Read Negative User Reviews for Mary Poppins Returns

3

doc2beJan 4, 2019

Aside from a likeable Emily Blunt, this movie was horrible. The last quarter was good and watchable and fun. Music was dull and not catchy. Movie lacked depth and definitely the feeling of the original. Jacks character made me squirm. SoAside from a likeable Emily Blunt, this movie was horrible. The last quarter was good and watchable and fun. Music was dull and not catchy. Movie lacked depth and definitely the feeling of the original. Jacks character made me squirm. So disappointed. Loved the scenery hovering over a London.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

2

DerekReideMar 9, 2019

This movie firstly wasn't even needed, secondly, I cringed the whole time, and thirdly, it was just plain horrible. I only have it at one star because of the appearance of Dick Van Dyke. If he wasn't in this film, I would have given it a 0/5.This movie firstly wasn't even needed, secondly, I cringed the whole time, and thirdly, it was just plain horrible. I only have it at one star because of the appearance of Dick Van Dyke. If he wasn't in this film, I would have given it a 0/5. The plot, one dimensional, acting, meh, Meryl Streep, not needed. Everything about this movie was dreadful. I'd think if the dancing penguins made this, they would've done a much better job and getting it right!… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

1

LCRDec 22, 2018

Rather than bringing this classic Disney movie sequel to the here and now, the movie is an excruciating, unimaginative, dated rehash with a mess of a screenplay, forgettable, stitched together musical dance numbers and songs that don’tRather than bringing this classic Disney movie sequel to the here and now, the movie is an excruciating, unimaginative, dated rehash with a mess of a screenplay, forgettable, stitched together musical dance numbers and songs that don’t advance the story. Despite the admirable performance of Emily Blunt the movie is simply unbearable!!!!… Expand

4 of 9 users found this helpful45

All this user's reviews

3

SSH83Dec 25, 2018

Serviceable musical and "old school" visuals, but overall brainless betrayal of the original that mimics the look and sound but failed to replicate the heart and mind.

2 of 5 users found this helpful23

All this user's reviews

0

Giggles8283Mar 16, 2019

They made it like a Broadway play instead of a mary popins movie And not one single memorable song If disney was still alive he would not approve of this movie He wanted the songs to be memorable This movie didnt have any catchy songs theyThey made it like a Broadway play instead of a mary popins movie And not one single memorable song If disney was still alive he would not approve of this movie He wanted the songs to be memorable This movie didnt have any catchy songs they treated it like a Broadway play… Expand

2 of 5 users found this helpful23

All this user's reviews

3

WiscoJoeDec 22, 2018

A shovelful of Splenda makes the mediocrity go down, whether you like it or not. 'Mary Poppins Returns' is practically perfunctory in every way. Like 'The Force Awakens' and other recent products fresh off the Disney assembly line, thisA shovelful of Splenda makes the mediocrity go down, whether you like it or not. 'Mary Poppins Returns' is practically perfunctory in every way. Like 'The Force Awakens' and other recent products fresh off the Disney assembly line, this retread slavishly recreates all of the familiar parts you loved from the original, without bothering to add in the innovation, sense of wonder, and complex shades that made the original worth watching in the first place. The Disney faithful will love it as it not only preaches but panders incessantly to the choir (this time singing forgettable songs that sound like b-sides from Marc Shaiman's better, though still largely pedestrian, back catalog). For everyone else, it might be worth seeing just for the costumes and some of the choreography, otherwise just watch the first one.… Expand

2 of 6 users found this helpful24

All this user's reviews

2

GreatMartinDec 28, 2018

A bad sign watching a movie is thinking mostly negative thoughts and after an hour I was thinking: 1) This really isn't a movie for kids as it is too dark and somber 2) This really isn't a movie for adults as it doesn't capture what made theA bad sign watching a movie is thinking mostly negative thoughts and after an hour I was thinking: 1) This really isn't a movie for kids as it is too dark and somber 2) This really isn't a movie for adults as it doesn't capture what made the first film memorable 3) Emily Blunt has talent but she isn't a Julie Andrews or a Mary Poppins 4) Emily Mortimer has that certain smile and would make a better Mary Poppins 5) Will this film get any better? and 6) The songs are pretty lame.

There was one positive thought and that was Lin-Manual Miranda was continuing his place on the top of the hill after "In The Heights", "Hamilton", his score for "Moana", being honored on The Kennedy Center Honors this week, plus winning an Emmy Award, A Tony Award, Grammy Awards, the Pulitzer Prize, about to reprise his role as Hamilton opening the show in Puerto Rico and now doing a good job as Jack, the man who lights and shuts off the street lamps in the streets of London during the Great Slump of the 1930s. Up to the hour and a half point--no pun intended--he is the only bright light.

Julie Walker, as the housekeeper, is almost an afterthought while Colin Firth should have been given a mustache to twirl as the villain to do something with the role. As the Banks children Pixie Davies, Nathanael Saleh and Joel Dawson they are given little more than they are expected to while Emily Mortimer, as their aunt, lights up the screen here and there and Ben Whishaw, as their father, really is wooden up to and in the last half hour of the film when he really comes through in a moving scene. Oh, yes, the less said about Meryl Streep, her song and her time on the screen the better.

The last half hour in no way makes up for the first 90-95 minutes but the screen does come alive with a song and dance by 93 year-old Dick Van Dyke up on a desk, with movie magic or not, reprising "Tripping The Light Fantastic" done earlier in the film by Miranda, along with 93 year-old Angela Lansbury as the Balloon Lady singing one of the better songs from the movie, "Nowhere To Go but Up" starting a full cast number.

Lin-Manuel Miranda always talks about watching the old song and dance movies and in "Mary Poppins Returns" he has two numbers, the first being "Tripping The Light Fantastic" and the second, "Race To Big Ben", that fulfill any dreams he might have had and brings back the magic of "Mary Poppins".

"Mary Poppins Returns" offers 30 minutes of entertainment in a film that is 130 minutes long and can probably watch Lin-Manuel Miranda, Dick Van Dyke and Angela Lansbury in their show shopping numbers on youtube!… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

3

ohsiyoDec 28, 2018

Saw the movie with my family who liked it, but was an endurance test for me. "Mary Poppins Returns" was completely derivative of the classic, but failed in almost every regard. Couldn't they have developed an original idea or story? The songsSaw the movie with my family who liked it, but was an endurance test for me. "Mary Poppins Returns" was completely derivative of the classic, but failed in almost every regard. Couldn't they have developed an original idea or story? The songs were out of your typical modern Broadway musical, bland and forgettable--nothing like the original. Emily Blunt is a good actress, but too "hard" as Mary Poppins for my taste. I think Lin-Manuel Miranda and Ben Whishaw were just miscast. Miranda tries too hard to be Dick Van Dyke and Whishaw as Michael Banks is an unsympathetic nebbish. I gave the movie 3 stars for the production values, but otherwise found the movie to be a pathetic imitation of the original classic.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

3

RayNewnanDec 24, 2018

MP was a tough one to seat through, 3 hours at the theater,
every song sucked and adults and kids restless.

2 of 7 users found this helpful25

All this user's reviews

3

Faisal5417Dec 22, 2018

This film just does not live up to what the critics have been saying. Disappointing.

2 of 7 users found this helpful25

All this user's reviews

2

TrevorsViewJan 19, 2019

In light of new year’s resolutions, we together should go back to when the impossible became possible, way back when Jesus walked earth (ahem, water) to prove himself as God’s son by breaking the laws of physics and the Pentateuch. As anIn light of new year’s resolutions, we together should go back to when the impossible became possible, way back when Jesus walked earth (ahem, water) to prove himself as God’s son by breaking the laws of physics and the Pentateuch. As an attempt of recreating that, for temporary entertainment, Disney revisits P.L. Travers’ Jesus figure she brought to humanity. The big Mouse House still hasn’t quite mastered how to produce live action feature films, meaning Mary Poppins Returns deserves no spot inside anyone’s wine cellar due to its absence of a story in order to showcase bad lip syncing, as well as other horrors of cinematic musicals.

The elements of this reality center around Michael, now a grown up widower with three children, who must pay off a loan or else lose his father’s home. It’s not at all worth caring for, since this potential homeless life leaves the three children unphased; I doubt they’d even run in fear from the Return to Oz wheelers—they’re that dull. That reality tries to combine with the whimsy too grounded in smelly parts of below to be funny, particularly when it comes to the bits with Admiral Boom. Then after two hours of hearing Lin-Manuel Miranda’s fake accent that sounds worse than Dick’s, the end takes on a thriller vibe driven by Colin Firth, an evil villain with a Cruella Deville cackle.

That’s why Mary Poppins returns, to help the family through something they easily could solve on their own. Rather, her only purpose is to teach kids dangerous games in a bathtub that for sure would cause death by drowning from toddlers who watch that scene and want to imitate it. The three offspring of Michael are in fact the ones who save the day for the grown-ups, something that would make parents watching roll their eyes; for any youngster that smart may as well crank their heads a full three-sixty then vomit pea soup. Except you won’t hear yourself shout, “the power of Christ compels you,” since the stereo blasts much louder than your own thoughts! While my mom and I were watching this, she had to cover her ears, and I wanted to, not just to block out the painful stereo, but because Michael sings worse than the witches of Hocus Pocus, making every one of his scenes that much more painful!

Although the good tunes try their best to remedy the pain, right from the exciting overture heard behind a series of rough London paintings. Marc Shaiman (The American President) heals the senses as his melody generates the spectacular tune of everyone fitting on a single bike, or even when the home of Mary’s cousin Topsy turns upside down. While many songs are bland, “Trip a Little Light Fantastic” manages to reach improbable levels of fun, relative to the rest of the film that is, although not like the legendary tunes of the original. Although not as strong, Emily Blunt does her best to capture the pacing of Julie Andrews’ iconic role by continually denying the adventures she has with the kids.

Those details leave relatively miniscule scars—all else penetrates pretty deep. Mary succumbs dancers less organized than the hysterical housemaid of the original movie, and with a sense of chaos that feels like life flashing before the eyes. A vertigo camera effect used at one brief point in the horrific climax means Cherry Tree Lane looking better than before matters none; the attempts to spark nostalgia fail from certain abuse of modern filming techniques.

Another huge reason for that disloyalty to the source material comes from the casting: Meryl Streep’s obnoxious accent literally seems unsure about which side of fantasy to express, she resorts to the anti-fantasy of a surfaced trout‘s blub-blub-blub. But the biggest reason for the disloyalty lands on the screenplay; nothing that ever happens, not even a china bowl adventure where a wolf steals one of the boys‘ stuffed giraffe, inflicts change on anybody or anything. After all the chaos happens, a deus ex machina renders everything throughout the entire film pointless… and just to make room for a High School Musical type of ending that teaches young innocent minds to stay self-indulgent on their dreams.

Really, what’s the point of these excessive musical numbers if they’re just going to be as obnoxious as a Cheetah Girl concert? There’s even a cabaret number to divert the familiar old Mary Poppins essence, hence why the people responsible behind this sequel forgot why the original became a classic. Highly doubtful they even care about the earliest memories of so many who grew up with Mary Poppins.

I as one came to love the original Mary Poppins over time due to its profound themes of a family’s interpersonal distance. Ignore the way Mary Poppins Returns has made P.L. Travers roll over in her grave. Look instead toward a man who walked on the sea, died, came back, and flew to heaven; that gives rewards beyond diving into a soapy tub.… Expand

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

2

DominArsenOct 27, 2019

I am without answer. The film is not bad. It just does not make me dream. It's the same as Dumbo. I am amazed the quality Disney is tearing itself apart.

Je suis sans réponse. Le film n'est pas mauvais. Il ne me fait simplement pas rêver.I am without answer. The film is not bad. It just does not make me dream. It's the same as Dumbo. I am amazed the quality Disney is tearing itself apart.

Je suis sans réponse. Le film n'est pas mauvais. Il ne me fait simplement pas rêver. C'est pareil que Dumbo. Je suis étonné la qualité Disney se déchire.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

3

CharleyNewmanFeb 6, 2019

Bwugh. What a chore to sit through. Full disclosure: not really a fan of the original either. But at least the original had, you know, some originality. This is an incredibly dull, trite film that had me bored to tears. The musical choicesBwugh. What a chore to sit through. Full disclosure: not really a fan of the original either. But at least the original had, you know, some originality. This is an incredibly dull, trite film that had me bored to tears. The musical choices were awful, the plot was tedious and predictable. Just a very poor film. Couldn't they have tried to jazz it up a little. Eight seconds of ONE song, rapped by Lin Manuel Miranda almost had me perk up. At least the animation sequence of the movie was kind of nice; also nice to have a bit of a return to 2D animation. Blunt and Whishaw are fine, but I expect better of them. What a disappointment, even for someone who had low expectations going in.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

3

Eaj6Oct 8, 2019

As the old saying goes "Everything old is new again." With this movie, I believe (reluctantly) that the original movie is better. The cast and attempt to replicate a classic film were deemed horrible. The music just wasn't the same because,As the old saying goes "Everything old is new again." With this movie, I believe (reluctantly) that the original movie is better. The cast and attempt to replicate a classic film were deemed horrible. The music just wasn't the same because, heck, you don't have the Sherman Brothers composing it. Also, there were no animals and whimsical imagination that the original move possesed. However, I have rated it 2 stars because of Dick Van Dyke's cameo.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

2

hnestlyontheslyOct 7, 2019

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. As far as I can tell, Mary Poppins Returns is the story of an upper class family that has fallen onto temporarily hard times yet can still afford a full-time nanny and a housekeeper. After her first chore of giving the three appropriately woke children baths, it’s easy to see why the myth of Mary Poppins is the wet dream of dads everywhere and a very big **** you to all moms. Emily Blunt does a lovely job being mean and contrary whenever possible, even spinning some dark moments into her performance at the end of “The Place Where Lost Things Go” and the look into the red balloon mirror during “Nowhere to Go But Up,” as she says, “practically perfect,” either referring to herself or the family she is about to leave.

My favorite songs are the one for adults, done in perfect burlesque fashion, “A Cover is Not the Book,” and “Turning Turtle,” because one of the actors sings the entire thing in an amazing Eastern European accent.

Wife called the film “soulless,” “a robot movie that looked the way a movie is supposed to look but with nothing underneath,” I think, because she thought that it was over-long, lacked essential truths like “A Spoonful of Sugar,” and felt like an only “loosely collected assortment of songs”. Mom said it felt like “watching a K-Drama” in the way its ending abruptly arrived. Wife says by making the stakes so high, the writers kind of ensured that the film would work out, because we knew deep down that no one was going to make those kids sleep in the street.

I said that I thought the bit in the beginning when, in an homage to the original, the kids and Mary Poppins are transported into a cartoon world would either mark the film as visually audacious or send it straight to the made-for-television category of children’s films and my dad said, “It looked exactly like it had been made in the original.” “Better?” I asked. “The same,” he said, which feels like it’s probably not a good thing.

These people wanted to see Mary Poppins in the first place, but they were so turned off by the sheer volume of half-baked songs and the uncanny valley of rudderless morality that is Disney’s sequel machine that they were coaxed into mild annoyance. My feeling is that your kids probably won’t know any better, so if you’re into it, go see it, but if you’d rather see literally anything else, they won’t be able to tell the difference anyway.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews