A Mary Poppins Sequel?

Cazza and Livvie's Mum · Post by **Cazza and Livvie's Mum** » Jan Sat 10, 2009 12:15 pm

There are 8 Mary Poppins books in total, so how come we never had a sequel to the movie. Does anybody else think we should have a Mary Revival?

Josh Q · Post by **Josh Q** » Jan Sat 10, 2009 2:40 pm

No. I just don't think that Disney would do a good job with them.

Jacca5660 · Post by **Jacca5660** » Jan Sat 10, 2009 2:41 pm

No thanks!

elizabethswann · Post by **elizabethswann** » Jan Sat 10, 2009 3:34 pm

The first one was good enough. I've seen both the movie and Broadway play versions so that's good enough for me and we know what a classic the first movie is. They should leave the sequels alone.

Future Guy · Post by **Future Guy** » Jan Sat 10, 2009 6:57 pm

No, uh-uh, negatory, nyet, and NOOOOOoooooooo

There shouldn't be a Mary Poppins 2 any more than there should be a Casablanca 2 or a Son Of Citizen Kane. No one can replace Julie Andrews, Dick Van Dyke, or the rest of the cast (although Anne Hathaway did a good Mary Poppins on SNL this year, in a skit based on the idea that Supercalifragilisticexpialadocious is a "disease that only adults can get")

Post by **js3901** » Jan Sat 10, 2009 7:32 pm

Future Guy wrote:No, uh-uh, negatory, nyet, and NOOOOOoooooooo

There shouldn't be a Mary Poppins 2 any more than there should be a Casablanca 2 or a Son Of Citizen Kane. No one can replace Julie Andrews, Dick Van Dyke, or the rest of the cast (although Anne Hathaway did a good Mary Poppins on SNL this year, in a skit based on the idea that Supercalifragilisticexpialadocious is a "disease that only adults can get")

very good. I like this description. I concur.

DisBeamer · Post by **DisBeamer** » Jan Sat 10, 2009 8:21 pm

I've read a bit about the author of Mary Poppins and her creative disagreements with Walt Disney (the man himself). I believe it was stipulated in her will that she wouldn't allow Disney to make any further movies of her books because she loathed the film so much.

She did talk to the people who made the musical, though, so I think there's more of her influence in that.

elizabethswann · Post by **elizabethswann** » Jan Sat 10, 2009 9:31 pm

The musical was great since it focused more on the book than the movie although Mary Poppins in the novel was actually more strict than how Disney showed her. I think it was good since a nicer nanny is more suitable for children instead of scarring them.

boilerbabe · Post by **boilerbabe** » Jan Sat 10, 2009 11:28 pm

NO!!! One was good enough. It would probably be something lame that just comes out on DVD and never hits the theatres. I think they should just leave it alone.

DisBeamer · Post by **DisBeamer** » Jan Sun 11, 2009 12:14 am

elizabethswann wrote:The musical was great since it focused more on the book than the movie although Mary Poppins in the novel was actually more strict than how Disney showed her. I think it was good since a nicer nanny is more suitable for children instead of scarring them.

Yeah the 'softening' was the author's beef with Disney, as far as I understood it. Apparently she didn't want a kindly nanny.

wxwiz · Post by **wxwiz** » Jan Mon 12, 2009 5:18 am

You can't top the original, including all of those great songs.

bluebayougirl · Post by **bluebayougirl** » Jan Mon 12, 2009 12:11 pm

I didn't know there were more books (duh me). They should stick with just the one movie - sequels are usually not to good.

- blue

disneydreamer58 · Post by **disneydreamer58** » Jan Mon 12, 2009 4:17 pm

js3901 wrote:
Future Guy wrote:No, uh-uh, negatory, nyet, and NOOOOOoooooooo

There shouldn't be a Mary Poppins 2 any more than there should be a Casablanca 2 or a Son Of Citizen Kane. No one can replace Julie Andrews, Dick Van Dyke, or the rest of the cast (although Anne Hathaway did a good Mary Poppins on SNL this year, in a skit based on the idea that Supercalifragilisticexpialadocious is a "disease that only adults can get")
very good. I like this description. I concur.

I third that decision!

disneyfamily2008 · Post by **disneyfamily2008** » Jan Tue 13, 2009 7:36 pm

I agree leave it alone. Even though I must say they could bring back van dyke and Andrews,maybe have them telling story's of there past or something like that.

figmentaholic · Post by **figmentaholic** » Jan Tue 13, 2009 8:17 pm

As much as 99.9% of the people hope and wish that they will leave it alone... Disney *DOES* have a very bad habit of making what my hubby calls "direct to DVD cheapquils"- sequels to movies that should never has been made in the first place.

I just hope that Mary Poppins avoids this regrettable fate.