After being deserted by their former nanny the Banks family was in need of a new caretaker. Their mischievous bunch needed a unique kind of help. A babysitter equipped with wits, patience, determination, and responsibility willing to put in the extra effort. Unquestionably unmatched in her field, but I personally believe Mary Poppins did better the first time around. In the new movie ‘Mary Poppins Returns’ a story was presented with a similar theme ultimately leaving the original in its shadow when it deserved one of its own.
The musical Mary Poppins released in 1964 was a tale of disobedient, selfish children who were in need of some friendly guidance. An entertaining story, yet sincere narrative that displayed a genuine relationship between nanny and child. Being that the Banks family was already preoccupied, everyone within the household could’ve used a peacemaker. This theatrical series of fantastical adventures was a wonderful, and heart-felt display of selflessness, with a 100% review on Rotten Tomatoes. Mary Poppins was an amazing role model that set a good motherly example that these children desperately needed.
Now an adult with three children, Mr.Banks comes to learn his house is on the verge of repossession in 5 days if he is unable to pay his mortgage loan. Not able to find proof of his shares, Mr.Banks is left distressed with thoughts of where he and his family will go. Just as all seems lost, Mary Poppins arrives unexpectedly to save the day. With a 78% on Rotten Tomatoes, and 7.2 review out of 10, the movie was ultimately a success. Despite the creativity, it was a pretty decent movie, but nothing compared to the original.
The new movie was entertaining and colorful but didn’t exactly do justice to the main theme. There was music and dance but it still lacked the important moral lessons. Personally, I believe the original story embodied Mary Poppins quirky and sarcastic personality much more than the new version. I love both, but I definitely have a preference.