Mary Poppins Returns has been listed as one of the
Media and drama good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: August 10, 2020. ( Reviewed version). |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Please respond? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:301:77B4:EBD0:3919:3162:8BD2:6101 ( talk) 20:52, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
Is there any information on how Walt Disney Pictures managed to secure the rights to producing the sequel? After the original author's disappointment with the original Mary Poppins film, P.L. Travers supposedly wrote on her last will that never again will any American production studio is ever going to adapt any of her books.( http://www.theqandapodcast.com/2013/12/saving-mr-banks-q.html) So, how in the world is Disney making a sequel now? Hope(N Forever) ( talk) 15:30, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
There are no animated parts produced / planned for the sequel? 惑乱 Wakuran ( talk) 11:57, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
Hold on! Wasn't Mary Poppins Returns' actual date December 25th? INB4EDITS ( talk) 00:39, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
Okay, but, "Wasn't Mary Poppins Returns' actual date December 25th" is what i'm asking. INB4EDITS ( talk) 23:04, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
References
The plot seems rather incomplete and it looks as thouhg it was written in a messy way. Could someone fix it?
So the resolution in the bank written in the plot isn't true "Dawes tells Michael that he knew his father and agreed that he made some good investments, so the shares will be enough to pay off the loan"
Basically Michael had originally put his tupons from the first movie in the bank all those years ago, and over the years the money has garnered enough interest to pay off the loan, meaning Michael kept the shares for his family (so the shares were never used in the first place to pay off the loan) Kranitoko ( talk) 23:04, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
The original film was set in 1910, so MP should be in her 50s when this is set in the mid-1930s. Is staying youthful a magic power of hers? Jim Michael ( talk) 01:53, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
The Dolby Theatre is not a cinema. Is this correct venue for the premiere, or do we mean the Chinese Theatre next door where premieres are traditionally hosted? 50.66.121.20 ( talk) 00:36, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
[ https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Mary_Poppins_Returns&diff=937448064&oldid=937447868 I just reverted an edit that changed the heading discussing a possible future sequel from "Possible sequel" to "Canceled sequel." After that, I looked at the recent page history and saw that the wording has gone back and forth a few times this past month.
As I noted in my edit summary, I prefer the terms "potential" or "possible" when describing this topic because using the term "canceled" implies that the sequel had been previously confirmed or greenlit, and that the studio subsequently canceled its development, which does not seem to be the case here. If one of the other users that prefers the term "canceled" would like to explain why they prefer that term, please do so here. Thanks. Aoi (青い) ( talk) 02:44, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Kingsif ( talk · contribs) 23:19, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
Hi, I'm Kingsif, and I'll be doing this review. This is an automated message that helps keep the bot updating the nominated article's talkpage working and allows me to say hi. Feel free to reach out and, if you think the review has gone well, I have some open GA nominations that you could (but are under no obligation to) look at. Kingsif ( talk) 23:19, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
Good Article review progress box
|
Cherry Tree Lane, Topsy’s Fix-It Shop, Big Ben, the interiors of the Banks home, and the enormous abandoned parkand
Scenes requiring green and blue screens for visual effects were first filmed on J and K Stages with physical set pieces for the cast to interact with, which were then replaced with animation in post-productionneed to be originally worded
"full of personality and humor, and reverential" without being slavish in their adherence to the musical patterns of the first filmis a quote from THR, not just the part in quotation marks
the film sees Mary Poppins, the former nanny of Jane and Michael Banks, returning one year after a family tragedyseems like a promotional line, and doesn't actually say what happens in the film.
That idea was also shot down, however, because Travers proved impossible to deal with since she imposed her own rules, including barring Poppins' clothing from being redcould be reworded; I suggest
was also shot downbe changed to "also did not come to fruition", and the second clause (everything between the commas with
...impossible to deal with...) be changed to "because Travers would not go ahead without certain caveats that the company would not concede"
a good friend of her whom- probably is intended as "of hers", but these two words are still unnecessary
a sequel entitled Mary Poppins Comes Back- just "titled"
and it was tricky to find an actor to play Bert's brother though an executive suggested that singer Michael Jackson was right for the partits own sentence: "It was also tricky..." (and add a comma after "brother")
The planned sequel eventually was cancelled upon the casting problems and the fact that new executives were now running the company- the phrasing is a little unusual, using verbs that don't match the action. How about "The planned sequel was eventually cancelled because of a combination of issues: the casting problems and the fact that new executives took over the company"
On the 2004 release of the 40th Anniversary DVD of the original film, the trivia track stated in regards to a possible sequel "One...– "The 2004 release of the 40th Anniversary DVD of the original film contained a trivia track that stated, in regards to a possible sequel, "One..."
Blunt and Miranda had been cast in the lead roles- unnecessary repetition?
the grownup Michael/Jane Banks- "adult" perhaps?
the Victorian Governmentshould certainly be written as the Government of Victoria; it's not the Victorian government
ex-Pixar veteran Jim Capobianco. Ex-Disney animator, Ken Duncan,- were they former employees at the time, because that seems strange?
of December 25, 2018- unnecessary repetition
, with the release date of December 25- still don't need to restate in the next sentence, either
and announced December 19 as the new release date for the film- ditto
of $349.5 million, against- don't need the comma
Mary Poppins’s return shows that sometimes it pays to wait. Half a century on, her allure hasn’tare text and not html - could they be fixed?
’
when they should be '
- you can copy the first example to search them in the article, then replace by just deleting and typing an apostrophe anew.
Kingsif (
talk)
23:37, 9 August 2020 (UTC)He also drew comparisons of the film's quality and tone to the 1960s musicals as well the nostalgia to Star Wars: The Force Awakensto "He compared the film's quality and tone to that of 1960s musicals, and its nostalgia to Star Wars: The Force Awakens"
...leading performance (whose performance he labelled...- perhaps "(which he labelled...", since it's already about the performance
[Truitt] described the film as a "comforting nostalgia-fest" and "satisfaction in spit-spot fashion" as well as commended the performances of Blunt and Miranda (whom he referred to as "endlessly charming") as well Marshall's knack on musical numbers and Shaiman's "swinging delight" original score.- this one might be harder to fix and need re-writing completely
He also found Blunt's version of Mary Poppins as "excellent" and described it as "a little chillier and more austere" while referring to it as "truer to the spirit of the heroine of P. L. Travers’s books".
[Travers] rated the film with three out of five stars, praising Blunt's unique portrayal of the title character while describing the film as an "industrial-strength sugarplum" and felt that the sequel didn't live up to the 1964 original, but nevertheless praised the film, remarking, "Mary Poppins Returns shows it has the power to leave you deliriously happy".
I changed American to American-British in the opening sentence, because the source material is British, as is the setting, the filming location, and most of the cast.
My edit was reversed twice (the second time when I provided IMDb as a source).
The reason I'm putting this out here is that I simply believe American-British is much more appropriate than American.
If there is a rule that the movie is always given the nationality of the production company—and this nationality only—unless a good source is provided that says to the contrary, perhaps someone who agrees with me could find a good source. Otherwise, perhaps some of the people active on this article could consider the merits of my argument.
Note that the 'nationality' (or 'country of origin') of a movie is very often 'unclear' and requires a judgement to be made on a case by case basis. Over-relying on the country in which the production company is based is going to lead to misleading or incomplete entries. lukeuser ( talk) 12:38, 28 December 2021 (UTC)
Mary Poppins Returns has been listed as one of the
Media and drama good articles under the
good article criteria. If you can improve it further,
please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can
reassess it. Review: August 10, 2020. ( Reviewed version). |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Please respond? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:301:77B4:EBD0:3919:3162:8BD2:6101 ( talk) 20:52, 30 June 2017 (UTC)
Is there any information on how Walt Disney Pictures managed to secure the rights to producing the sequel? After the original author's disappointment with the original Mary Poppins film, P.L. Travers supposedly wrote on her last will that never again will any American production studio is ever going to adapt any of her books.( http://www.theqandapodcast.com/2013/12/saving-mr-banks-q.html) So, how in the world is Disney making a sequel now? Hope(N Forever) ( talk) 15:30, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
There are no animated parts produced / planned for the sequel? 惑乱 Wakuran ( talk) 11:57, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
Hold on! Wasn't Mary Poppins Returns' actual date December 25th? INB4EDITS ( talk) 00:39, 25 November 2018 (UTC)
Okay, but, "Wasn't Mary Poppins Returns' actual date December 25th" is what i'm asking. INB4EDITS ( talk) 23:04, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
References
The plot seems rather incomplete and it looks as thouhg it was written in a messy way. Could someone fix it?
So the resolution in the bank written in the plot isn't true "Dawes tells Michael that he knew his father and agreed that he made some good investments, so the shares will be enough to pay off the loan"
Basically Michael had originally put his tupons from the first movie in the bank all those years ago, and over the years the money has garnered enough interest to pay off the loan, meaning Michael kept the shares for his family (so the shares were never used in the first place to pay off the loan) Kranitoko ( talk) 23:04, 23 December 2018 (UTC)
The original film was set in 1910, so MP should be in her 50s when this is set in the mid-1930s. Is staying youthful a magic power of hers? Jim Michael ( talk) 01:53, 24 January 2019 (UTC)
The Dolby Theatre is not a cinema. Is this correct venue for the premiere, or do we mean the Chinese Theatre next door where premieres are traditionally hosted? 50.66.121.20 ( talk) 00:36, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
[ https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Mary_Poppins_Returns&diff=937448064&oldid=937447868 I just reverted an edit that changed the heading discussing a possible future sequel from "Possible sequel" to "Canceled sequel." After that, I looked at the recent page history and saw that the wording has gone back and forth a few times this past month.
As I noted in my edit summary, I prefer the terms "potential" or "possible" when describing this topic because using the term "canceled" implies that the sequel had been previously confirmed or greenlit, and that the studio subsequently canceled its development, which does not seem to be the case here. If one of the other users that prefers the term "canceled" would like to explain why they prefer that term, please do so here. Thanks. Aoi (青い) ( talk) 02:44, 25 January 2020 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Kingsif ( talk · contribs) 23:19, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
Hi, I'm Kingsif, and I'll be doing this review. This is an automated message that helps keep the bot updating the nominated article's talkpage working and allows me to say hi. Feel free to reach out and, if you think the review has gone well, I have some open GA nominations that you could (but are under no obligation to) look at. Kingsif ( talk) 23:19, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
Good Article review progress box
|
Cherry Tree Lane, Topsy’s Fix-It Shop, Big Ben, the interiors of the Banks home, and the enormous abandoned parkand
Scenes requiring green and blue screens for visual effects were first filmed on J and K Stages with physical set pieces for the cast to interact with, which were then replaced with animation in post-productionneed to be originally worded
"full of personality and humor, and reverential" without being slavish in their adherence to the musical patterns of the first filmis a quote from THR, not just the part in quotation marks
the film sees Mary Poppins, the former nanny of Jane and Michael Banks, returning one year after a family tragedyseems like a promotional line, and doesn't actually say what happens in the film.
That idea was also shot down, however, because Travers proved impossible to deal with since she imposed her own rules, including barring Poppins' clothing from being redcould be reworded; I suggest
was also shot downbe changed to "also did not come to fruition", and the second clause (everything between the commas with
...impossible to deal with...) be changed to "because Travers would not go ahead without certain caveats that the company would not concede"
a good friend of her whom- probably is intended as "of hers", but these two words are still unnecessary
a sequel entitled Mary Poppins Comes Back- just "titled"
and it was tricky to find an actor to play Bert's brother though an executive suggested that singer Michael Jackson was right for the partits own sentence: "It was also tricky..." (and add a comma after "brother")
The planned sequel eventually was cancelled upon the casting problems and the fact that new executives were now running the company- the phrasing is a little unusual, using verbs that don't match the action. How about "The planned sequel was eventually cancelled because of a combination of issues: the casting problems and the fact that new executives took over the company"
On the 2004 release of the 40th Anniversary DVD of the original film, the trivia track stated in regards to a possible sequel "One...– "The 2004 release of the 40th Anniversary DVD of the original film contained a trivia track that stated, in regards to a possible sequel, "One..."
Blunt and Miranda had been cast in the lead roles- unnecessary repetition?
the grownup Michael/Jane Banks- "adult" perhaps?
the Victorian Governmentshould certainly be written as the Government of Victoria; it's not the Victorian government
ex-Pixar veteran Jim Capobianco. Ex-Disney animator, Ken Duncan,- were they former employees at the time, because that seems strange?
of December 25, 2018- unnecessary repetition
, with the release date of December 25- still don't need to restate in the next sentence, either
and announced December 19 as the new release date for the film- ditto
of $349.5 million, against- don't need the comma
Mary Poppins’s return shows that sometimes it pays to wait. Half a century on, her allure hasn’tare text and not html - could they be fixed?
’
when they should be '
- you can copy the first example to search them in the article, then replace by just deleting and typing an apostrophe anew.
Kingsif (
talk)
23:37, 9 August 2020 (UTC)He also drew comparisons of the film's quality and tone to the 1960s musicals as well the nostalgia to Star Wars: The Force Awakensto "He compared the film's quality and tone to that of 1960s musicals, and its nostalgia to Star Wars: The Force Awakens"
...leading performance (whose performance he labelled...- perhaps "(which he labelled...", since it's already about the performance
[Truitt] described the film as a "comforting nostalgia-fest" and "satisfaction in spit-spot fashion" as well as commended the performances of Blunt and Miranda (whom he referred to as "endlessly charming") as well Marshall's knack on musical numbers and Shaiman's "swinging delight" original score.- this one might be harder to fix and need re-writing completely
He also found Blunt's version of Mary Poppins as "excellent" and described it as "a little chillier and more austere" while referring to it as "truer to the spirit of the heroine of P. L. Travers’s books".
[Travers] rated the film with three out of five stars, praising Blunt's unique portrayal of the title character while describing the film as an "industrial-strength sugarplum" and felt that the sequel didn't live up to the 1964 original, but nevertheless praised the film, remarking, "Mary Poppins Returns shows it has the power to leave you deliriously happy".
I changed American to American-British in the opening sentence, because the source material is British, as is the setting, the filming location, and most of the cast.
My edit was reversed twice (the second time when I provided IMDb as a source).
The reason I'm putting this out here is that I simply believe American-British is much more appropriate than American.
If there is a rule that the movie is always given the nationality of the production company—and this nationality only—unless a good source is provided that says to the contrary, perhaps someone who agrees with me could find a good source. Otherwise, perhaps some of the people active on this article could consider the merits of my argument.
Note that the 'nationality' (or 'country of origin') of a movie is very often 'unclear' and requires a judgement to be made on a case by case basis. Over-relying on the country in which the production company is based is going to lead to misleading or incomplete entries. lukeuser ( talk) 12:38, 28 December 2021 (UTC)