Saving Mr. Banks Review (1 Viewer)

[Hanson]

It was wrong for James Cameron to depict a real historical person like that. Ask James Cameron, who eventually apologized to the Murdoch family for the scene. http://www.contactmusic.com/news-article/cameron-apologises-to-titanic-officer.s-familyTo say it was okay or fair game to severely alter the facts like this is where we differ. To me, this is simply egregious. I really can't even understand how anyone would condone it much less celebrate it.

 

[Brandon Conway]

You must despise Shakespeare.Sent from my VS920 4G using Tapatalk

 

[TravisR]

It was wrong for James Cameron to depict a real historical person like that. Ask James Cameron, who eventually apologized to the Murdoch family for the scene.

I know Cameron apologized and said that it was unlikely to have happened but notice that he didn't cut the scene from the 2005 DVD special edition or the 2012 theatrical re-release and video release. I'm guessing it's because he knows the scene works dramatically.

I can certainly understand how Murdoch's family would be upset but as people were leaving the theater after seeing Titanic, they're talking about Jack and Rose and not Murdoch the murdering First Officer. Anyone who knew who Murdoch was or became interested in the event due to the movie and read a book knows that that it's unlikely in the extreme that he died that way.

The irony of debating these "based on a true story" movies is that Titanic- with its fictional main characters and the likely factually incorrect Murdoch shooting- is still one of (if not) the most historically accurate movie ever made. That should be enough to prove that you should trust nothing that you see in a movie based on a true story.

 

[JohnMor]

It was wrong for James Cameron to depict a real historical person like that. Ask James Cameron, who eventually apologized to the Murdoch family for the scene.

http://www.contactmusic.com/news-article/cameron-apologises-to-titanic-officer.s-family

To say it was okay or fair game to severely alter the facts like this is where we differ. To me, this is simply egregious. I really can't even understand how anyone would condone it much less celebrate it.

Just to be clear, I did not say I thought it was okay or fair game. I said the filmmaker felt that way. And I'm simply pointing out that it's not new. It has been a part of drama for centuries. But I also feel there's a world of difference between falsely showing a real person shooting someone and then committing suicide and falsely showing a real person liking a movie they didn't like in real life.

As for the specifics of Titanic, as a Titanic buff since childhood I enjoyed the depiction of the ship, but I found the characters one dimensional cardboard cutouts and the screenplay absolutely dreadful. And I was VERY put off by the Murdoch scene. But the facts are out there for people who are interested in them. Like it or not, history has been changed since time immemorial, and in ways FAR more egregious than anything in Saving Mr. Banks.

 

[Ejanss]

I think Streep has simply bought into the public discourse about Walt perpetuated by rumor and tasteless SNL/Family Guy type jokes we've seen in the last 20 years.

A lot of the easy Evil Un-PC Walt legends were popular during the corporate Disney-bashing of the 70's and the frustrated Eisner-bashing of the 90's/00's...And like most urban myths, they're also just plain WRONG.
I'll leave it to more qualified experts to break down the "Racist" claim (which was first leveled by Clarence Muse after a falling out with the studio, and ran to the NAACP to attack Song of the South), and the "Anti-semitic" claim (which was first leveled as a dirty strongarm tactic by shady Hollywood union organizers in the 40's, after Walt was one of the few studio bosses who wasn't clear on why he should give in to union pressure).
But you have to giggle at the utter belief with which Meryl slings "As if the 'King of the Jungle' [sic] number wasn't proof enough (of Disney's racism)!"
Now, I don't claim to know exactly why Meryl would think King Louie was black, but just to give you an idea of how widespread this goofy urban-myth is, by demonstration--I know it's kind of a biased sample, and we're not going to get too many among the cool film buffs of HTF, but show of hands: How many now, or at one time thought, that the swingin' orangutan from The Jungle Book was played by Louis Armstrong? C'mon, we see you back there, don't be shy, put 'em up.
(Uh, I'm pretty sure Louis PRIMA was Italian, but I'd have to check.)

So what personal demons could've driven the normally respectable and intelligent Streep to go on such a goofy spree to donkey-bray the established shopping-list of every dopey urban-myth short of "Walt frozen under the castle" and "Aladdin telling kids to take off their clothes"? (Besides the obvious explanation that they serve drinks at the Golden Globes, and by the end of the evening, there's never a dull moment onstage?)
I have a theory, for what it's worth: Just after finishing "Into the Woods", Disney found out that live-action "Cinderella" screenwriter Aline McKenna had also written "The Devil Wears Prada"--y'know, the one with Meryl Streep as the evil nasty fashion designer?--they mysteriously, and seemingly without explicable provocation, announced plans for one more live-action 101 Dalmatians. Gee, I can't imagine who they might've had in mind to follow in Glenn Close's footsteps as Cruella DeVille...
Safe bet, but a few table-drinks of Truth Serum on the Rocks with a Twist later and I think those long-range plans are now on hold.

(And just off the subject, it's rather unsettling just how hard it is to bash mainstream anti-Disney urban-legends without using the words "Goofy" and "Dopey"... )

 

[Johnny Angell]

Having not seen Mary Poppins, that aspect is lost on me. This movie is a tribute to Dear Leader. Your attitude towards Dear Leader will color your perceptions -- glorious tribute or revisionist propaganda?

While I would have preferred the movie not divert so much from reality, in particular the ending where Travers accepts the movie, I find your comparing Walt Disney to the Dear Leader to not only be inaccurate, but extremely offensive. You want to compare Disney to the leader of a regime that oppresses, imprisons, enslaves, starves, brain-washes, and murders it's own people? All the things that Streep said (and I don't accept that) could be true and Disney's offenses would still pale by comparison.

You lose all credibility when you do that.

 

[MatthewA]

I have no sympathy for any woman who outright despised the art of animation.

I could bore you all with a list of facts this film got right and the ones it got wrong (not including Bill Walsh was unforgivable), but the only thing I will say about this film at any time in any context is that if you like the movie version of Mary Poppins, you'll probably like this film.

 

[Walter C]

The mentioning of Dear Leader is just really uncalled for, and has caused this thread to go off the deep end. I could get into how Dear Leader and his father have affected family members of mine on a more personal level, but that would violate HTF rules. So let's not get into that, shall we?
Getting back to the film, I saw this as more for the adult Disney fans. I just don't see this film as one that kids could watch, simply because I think they would gotten bored by it. I know if I was a kid watching this, I would have.

 

[TravisR]

Getting back to the film, I saw this as more for the adult Disney fans. I just don't see this film as one that kids could watch, simply because I think they would gotten bored by it. I know if I was a kid watching this, I would have.

Based on the trailer and the fact that it's about Mary Poppins, I thought it was basically a movie for slightly older kids (maybe like 9 or 10 years old and up). I initially thought my theater had the rating wrong when I saw it listed as PG-13 and that's when I realized it was aimed more at adults.

 

[DaveF]

I have no sympathy for any woman who outright despised the art of animation. I could bore you all with a list of facts this film got right and the ones it got wrong (not including Bill Walsh was unforgivable), but the only thing I will say about this film at any time in any context is that if you like the movie version of Mary Poppins, you'll probably like this film.

I like Mary Poppins. I didn't like Saving Mr. Banks (boring. Unlikeable main character. Tom Hanks playing Tom Hanks playing Disney.) And the more I learn about the terrible irony of this movie, the less I like it: A treacly re-invention of a woman's life story who abhorred the treacly re-inventions of stories.

 

[Aaron Silverman]

From an Austin Film Festival event with Kelly Marcel, screenwriter of Saving Mr. Banks, being interviewed by John August:

John: So, can you give me the backstory on how this movie came into your life and what the genesis of this is for you?Kelly: Yeah. There was a British producer called Alison Owen who came to me in England and I had just left a TV show that I created called Terra Nova because they wanted to put dinosaurs in it and I didn’t want them to. [laughs] And so she was like, “Oh, you wrote the dinosaur show. You should write this thing about Mary Poppins.”I was like, all right.No, she told me the story of Pam Travers which I didn’t know and it’s a really, really fascinating story. And there was this originating script by this Australian writer called Sue Smith who had sort of done a birth to death biopic of P.L.’s whole life, which is completely fascinating but enormous.And in the middle of it was this little story where she goes to LA and Alison had felt that was the film and asked if I could kind of reimagine it. And I thought it was great. I thought it would never get made because it had to be full of Poppins songs and we were going to put Walt Disney in it and I just thought we’d get a cease and desist order from Disney, but decided to write it anyway because I thought it would be a really lovely sample and honestly just couldn’t leave it alone.John: Great. So, at this point you’re working with just this producer, so Disney is not involved?Kelly: No.John: And is she paying you to do this, or is this a spec essentially for you to be writing?Kelly: There’s no money in British film. So, yeah, essentially it was a spec.John: So, after you have the script, what is the next step for this entering into the world of a makeable movie? What happened?Kelly: Do you know, it was really quick. I only wrote this script just under three years ago, so it’s a amazing that it’s coming out now. And basically what happened was the Black List. And so the script kind of went out, a lot of producers were reading it, people really loved it. It ended up on the Black List and Disney were like, “What’s this film that has our founder in it and all the Mary Poppins songs? We need to shut this down.”And then they got hold of it and thankfully were really smart and lovely and decided to make it with our lovely John Lee instead.

She's now writing the Fifty Shades of Grey adaptation.

 

[MatthewA]

McKenna will also be co-writing the Annie re-remake with...Emma Thompson!

I wasn't crazy about The Devil Wears Prada, honestly.

 

[Mark Booth]

My wife and I have advance screening passes to see 'Labor Day' this afternoon. I had to really debate whether I wanted to go see a film titled 'Labor Day' when it's not about pregnancy and it's not being released in September. Of all the gall! These studios just don't know when to quit changing facts and history to suit their needs!

[tongue firmly planted in cheek]

Mark

 

[Aaron Silverman]

Don't get mixed up. . .I don't think Aline McKenna had anything to do with Saving Mr. Banks.

 

[MatthewA]

Don't get mixed up. . .I don't think Aline McKenna had anything to do with Saving Mr. Banks.

No she didn't, but there are enough misconceptions about Walt without the modern-day Disney company adding to them!