Sequel to… Mary Poppins?

Did we know about this?

Walt Disney Pictures has officially announced that Golden Globe Award winner Emily Blunt (Into the Woods, the upcoming Girl on the Train) and Emmy, Grammy, Tony Award and Pulitzer Prize winner Lin-Manuel Miranda (“Hamilton,” “In the Heights”) are set to star in Mary Poppins Returns, a sequel to the studio’s 1964 classic, Mary Poppins, which will be released on December 25, 2018.

…because I feel like I knew about this already, somehow. Although, truth be told… the era that this movie is from isn’t really my scene.  Early Sixties stuff often isn’t; I’m down with the Atomic Horror stuff in the 1950s and the Golden Age of Dystopian Movies in the 1970s, but that period in-between isn’t reliably in my wheelhouse.  When it comes to that decade it’s pretty much war movies for me and not much else.

So I dunno if I’m going to be all that outraged, honestly. I mean, it might not suck on its own merits.

9 thoughts on “Sequel to… Mary Poppins?”

  1. Wonder how, since the author hated what Disney did to her work and refused permission. She’s been dead for 20 years now though, maybe some statute ran out?

  2. Is the original Mary Poppins movie really that highly regarded? It’s got a few good songs in it, but I don’t remember the story being anything special…

    .

    I think if I wanted to watch a family friendly film from that era, I’d pick Chitty Chitty Bang Bang or The Great Race.

    .

    Amusing, if pretty much completely off-topic note: the guy who played the grandfather in Chitty Chitty Bang Bang was actually 6 months younger than Dick Van Dyke.

  3. I knew about it, but mostly because my family is currently caught up in the mania for all things “Hamilton”-related. We’ve been expanding on it to get more coverage on Revolutionary-era history, too — we spent a few days at Colonial Williamsburg, toured the battlefield at Yorktown, and so on.

    I’m not sure about the project itself, but if Lin-Manuel Miranda wants to give it a shot, I’m willing to check it out. All I know about Emily Blunt is from watching her get thumped by Anne Hathaway on “Lip Sync Battle”.

  4. To be honest, The original is not unlike how I imagine a complete acid trip.
    .
    Of course there’s a sequel. This be Disney. At least they’re not trying an out and our hash of a remake.

  5. Mary Poppins is one of Disney’s more popular live action movies from that era, so of course there is money to be made maybe. Its been talked about for the last year or so, just finally have a cast list now. Confidence level=low, they tried to bring back Wizard of Oz and that failed.
    .
    Moe, the movie itself is set in the pre- WWI era as imagined by the upper crust. In the movie the Chimney sweeps are adults, instead of young children. Reality is the chimneys were small and crooked and therefore children sent to do the job, if they got to big they would get stuck and die. There is your horror aspect.

    1. Victorian Horror is a thing, yes? Maybe throw in some Mythos with the chimneys as portals to the dimensions of Madness, and…. Heck I’d watch/read that.

    2. The actual sweeps were adults. Children were more like tools to get the hard to reach spots.

  6. Given that the movie is based on the books and there are 8, there is some story left to tell. But, they will probably write a new story for her. Assuming that sequel is the correct word.

Comments are closed.