Mary Poppins Returns

Seen at the Regent Theatre, Melbourne

Bea says: Cecil and I were lucky enough to bag advance tickets to some special screenings of this film at Melbourne's historic Regent Theatre, and a couple of friends joined us which made for a lovely city outing in those days between Christmas and New Year.

I probably last watched the original Mary Poppins when I was the age of many audience members (perhaps 5 or 6) and don't remember the story well, except for the Chim-Chimenee scene and song, the chalk paintings and the carousel horses.  But I did read the books (all of them) in early primary school, so also have a sense of how the books present the characters and stories.  I say stories as they are just that - a sequence of short stories really, and I understand that this was a challenge for both films.

But - it is a good effort for a sequel.  The all star cast (Emily Blunt, Colin Firth - playing a baddie, Meryl Streep, Angela Lansbury to name a few) save any weaknesses in plot and context, although Cecil and I both felt the songs were not as strong, and I at times felt the writing team may have been struggling to keep a distinct plot line going.  It did occasionally venture into Harry Potter territory (Meryl Streep's sequence particularly), and that was when I felt it was most tangential in terms of plot and context.  There are many (I think) references to the original; I didn't really need those and sometimes they just made me wonder why - the penguins for example, don't really belong in the book sequence...

The second half of the film picks up the pace and overall it is satisfying and a great little piece of escapism as a film, with a few nice moments and messages.  Again, perfect for those days between Christmas and New Year; Cecil and I had just been for a long walk on a pier before entering the theatre so we both had a few minutes of shut eye during the first half, with no ill effects in terms of following the plot or characters. 

We had a slap up cream tea afterwards with our friends; highly recommended as a follow up to a screening of this!

***1/2 

Cecil says: It’s confession time for me, here. I have never seen the original Mary Poppins. I kind of knew some of the songs, but to be honest these mid-60s classic musicals all blur into one for me, so Sound of Music and My Fair Lady as well – films I never saw when they came out in my childhood.

Bea had to give me a quick tutorial on Mary Poppins before we left for the day out, especially as it was impossible to find an online copy of the original movie.

And really we went to Mary Poppins Returns because it was a chance to see a film at the wonderful Regent Theatre in Melbourne. I’d have gone even if it was the most unsuitable loud fantasy war game movie because it was the venue that counted.

So I had nothing to compare the new Poppins to.

As Bea says, the songs were a bit disappointing, I thought. None of them felt catchy enough to be humming them later; none of them felt particularly enjoyable to watch even on the screen. In fact, if comparisons are to be made, my other recent experiences of musicals – Sunshine on Leith and the Greatest Showman – both had catchier and more uplifting tunes, to be honest.

I think the last song of all was my favourite, but even that one I have already forgotten, just a week later.

As for the all-star cast, Emily Blunt was pretty good in the title role; Meryl Streep was flamboyant and clearly enjoyed herself, but I kind of wondered ‘Why?” at her cameo; Colin Firth was fine as the baddie. But my favourite was Angela Lansbury, who comes on very late but for me took the show.

It was fun to see the Two Chairmen pub in one of the early scenes, since I used to work in an office very close to there.

But I really haven’t got much else to say about this film.

The venue was fabulous, and they put on a ‘Cockney’ chimney sweep on a bike in front of the screen before the film began, who made a quick welcome and intro for the audience in the Regent, which was a nice touch.

**.5

Ladies in Black

Seen at the Regent Theatre, Ballarat, VIC

Cecil says: Ladies in Black is the kind of film I could go and see over and over again, and probably always pick up new little insights into life in 1959 (the year of my birth, funnily enough, so I don’t have actual memories of that time myself!). It stands alongside Strictly Ballroom as one of those films I will no doubt see more than once and not tire of, so it must be my top film of 2018, I think.

There are so many aspects that make this a charming watch: the coming-of-age (but not at all in a sexual way) of school-leaver Lisa (one of the big moves she makes to ‘come of age’ is to drop her androgynous name ‘Lesley’ and start a new life at work as ‘Lisa”); the arrival and gradual acceptance of ‘new’ migrants from other parts of Europe than the UK and Ireland; the social limits on behaviour and propriety, leading to some hilarious and some touching moments, as two of the Ladies in Black deal with developing relationships.

It’s all set in Sydney, so any shots with backdrop to the City and CBD are obviously computer-generated, but there is also careful filming on the harbour, managing to avoid any new build that has sprung up since the 1950s, and use of that beautiful old department store building in the city with its original façade.

As a child in Sydney in 1967, I became a geeky ‘collector’ of bus numbers and destinations, so I know that Circular Quay was the main bus destination in those days (rather than the current-day Wynyard), so the child geek in me was pleased to see Circular Quay on the front of many of the buses shown in Ladies in Black.

There were slightly melodramatic characters like Magda, who managed the up-market couture dresses in the store and was obviously used to mixing in finer circles than other shop assistants, but was having to adapt to Australia’s more working-class but increasingly affluent society.

And there were the lovely cameo characters like Miss Cartwright, who had a soft spot for Lisa from the start, and obviously wants her to make the most of the opportunities open to young women in 1959 that weren’t there for women oi her generation. She’s almost the most beautiful character in the film, managing to overcome any regrets at an unfulfilled life herself to wish well to a new generation starting out.

I was a bit confused at first over the two brunettes who were friends and colleagues of Fay. I thought they were the same person at the start, which is another reason to see this film again.

And in a sense, although Lisa was the central character, it was Fay whose story we followed as closely and who spoke for her own generation at the time: intelligent but not educated; fed up with boorish men in their lives; but lacking opportunities to break out, until the arrival of the new immigrants into Australia.

Well, these are just a few of the highlights for me. I’m sure on second viewing, I’ll find more favourite bits to comment on, so look forward to when it comes back to some cinemas for a second run…

*****

Bea says: I was very keen to see this film because when I saw the preview (at the cinema attending another film) I saw that one of the storylines is about the arrival of the "New Australians" during the 1940s-early 1970s and their assimilation into Australian life.  I am very interested in this topic, as I am the daughter of New Australians myself, and I have just started to notice with pleasure more in Australian literature and film on this - I suspect because the children of the New Australians are now well into adulthood and are writing and making films and art about their influences.

However, Ladies in Black in actually based on an early novel by Madeleine St John - who I know from her later, award winning work The Essence of the Thing; I had no idea she was even Australian, and from my (brief) recent research into her after seeing Ladies in Black I don't think she is of New Australian stock.  It turns out she was at Sydney University with Bruce Beresford, the film's director, and I suspect that Ladies in Black is a coming of age, semi-autobiographical work of hers; she is likely to have identified pretty strongly with Lisa (Lesley), who is busy having her horizons opened (by the New Australians) and reinventing herself during her summer department store job, before starting her first term at Sydney University.  I have to say that Sydney University is a pretty magical place; I spent a year teaching there on a contract in 2017, and my heart skipped with excitement whenever I walked through the main campus - it really feels like a historic place where any possibility can happen...

Other than Lisa's storyline, we follow several other of the department store staff, who are all at different moments in their lives and so the film explores such things as finding a partner, marriage and infertility, spinsterhood, work and life decisions, but with Beresford's light touch, wry sense of humour and beautiful cinematography.

It certainly really spoke to me, and to Cecil, but I have heard mixed reviews amongst friends.  But I say - go and see it; it may speak volumes to you about your life, or not, but if not it will certainly be a pleasant diversion, particularly if you have any memories of Sydney life in earlier decades.  I also gifted the DVD to my parents for Christmas.

*****

The 15:17 to Paris

Seen at the beautiful Regent Theatre in Ballarat, VIC

Bea says: I enjoyed this much more than I thought I would - Cecil and I often have a (long) short-list of current films we want to see, and as our free time is limited, if we have time to see a film we see whatever we can from the list. 

Going in, I feared an action film but I have to say, I found it very, very interesting.  Partly this was because the film spends a long time on the backstory, and as I am narrative-driven in films, I preferred this to lots of time on the action sequence of the actual event on the train.  Others may not enjoy the focus on the backstory as much as I did. 

The backstory takes us right back to the middle school/early high school years of the three friends who end up on the Paris train, playing war games in the open country around where they grew up, and military fatigues to school.  Later, high school separated them, and they all ended up trying to find their individual paths; our hero Spencer Stone is actually a bit lost, not making it in the military into the role he wants, and not excelling in the role he ended up in. 

They all take a bit of time out and holiday in Europe, backpacking the familiar trail of Venice, to Amsterdam, to Paris (I think I did almost exactly the same route 25 years ago).  Amsterdam was a wild night for them (I heard the older couple near us whisper to each other "we didn't do that in Amsterdam!") and hung over, they board the Paris train the next day. 

In fact, they only go ahead because Spencer feels he must; and that is a loop in the film's plot I found really interesting, and which Cecil also refers to - Spencer feels like he was born to do something important, of value to others.  Many years ago I read the John Irving book A Prayer for Owen Meany, and was put in mind of that book when watching this film - "the shot"; although in Owen Meany's case, he knew what it was he would be doing, many years later.  But like Stone, he had to convince friends  that there was something important to come, and to practise and prepare. 

Irving's novel was written years before this event (I read the book in the 1990s) - a case of life imitating art....If you enjoyed this film, I would definitely recommend reading it, and in fact I might re-read it again now.

My research post-film, in a relaxed lunch spot in Ballarat was interesting, as Cecil mentions - Stone had left the military, his main aim in life as a child/young person, now he had done the thing he always felt he had to do, perhaps there was no reason to be in it anymore, but was studying.  His two friends did not seem to be progressing quite so well; relying a little bit on their fame...I couldn't quite tell.

Nice direction from Clint Eastwood.
***1/2

Cecil says: I hadn't realised Clint Eastwood directed this film until I watched the credits roll at the end. And the interesting thing he chose to do was to cast the actual people involved in the Thalys incident to play the parts as themselves through most of the movie.

Actually they did pretty well, considering they are not actors. It's probably easier to play yourself, if you are not a trained actor, but still even playing yourself can become really wooden when you try too hard to act, so congrats to them for carrying this off.

The only weakness for me in this portrayal of three 'ordinary' American dudes acting the heroes when a terrorist tries to massacre passengers on an Amsterdam to Paris train was in the black character (Sal). As a child, he is portrayed as quirky, questioning and cheeky; as an adult, he seems to have lost all of that curiosity and lateral thinking spirit his school boy character showed. I don't honesty believe such a creative child would end up as 'ordinary' as an adult, but who knows.

The main character of the three, Spencer Stone, is interesting. It's all very well, both for dramatic licence or for some sort of higher-level spiritual reason, to have a youngster say he senses he is on the path to do something extraordinary. But what happens if you are barely 20 and you have done your extraordinary act? What do you do for the rest of your life?

And it was interesting when Bea did some delving to find out that Spencer Stone is now studying International Relations at uni. What a fantastic next chapter for a guy like this. Good luck to him as he finds the next direction to take, and hopefully channels his passion and curiosity further. \

I was struck at the end how they had footage of the French President pinning the Legion d'Honneur onto these guys' lapels (I thought at first it was clever CGI work to have Pres Hollande footage and to have superimposed the actors we had seen into the scene - though at that stage I didn't realise Eastwood had used the actual characters). I wondered how they could possibly know just what an enormous thing that was for a French president to give three Americans that honour - and maybe doing an international relations degree might just help Spencer realise what a massive moment that was.

Bea and I discussed briefly the 'what would we have done?' question after the film. I know for sure I'd have been one of the passengers cowering behind a seat. I have acted in the past in minor incidents on London streets, but I know I don't have the skills necessary to prevent something as major as this. But these guys knew they did have the training, and hats off to them for acting.

Nobody actually knows how they'll act until confronted with a scenario for real. And for me such questions were first raised when I read a Simone de Beauvoir novel set during the Nazi occupation of Paris. That somehow would be a harder dilemma: dealing with 4 years of constant occupation would be very different from a sudden mad terror incident.\

The film itself was pretty slow-paced.

We spend far too long at the gelato stand in Venice, I'm not sure the point of the German exchange student interlude, and we have long moments lingering on minutiae of life, which made me wonder what else Eastwood could have done with his film time? Surely taking the story on beyond the incident might have been interesting, though possibly challenging also?

It was a delight to have our first time at the beautiful 1920s Regent Theatre in Ballarat, and the movie was fairly well-attended for a Sunday morning slot. Not a bad way to spend a quiet Sunday

***