Who knew there was so much turmoil behind the story of Mary Poppins?  In 1964 the public was presented with a jolly holiday of a movie replete with joyful music, peppy characters and a serious but sweet undertone.  It won Julie Andrews an Oscar and became a classic hit for Walt Disney, probably the greatest of his live-action films. Yet getting there was absolute nuttiness for Disney, all because of the reticence of original author P. L. Travers.  This is how Travers (Emma Thompson) and Disney (Tom Hanks) finally reached an uneasy accord.

Travers is a great character, all prim and proper and unapologetically frank, and Thompson is just perfect in the role.  I believe she will be nominated, and probably win, the Oscar for this role because she is that good.  The movie is hers all the way.

Much of John Lee Hancock’s film takes place in Australia, as Travers recalls her unusual childhood in flashbacks and particularly a father (Colin Farrell) who just could not seem to find his place in life.  These flashbacks illustrate Travers’ personality and influences in Mary Poppins, which is more important to her than any living person, and yet they slow the film’s modern momentum.  It’s a kind of uneasy balance between the past and the present, which is probably exactly what was intended.

Eventually Disney gets to the heart of the matter (he hasn’t seen the title of the film, which gives it away) and the production of Mary Poppins progresses.  There are a couple of magic scenes as music is rehearsed and Travers reluctantly lets go of her cherished creation.  It all ends quite happily, rewarding viewers with a rare inside look at how movies are really made.  The standard Disney whitewash of stubborn facts and its own pearly-white image is present, but not intrusive.  Although it is odd that Julie Andrews is not even mentioned until the final act.  Poor Dick Van Dyke does not fare so well.  ☆ ☆ ☆.  31 December 2013.