even Song of the South has those lovely little Tar Babies.

Box office mojo is pretty upbeat on the movie's prospects.

[quote]Disney's Mary Poppins Returns also performed right on par with Mojo's pre-weekend forecast, delivering an estimated $28 million in its second weekend, a +19% improvement over last weekend, resulting in a domestic cume just shy of $100 million as the film begins to show potential for long legs.

[quote]Internationally, Mary Poppins added $28.9 million this weekend from 37 markets for an international cume that now stands just shy of $75 million. The film's top overseas market remains the UK where it has grossed nearly $30 million so far and it will open in Australia and Russia next weekend.

Emily Blunt has lovely legs as well.

My kids begged me to buy them the soundtrack at Target the other day and have both been singing Turning Turtle nonstop ever since. Sounds like this film is the next Frozen.

A Cover is Not a Book is the one I can't get out of my head. Turning Turtle is definitely a really jazzy tune, though.

[quote]word is they may replace her in the rock movie, due to flop poppins...

Word is that you're a liar. You've been lying throughout this whole thread. The Jungle Cruise film is coming out in early summer. They couldn't replace her if they wanted to, but of course, they don't want to, and you know that.

You're just like your hero, Trump. You throw lies out and figure one of them will stick. I guess it's part of your mental deficiency. SAD.

[quote]My kids begged me to buy them the soundtrack at Target the other day and have both been singing Turning Turtle nonstop ever since.

There's a song in it about Mitch McConnell? Blergh!

[quote]The Sword in the Stone gets no love.

I love The Sword in the Stone

I was disappointed in The Sword and the Stone even as a child. It just wasn't on the level of such Disney animated classics as Sleeping Beauty, Cinderella, Dumbo, and Snow White, although Old Madam Mim was fun. The Disney animated film prior was 101 Dalmations, and this was a huge let down (a let down after Three Lives of Thomasina even).

Mary Poppins came out about seven months later and wiped everyone's memories clean of TSITS.

R470 - Almost purchased at Target but it was cheaper on iTunes. Heard there were special “collectible cards” included in the Target CD. I don’t know why they feature nonstop movies and music with Target-only exclusives. However, I am wondering what said cards look like. Perhaps just another bizarre and cheap Target exclusive but am at least curious.

heads are rolling at Disney for spending so much $$$ on this turkey....and for casting the leads..

There's the Loon at r477, lying again, just like his honey Trump.

Heads aren't rolling at all about this film or the casting.

If anyone's in a bit of trouble, it's the marketing people who decided to move it from Christmas Day to Dec 19, which turned out not to have been the right choice.

The movie is a hit, it's making money. It's not a blockbuster, but it's doing fine. So sorry to burst your ugly little bubble, r477, but all the lying posts in the world aren't going to turn this into a flop. Go back into your autistic stupor, stupid.

Hard to say if leaving it at the original Christmas Day would have made much of a difference. The studio didn’t get the jump on “Aquaman” they were hoping to, but the people who want to see it will regardless opening a week earlier. And from what I hear from a friend in the biz, Disney may have some bigger plans in the coming months for how to milk this and the original film. MPR is going to be a moneymaker no matter what these liars post.

Call me stupid, but I don't understand what the success level of AQUAMAN has to do with the success level of MARY POPPINS RETURNS. Even without seeing AQUAMAN, I assume they are two very different types of movie, so it's hard for me to imagine any family saying, "Okay, we have to choose between AQUAMAN and MARY POPPINS RETURNS! We can only see one of them!!!"

[quote]Julie undeservedly winning the Oscar for the original was nothing more than a rebuke of Jack Warner for not casting her in My Fair Lady.

Also, Andrews had a banner year! MARY POPPINS opened in August 1964. Two months later, in October, THE AMERICANIZATION OF EMILY was released and was a critical/commercial success albeit on a smaller scale. Then in March 1965 came THE SOUND OF MUSIC and was an even bigger hit than POPPINS. By the time the Oscars rolled around in April, Andrews was a bona fide movie star which proved wrong Warner's earlier assertion about her and his reason for not hiring her -- that she was not movie star material.

R458 Disney had Rapunzel live in ITW which totally alters the Witch's plight. If Rapunzel merely runs away, there's no longer reason for the Witch to be so distraught, because there's always the possibility of trying to win her back.

[quote]because there's always the possibility of trying to win her back.

Not with that dim bulb c-lister they gave me for a daughter there isn’t.

Haha reminds me Sondheim wrote a new song for The Witch called "She'll be back" which got cut to trim the movie time. I agree it ruined The Witch's reason for being furious as her daughter didn't get squished by the giant. Bad move.

Those blue hair are fabulous.

R485 do you think The Witch's pubes turned blue as well when she transformed? To match her reinvigorated weave?

Ask the Prince.

Saw it tonight. 💋

Streep looked great in ITW. She probably won't look that glam ever again on film.

Old gay guys love Mary Poppins. I don't get it.

Got in a little late to the theater. Bank execs (here we go) were already in home. Aisle seat close up because I'm near sighted. Approached it with a pissy attitude to the delight of the rows seated behind me.

My reactions to the stunt casting got laughs from the crowd.

R492 how do you mean?

I don't get it either, r490. But since it's a hot topic on this board ....

Seems like the movie is doing just fine at the box office, after all. It's not a megahit, but it's not a flop, either.

But..but R490, old gay white guys, yes but it's all the rage with the ghetto cretins of lipstick alley. The magical negro bank executive in 1930s London touched so many hearts. Protecting the Banks family from evil white do-ers. Right up there with Green Mile. Just got the chills, me 😇

R490 - what’s there to “get”? I know plenty of younger guys (gay or not) who also enjoy Mary. I don’t get AQUAMAN or STAR WARS either I suppose. You just seem really bitter, dear. This movie is also pretty diverse at least in audiences I’ve seen.

R214 I think some of the hate can be attributed to her fellow Brits who hate her for becoming an American citizen a few years back and residing permanently in the US. They hate when their countrymen do that and then treat them like Americans when they do.

I had a British acquaintance ten years ago who was in Massachusetts on a visa working as a counselor at a group home. She met a man from Cape Cod, became seriously involved, married him and became a US citizen. Her former friends back home turned on her. I haven't seen her in a few years so I don't know if all that was resolved in time, but it was petty I thought.

Wanted to be critical but credit is due. Blunt knocked this role out of the park.

Got chills as bath adventure ended in sea with whirlpool. Needs to be edited by about 15 mins. Especially the torch bearers scene and the clock scene which she could have remedied right off. Wish it was more chromatic. Brighter colors. Miranda was charming but needed some editing. I enjoyed him. Kinda magical charisma in 1st half. Warm smile. Still, not disappointed as Blunt bangs it out. The stunt casting needs to stop. Highly distracting and felt pandered to by SJW HW.

[quote]My reactions to the stunt casting got laughs from the crowd.

[quote]how do you mean?

It’s Matt the Loon. He got up and started singing songs from Bedknobs and Broomsticks, and when the black lawyer came on he farted, bless his racist little heart. They finally had to drag him out.

Emily should have flashed her ginger muff to get the punters in!

15m in the weekend

Domestic total: $138,729,305

Worldwide: $257,929,305 t

Its budget was $130 million. I don't think it's broken even yet.

I'll admit I was distracted by the black lawyer when I saw the movie, because it seemed historically inaccurate to me. But then I did some Google research and found that there were, indeed, some black lawyers (or solicitors or barristers) in Britain back then, and even earlier -- even if not a lot of them, obviously. So I think it was fine to have that character be black, because it was certainly possible that he would be, if not likely. That said, I thought it was rather heavy-handed to make the black lawyer the really good, nice one and the white lawyer the nasty, mean, greedy one. I guess we have a LONG way to go before black people can again be represented as villains in movies and TV shows made by white people, but that's understandable even if problematic.

[quote]That said, I thought it was rather heavy-handed to make the black lawyer the really good, nice one and the white lawyer the nasty, mean, greedy one.

Ugh! I haven't seen the film yet, but that disappoints me. It just gives more ammo to the right who already believe that Hollywood/liberals are out of touch and hate white people.

Anybody see Julie on Colbert? Honestly don't know when it was from as I saw it on youtube and didn't check.

But her most recent(I assume) facework is such a horror she looks like a cubist nightmare. I've always been a big fan so this is really sad for me to see her so desperate.

Always indomitably strong but clearly aging is agony for her.

R506 Julie Andrews?

yes. Know when it was from?

If it was uploaded by the show on their channel, it usually occurs within a day of airing. This is the only Colbert/Andrews interview I could find. It says it was uploaded in February 2017, so almost 2 years ago.

Yes that's it. 2 years ago wow. I hope she looks better now but she probably already needs another one. They don't seem to last long.

She must look like hunchbacked Julia Child by now.

Emily jealous of rami's movie's box office success.

R503 I heard it needed $250 million to break even. Typically you double the budget, so that puts it at $260 million. So let's say $250-260 million to break even. It basically just has.

R518 so, it's a flop stateside? But when you factor in the foreign gross, it barely breaks even? And it's on its third weekend? I don't think that's good news for a big budget extravaganza.

But you know in the long run it will bring in a ton of money. Does that no longer matter anymore? It has to be a blockbuster out of the gate or it's more effort than it's worth?

Movies don't stay out in theaters for long these days, unless they're out of the gate blockbusters. Its grosses are going to go down weekly, and it needs to gross another $250 million to make a healthy profit. It looks like it'll lose money, instead.

R516 - Another $250 million?? Can you do basic arithmetic?! It will enter profitable territory as of this week when you factor in worldwide gross. Where would you get your crazy numbers from? Movies don’t stay in theaters forever anymore. But, this has end of February at least locked up. One weekend dip doesn’t mean it can’t pick back up next one, especially with musicals. I don’t get the overall hatred directed at this movie. Is it just to take down the Disney giant? I can’t imagine it’s the film/brand herself.

R517 Its budget was $130 million. It needed to gross $260 million to break even. its current gross is $257 million ($138 million domestic, $119 foreign). Thus, it needs to gross twice that to make a *healthy* profit. Sure, everything from here on (when you factor in foreign gross) is a profit, but it has to gross another $250 million for its investment to be worth it.

With the way Hollywood budgets, I hear that Titanic is set to break even.

All the Christmas movies including this one will die out by tomorrow since the kiddies are going back to school, parents take their kids and the whole family during xmas vacations to the theater hence why Christmas has become an important release window for Hollywood since almost every Christmas release makes a killing at the box office. This movie tanked. Get over it shill.

Shill? I doubt there are any true shills here. It’s far from tanking and its run is far from over. Such hatred - this is what Trump era is breeding I suppose.

No, it's what Asperger's is breeding with Matt the Loon. Plus that painted clown with the shrill voice from Europe.

ok I don’t know who Matt or the painted clown is or why Trump is mentioned but I do think it’s premature kind of to cal it a bomb. I certainly am not looking forward to you asshats all through 2019 with all of Disney’s remakes/sequels getting same joy they are “tanking”.

If not a bomb, then a disappointment. It's definitely underperforming.

R523 people really love to see a big giant like Disney have expectations that fall short. Sick kind of game seen in politics right now. These jealous have-nots are rooting for all their ’19 musical releases to also underwhelm I’m sure. Sad...

Disney is evil the way they treat their park employees, including replacing longtime tech workers with foreigners on temporary work visas.

Disney is great to their gay employees.

A film that cost $130 million to make only needs $260 million to break even yet you all were claiming Bohemian Rhapsody hadn’t broken even at $600 million on a $55 million budget.

Makes sense.

Wait who is this directed at? I’m not the one who posted at 525. This is confusing with anon users posting one after another. Wish we knew what each other looked like. Actually, could make some informed guesses about some posters’ age, gender, and race based on their comments.

Disney better be great to their gay employees. We're the ones who put the magic into The Magic Kingdom and we don't tolerate shit.

FIrst of all, the budget was well north of 250 million, not 130. Domestically it will not profit. Period. It will barely break even with VOD. MAYBE.

SEcond, it was beaten this weekend by a shitty z list horror flick. No matter how you try to spin it, Floppins is an expensive failure, one of a long string for Disney.

Just can’t figure out what went wrong. It should have been a slam dunk. It’s a popular, beloved classic original, it’s a recognizable character/brand, the direction and other creative elements were excellent, reviews were generally at least favorable, the new songs mostly worked, the SFX and visuals were beautiful, and it even boasted a handful of Hollywood legends in cameo roles. After looking over that list, the only thing I can put my finger on is...sigh...the cast. Perhaps Emily Blunt (who has received great praise) isn’t the box office name Disney was hoping, and maybe Lin-Manuel has very little recognition outside of HAMILTON fame. It really does break my heart - a live action musical is one of the few films that gets me to the theater (and I don’t think Disney’s offerings in 2019 will be as of much interest to me).

[quote]maybe Lin-Manuel has very little recognition outside of HAMILTON fame.

He doesn't. I'm a musical theater geek, but some people i know who aren't into theater barely know HAMILTON , never mind LMM.

[quote] It’s a popular, beloved classic original,

The original is a classic, and I enjoy it, but am not sure it is a character or a movie that has been watched by kids in the decades since it came out, especially the last twenty years. I can see many families having copies of the older animated classics like Cinderella, but not having Mary Poppins. You see little girls playing the princess characters, but you do not see them play Mary Poppins. Also, it is not like the parents of these kids would have great nostalgia for the character and bring the kids. You would have to go back to their grandparents to find a lot of Mary Poppins nostalgia.

For what it's worth, both my sisters bought MARY POPPINS for their kids this decade. But they've only attempted to watch it once. That movie is rather slow-moving and boring for today's kids. However, they have loved and watched repeatedly THE SOUND OF MUSIC, which is longer and has an intermission, but I think the lively and rambunctious kids (as opposed to the stuffy Banks kids) are more attractive to modern children. Also, the scenery is breathtaking and Salzburg feels/looks like a magical land. POPPINS surprisingly doesn't, save for the animated sequence. It's actually rather drab-looking.

R535 and R534 - I just don’t think your reasoning is true across the board. For what it’s worth, I’m a 27 yo guy and the original is one of my all-time favorites. I saw MPR twice (with 30 yo guy and then female friend of 46); my 54 year-old aunt also quite enjoyed the sequel. The theater was filled each time with a pretty even split of children and the 50+ crowd. Perhaps children do need to be 10 years old rather than, say 5 ,to appreciate the 1964 version though.

All in all, I think the user a few posts back hit the nail on the head about casting, especially Lin-Manuel. People love the original and it will continue to endure for another 54 years. BUT, people want to see Julie Andrews in the role, not the less warm Emily Blunt and some random Latino dude.

[quote]Wish we knew what each other looked like.

Here's what the main Poppins hater looks like. Meet Matt.

Sick of Emily Blunt and her moron husband being heralded as the it couple of the year.... it makes me laugh that Mary Floppins did bad business and her husband's film was exposed as plagiarising the Bird Box novel.

Loved Emily and Dick on the GGs last night.

How the hell did the BAFTAS snub Emily Blunt. She's British and the movie was shot there, that's basically an automatic nomination from that group. Surprising actually as she has two SAG nominations.

Lin Manuel Miranda rightfully should enjoy his Hamilton kudos but he’s a void in any other medium, especially film, he was basically invisible in MPR, needed a comic with some spark.

[quote]The stunt casting needs to stop. Highly distracting and felt pandered to by SJW HW.

People on their fainting couch over the (in their minds) the implausibility of black people working amongst white people in 1930s London or a Purto Rican but can accept that a bitch descends from/ ascends into the sky with a umbrella and can leap into pottery and perform dance routines with talking cartoon animals.

Well it does actually sound more probable that a british bitch in 30s London would descend from the heavens with an umbrella than deal with blacks or Puerto Ricans.

R542 don't set it in a specific time and place then. The magic is just an aspect of the storytelling. Filmmakers, want you to believe in the magic by setting it in 'the real world.' But once you start adding more nonsensical stuff that conflicts with that 'reality,' the suspension of disbelief is hard to come by.

For instance, the 1997 TV remake of R&H's CINDERELLA could get away with its diverse casting, because it takes place in a fictional fairy kingdom where anything goes. But MPR cannot because it is specifically set in 1930s London, which was not diversified.

The casting of that black actor as one of the lawyers in MPR took me out of the movie because it seemed to me so implausible that there would be a black lawyer in London in the 1930s, but I looked it up after seeing the movie and it seems it would have been possible, if not probable -- there were SOME black lawyers back then and even earlier, and even some sort of black barristers' association. That said, I think it was awfully heavy-handed that the script writers of MPR made the black lawyer the nice one and the white lawyer the mean one. Of course.

It's just a fucking movie.

People still go to movies? It seems so 20th Century.

R495 I'm sick of magic negroes turning up in all the inappropriate places.

It'a another reason for me avoid this mega-schmaltz.

I suspect this movie is doing poorly at the box office.

The distributors relied on word of mouth to sell this movie when it was released here a month ago.

But now, a month later, they're spending big on advertising to get buyers.

I hate musicals so I couldn't care less but this movie is not a flop. I won't go on a rant trying to explain the real price of making a movie, but this movie is doing just fine. This idea some here have that a movie needs to make 3x their budget to break even is not true. No big budget movie loses money. Just wanted to pitch in with a perspective from someone who has worked in development for 12 years.

[quote]I suspect this movie is doing poorly at the box office.

It's been out for a month and has grossed $15. million domestically and $137 million foreign ($290 million total) on a $130 million budget.

^ $153 million domestically

R550 You say you couldn't care less but this movie is not a flop.

I'm glad it's doing poorly because I think it's downright rude for this money-making venture be done in Dame Julie's lifetime.

As of January 16, 2019, Mary Poppins Returns has grossed $153 million in the United States and Canada, and $137.3 million in other territories, for a total worldwide gross of $290.3 million, against a production budget of $130 million

I have no clue what you believe constitutes a flop, so maybe by your fanboy standards it is. By commercial and industry standards it is not. It is making less money than its projections, though, which is another matter.

I saw it, took my niece. It was not amazing. The songs were not good or catchy. Emily Blunt is a delight but her MP was rather subdued and low key. She seemed to stand around a lot watching other people do things.

Loved seeing DVD at the end. So heartwarming.

I don’t regret going but it wasn’t particularly memorable or special.

[quote]I'm glad it's doing poorly because I think it's downright rude for this money-making venture be done in Dame Julie's lifetime.

Sorry, seeing Dick Van Dyke back and dancing at 92 was worth snobby Julie Andrews turning down a cameo. She would have been perfect for Streep's role.

[quote]The songs were not good or catchy

The Place Where Lost Things Go is beautiful and deserves the Oscar over Gaga's song.

Julie wasn't snobby. She felt that people would not be able to see her as anything than "oh, there's the REAL Mary Poppins", and she would be a distraction. She didn't want to intrude on Emily's movie.

[quote]The Place Where Lost Things Go is beautiful and deserves the Oscar over Gaga's song.

Forgotten as soon as the last note was played, I’m afraid.

Not that I thought the songs in ASIB were stunning either.

Anybody who hates musicals has no right to an opinion about anything and really no right to live.

Not true, I cried until the next song, R560.

Thinking about it makes me tear up.

The thought that a dead mother isn't dead but is in the place where lost things go is such a heart wrenching and beautiful way to explain the death of a parent to a grieving child WITHOUT GETTING ALL JEEBUSY ABOUT IT. Loved it.

The mother gets lost and can't figure out how to get back to her children? That's a bizarre conceit. I thought it was a song about TV remotes.

The kids know she is dead, it was an approach to grief.

Like mamma bein in hebn wit Jeebus is such a comfort to many.

my old aunt went to see it and couldn't put into words what she felt watching him dance. it was that captivating. i asked who thinking dick van dyke of course but nope. she was talking about lin manuel! lmao. i just don't get it. by the way, i just saw the original last summer and hated it. my nieces and nephews were not interested.

R565, like anyone cares about your senile aunt? She probably was masturbating during the film, thinking of Dick.

^nope. she only had praises for lin manuel. haha. believe me, i don't get it one bit.

Two Oscar Noms! Best Song and Score!

Um...4 Noms. Costume and Production Design as well.

my sis in law came over tonight and said she took her kids. she loved it and said she wants to marry lin manuel!!! hahaha. and her husband is a HUNK. I just don't get it. what does he do to people?

I think there is a special warmth and cuteness about Lin-Manuel, especially when he smiles. There's something very appealing in his his smile, and also his eyes. And some of my friends and I agree that he actually seems to have gotten better looking over the past few years, I think maybe partly because his haircuts have been more flattering during than they used to be. (I don't think he looked very good with the long-hair-pulled-back that he had for HAMILTON.)

R571, agree 100%. Plus he actually seems nice.

Just saw it and I rather enjoyed it. I appreciate the hand drawn animation rather than the crap ugly CGI animation of today.

You have to have great features for that pulled back hair look. Ok but cute features look better with hair framing the face.

I want to fuck him.

No you don't, you just want to fondle his Tony.

Miranda has a buttahface to end all buttahfaces. His buttahface also ranks very highly on the punchability scale.

R574 to whom are you referring?

If they had cast a true English song and dance man with a comic spark the whole film would have risen above its middling thud.

If Gaga had played Poppins - would she have been Oscar nom'd for this instead of ASIB?

Yeah, 577, here is that "buttahface." Really homely. I can only imagine whom you consider to be attractive.

$171,915,781 in North America + $177,056,399 in foreign markets for a total $348,972,180. It has finished its run almost everywhere. It was still out in 84 theaters last weekend. It should reach 349m and ends there.

R582 you forgot to mention its production budget was $130 million.

I'm sorry R581, but I agree: I was taken by how plain he is without facial hair. A face made for Broadway. From the back row.

That's not counting DVD/streaming sales, or cable. Rob Marshall says he's working on a sequel.

Nevertheless, it underperformed at the box office. Was it even profitable in theaters?

No memorable songs.

OMG, Where The Lost Things Go makes me tear up at the mention of it...

Memorable

[quote]Nevertheless, it underperformed at the box office.

Whatever that means.

If we use the old tried and true formula Profit = BO - (budgetx2) then the movie will end up making a profit of eight million dollars for the studio. That is not a flop. What underperforming means for this picture is anyone's guess. The Blunthater Troll is really grasping at straws on this one.

^^^ eighty, not eight

FWIW: I thought LMM was cutest when he was on Curb Your Enthusiasm. Had kind of a preppy Puerto Rican think going on.