Posted on 12/31/2013 12:16:35 AM PST by mylife
Some hate Disney and some might hate this film.
I liked it.
The stage version is very strange. I only liked the parts that were disneyfied. Step in time was fabulous on stage!
He should’ve taken all of you to the local drive-in. Five bucks for the whole family!
They definitely showed Walt smoking. The Sherman brothers are in it, but don’t know much about them so don’t know if they are portrayed correctly.
Movies about making movies have to be the absolute worst boring things put out by filmdom.
It’s pretty clear that had Travers full creative control at Disney, it would’ve likely been free of music (at least of the Sherman Brothers variety, perhaps just your routine orchestral score), no animation, and a more darker interpretation and icy-cold Poppins. A good movie ? Perhaps. A classic one beloved by millions ? Not very likely.
Same thing with if the Von Trapp story had been told as it actually was. Maria was a cold, stern bitch and emotionally abusive to some of the children (she locked up one daughter who wanted to see her boyfriend — imagine a Catholic school nun as a mother). Georg was warm and fun-loving and a bit older. Reverse the personalities portrayed in the musical. When they first screened the film for the family, the adult children were rolling in the aisles because it was pure science fiction to them. Even the escape to Switzerland. They just walked down to the train station and left Austria. Not half the Nazi Army in pursuit.
That’s why you need creative talent in the studios to punch up the original storylines, and the collaborative effort often produces something far more special than the reality, as MP and TSOM demonstrate. It’s unfortunate Travers couldn’t realize that and refused to let Disney turn out some sequels that might’ve been almost as good (if not better than) the first. All of what followed out of Disney (such as “Bedknobs and Broomsticks”) never came close to being as good.
Depends. Sometimes it is more interesting that the original movie.
I am a writer. I have had some of my works published, in various small houses.
The editor does not think up the original idea, that became my work. The publisher does not have a whit about the things, places, plots and characters that have run though my head.
I not only have the original pieces in type, I, also, keep them aqmong my many journals in ink. Computers are great for some things, but I have never trusted them to keep any of my works, digitally.
I was a contributing columnist to the local regional newspaper for six years. I have my written copy, typed copy, the emails containing my submissions - nothing no how no way in any word processing format - and a copy of each newsprint of the column, along with the emials from the editor when they DID lose my submitted story!
Harlan’s script was not used. Roddenberry re-wrote it, and called it his. A legal battle ensued that spanned a length of time, but was settled in Harlan’s favor.
Please excuse me, I misspoke. What I was referring to was screenwriters and their wanting creative control (over the finished filmed product). Ellison’s screenplay was great, but it couldn’t be filmed as he wrote it. No question that Roddenberry frequently took credit for most Trek related things when it was many other people that played a part.
Curiously, now with this Trek reboot, Ellison might be able to get it filmed the way he wrote it if they were to use it for a movie.
Usually we did go to the local Drive-In, but on special occasions we would go to the movie theater. Those movies were special occasions for us.
I’ve seen it, but I was really never a fan of the Oz story itself (I liked “Zardoz” better, if only for its weirdness). As for Ellison, he turns 80 this year. It’s weird seeing him as an “old man.”
Say what you will about Oz (I still would like to see one of the cable networks film all of Baum's Oz books), but if you dare say a bad word about "Meet Me in St. Louis," I will sic the Wilton Manors city council on you!
Horrible miscasting of Dick Van Dyke is, in my mind, the only negative thing about Mary Poppins.
I like Judy Garland just fine. Listening to her more mature version of “Over the Rainbow” is heartbreaking, since it isn’t Dorothy asking the question, but poor Judy.
I’ve been exploring some cities at street level using Google Maps (previously went through all of St. Louis, now I’m working on Detroit) and I noticed the real house for the setting of MMISL fell to the wrecking ball.
It’s amazing nobody took notice during filming that DVD’s dialect coach was a wrongly-chosen Irishman (although Van Dyke noticed). Had he received proper coaching for the Cockney accent, he might’ve pulled it off (accent aside, he still had great chemistry with Julie Andrews). Still, I’ve always maintained that Tommy Steele would’ve been a better choice for the role (however, his romantic chemistry with Andrews might not have been as strong as Van Dyke’s). If you’ve ever seen him in the charming, but little-seen musical, “Half A Sixpence”, he had that “Disney-style” presence and dynamism for the role.
Dear fieldmarshaldj,
We have reached a point of equal agreement.
“The Guardian of Forever” -is- the stuff for movies, even with today’s ‘cg’ additions.
Do you think with today’s ST cast, they could pull it off? It was hard for me to get around the bald evil guy, consideriong he was ‘Hector’, ‘Hulk’, and in ‘Munich’. Who would fill the shoes of a young Joan Collins?
Harlan’s lecture/speeches are on CD, as well as his movie, “Dreams with Sharp Teeth”.
HNY!!
I’ve not been much of a fan of the reboot, to be honest. I wish they had jumped ahead a century and covered new ground with new characters instead of rewriting history with actors that don’t much resemble the original folks.
As for Eric Bana, the antagonist of the first reboot, I was “meh” about it. The villain reminded me of the previous one in the last “Next Generation” movie. Of course, that wasn’t nearly as bad as the gross miscasting of Khan with a very Caucasian Englishman in the second film (that may have been worse than the casting of Ming the Merciless in a Sci-Fi remake for “Flash Gordon”). Benicio del Toro had been cast for Khan but became unavailable. Surely there could’ve been any number of Latino (or correctly cast, Middle Eastern-Indian) actors for the part. Javier Bardem comes to mind.
As for a “City on the Edge of Forever” remake, for the Joan Collins role, the up-and-coming English actress Holliday Grainger seems like a potential choice (so long as she dyes her hair brunette as she did for the “Bonnie & Clyde” remake of late. I didn’t see that, yet, but she had such a strikingly beautiful look in the promos).
Happy New Year to you as well.
after the movie was made it was found out: “...Although she never married, she had romantic relationships with both men and women. Her biographer Valerie Lawson writes that she probably had a sexual relationship with Madge Burnand, and certainly one with Jessie Orage.”
in the 60’s she adopted only one of two twin boys based on an astrologer’s advice.
it might have been a good children’s book, but she was still a kook.
Keep in mind, Disneyland is focused (originally) around classic books. It was not like today where it is all about selling toys from movies.
by the end of the movie she really really really hated disney. She wanted more of the dark side of poppins.
for the play she contractually excluded any new songs from the sherman brothers.
I think Walt Disney saved her books.
AFAIC, Dick Van Dyke stole the whole show!
Mary Poppins was unbearable; the kids were saccharin-sweet; the Dad was a no-go.
Without Dick and the chimney sweeps, it would have been a total wash.
And now, in the 21st century, they’ve made another boring movie about the original boring movie???
I will never understand Hollywood.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.