*NEW* BEAUTY AND THE BEAST REVIEW *NEW*

And the remakes keep on coming . . .

BUT if they can keep up this standard then be my guest (I couldn’t resist).

An adaptation of the fairy tale about a monstrous-looking prince (Dan Stevens) and a young woman (Emma Watson) who fall in love.

After complaining for the last five years about reboots and remakes, I was livid that even Disney were revisiting their backlog. I mean is that hard to find original stories? If you are going to remake movies, can you at least tackle the bad ones? Leave the classics alone!

However, I was pleasantly surprised with Kenneth Branagh’s rendition of Cinderella. The less we say about the Alice in Wonderland movies, the better. While The Jungle Book fell short of the classic by a country mile.

So my feelings about watching the new Beauty and the Beast were mixed, to say the least. Especially when I discovered that there was an extra 45 minutes on the running length to the 1991 animated hit!

BUT after all my griping, I finally gave it a go and you know what? It wasn’t too bad at all.

The opening surprised me from the get go. Expanding on the origin story of the curse. The overture fell a little flat but the lavish set designs, costumes and Tobias A. Schliessler’s beautiful cinematography took my attention away from that bum note.

The Belle sequence was literally a shot for shot live action re-enactment. Emma Watson was the physical embodiment of Belle. Her singing wasn’t the strongest but a lovely voice all the same.

Luke Evans and Josh Gad were fantastic. Evans played Gaston with aplomb. He was Gaston, nailing the shallow womanizer perfectly.

Who better than Olaf from Frozen to take on Gaston’s long suffering, and incredibly flamboyant, partner in crime LeFou. Gad was equally as entertaining. Prancing and pouting about the place.

The controversy about the gay subtext was misplaced. If there was one, I didn’t notice and it didn’t ruin the story in any capacity.

Belle was always a strong feminist character that wanted more from the world and her role. Her confrontation with a villager over teaching a young girl to read was a little heavy handed.

I was disappointed with Kevin Kline’s performance as Maurice. He was far too deadpan for the role. Belle’s father was always the quirky crackpot.

A shame considering you had the best man for the job. I mean, he was in A Fish Called Wanda?! He didn’t even have Rex Everhart’s delivery. Too stern and frail.

The pace kept things moving along and the film was easy-going and highly watchable.

From the trailers and teasers, I thought the effects on the Beast looked dreadful BUT once Belle entered that haunting Gothic castle, I was impressed.

The special effects and CGI were brilliant. The Beast actually looked quite good. Stevens did well and I could understand his gravelly voice. Not quite Lance Henriksen’s gravitas BUT he still delivered a sterling performance.

I think what helped (and had to) was that the pair had great chemistry. The extra running time fleshed out the pair’s blossoming romance and made it a little more believable that this stubborn and unloving beast would take some time to get over his hurt ego and learn to love again.

The supporting cast had tough acts to follow BUT what a cast?!

Ewan McGregor and Sir Ian McKellen played Lumiere and Cogsworth perfectly. They were a great duo and kept things entertaining.

Even if I couldn’t help but laugh at McGregor’s ‘Allo Allo accent. The Moulin Rouge maestro excelled with his rendition of Be Our Guest.

Stanley Tucci was wasted in his small role as Maestro Cadenza. While Emma Thompson was so-so for me as Mrs. Potts.

Her mockney accent grated against me in parts. She was always going to have a tough act following in Angela Lansbury’s footsteps. BUT as soon as Beauty and the Beast came on, and Belle strolled down those labyrinthine stairs for that infamous dance, it still worked a treat and Thompson excelled.

Composer Alan Menken thankfully kept the original soundtrack and added new entries.  The only problem was that they weren’t really that memorable. Days in the Sun wasn’t a bad song BUT the others have . . . already slipped my mind.

The story was still the same BUT the extra fleshing out wasn’t a bad approach. Especially when they played on the magic of the Rose and the flashback to Belle’s childhood. It was different. Just a shame that it led to the same old result BUT why stray away from a winning formula?

Thankfully, there was enough heart, charm and cheese to make this an entertaining affair that complimented the original Disney classic and just about stood on its own two feet.

3/5

Advertisements

*NEW* BRIDGET JONES’S BABY REVIEW *NEW*

bridget_joness_baby_ver5

Third time’s the charm?

Bridget’s (Renee Zellweger) focus on single life and her career is interrupted when she finds herself pregnant, but with one hitch . . . she can only be fifty percent sure of the identity of her baby’s father.

My initial reaction when my mum asked if I would take her to see the latest offering of Bridget Jones.

2e0

However, grumbling and jokes aside, I have to say that I was pleasantly surprised. An easygoing and very entertaining affair. Probably the best one out of the bunch. Has it really been 12 years since the shambolic sequel that was The Edge of Reason?

I actually didn’t mind the first film. It was silly BUT fun. The second one, however, was terrible. It was overlong, OTT and did exactly the same thing as the first BUT with much weaker results. And now we join Bridget in her 40s and starting all over again.

The first time that Zellweger didn’t put on the weight. Controversial? It hardly made a difference as she still nailed it as the bumbling singleton desperate to get her life in order. Finally reaching her ideal size and having fun. Cheesy BUT watchable.

Of course the questions came flying in; what happened with Mr Darcy? Where’s Hugh Grant? (I mean obviously, I wasn’t thinking that. Cough. Moving on . . . )

Colin Firth is looking old BUT he still delivered the charm as Mark. He had great chemistry with Zellweger yet again as the pair must awkwardly face each other within their social gatherings. It wasn’t long before the old feelings came back. Although you could sense the inevitable coming, it wasn’t quite as straightforward with the pair’s reunion also opening old wounds.

Patrick Dempsey (Grey’s Anatomy) certainly made one of the cheesiest introductions as Bridget’s new Prince Charming (I’m sure the Enchanted fans got a laugh out of that reference in the film. BUT not me. Because I haven’t seen Enchanted. Cough). Rescuing her from the muddy swamp of a music festival.

The festival sequence served up an unexpected cameo from a certain red headed musician that just won’t disappear BUT entertaining none the less.

Dempsey played the part of the sickly sweet Jack well. A bi-polar opposite to the robotic Mr Darcy. He had good chemistry with Zellweger as a new romance blossomed between the pair.

Emma Thompson was on scene stealing form in her (tragically) small supporting role as Dr Rawlings. I had to laugh when she had to announce the sex of the baby to both “fathers”. Her enthusiasm wading with each encounter as Bridget desperately tried to hide the truth from the pair.

The sparring between the two “fathers” was quite entertaining with both desperate to win Bridget’s affection. I’m sure there were Team Jack and Team Darcy divides going on through out the film. It made for some heartfelt drama and genuine laugh out loud moments. Especially during the pregnancy sequence. I was in stitches. They must have had fun filming that.

I haven’t read the books so I can’t say if the film stayed true to the material BUT it may relieve fans knowing that author Helen Fielding was involved heavily in the screen adaptation with the aid of writers Dan Mazer and Emma Thompson. That’s probably why this sequel worked a lot better.

Fielding and co. brought back a lot of the old faces and everybody got their moment to shine. “Oh my God, you had a three way?!” I wish Gemma Jones (Sense and Sensibility) and Jim Broadbent (Harry Potter) were in it more as Bridget’s parents.

Typical parents. Unable to work technology; their FaceTime phone chat would have been something my parents would have done. BUT always there to help in their strange way. Jones’ overreactions cracked me up. Afraid that Bridget’s unwed pregnancy would cause scandal over her local council election.

We were also rewarded with some new faces. Sarah Solemani (Him & Her) was brilliant as Bridget’s new BFF and partner in crime Miranda. Their news room shenanigans and in between live shot conversations delivered all sorts of cringe-inducing moments that delivered the laughs.

I wasn’t bored and was quite engaged in the love triangle. Wondering who Bridget would choose in the end. Would Mr Darcy fail again? Was this Jack too good to be true? I liked the fact that they left you guessing right up to the very end on who was the father?

There were moments that were a little too corny and OTT for my liking. BUT it was always going to be that sort of film. Kate O’Flynn (Happy-Go-Lucky) was really annoying as Bridget’s new boss Alice. I’m sure that was supposed to be the point as the cutthroat boss looking to throw the old out for the new (which delivered an all too realistic generation clash) BUT she wasn’t that funny and got on my nerves.

It was easygoing fluff that delivered enough charm and drama to crack a smile from this cynical movie goer. I wondered why they bothered with another sequel that nobody asked for (Like most these days) BUT fans will love it and I have to say that even the skeptics might want to take a chance.

You might be pleasantly surprised.

3.5/5

*NEW* BURNT REVIEW *NEW*

246390

Overcooked and overdone. Let’s hope Mr Cooper has a thick skin.

Adam Jones (Bradley Cooper) is a chef who destroyed his career with drugs and diva behavior. He cleans up and returns to London, determined to redeem himself by spearheading a top restaurant that can gain three Michelin stars.

Penned by Steven Knight. Normally, I’m a big fan of the chap. Dirty Pretty Things was one of the best British films I had seen in a long time. BUT his latest offerings (Locke and Peaky Blinders) were very disappointing. Locke was an unintentionally comical showcase for Tom Hardy while Peaky Blinders (A fantastic gangster series that I had once called the best damn thing on TV) suffered from a stuttering second season.

Unfortunately (if you hadn’t gathered from that poorly punned tagline) that run has continued. Bradley Cooper does his best Gordon Ramsey impression BUT to no avail.

The first hour was actually quite watchable after a slow opening act with Cooper’s callous chef serving his “penance” by shucking out a million oysters. Yep. It really was as tedious as you think. BUT I was still intrigued to find out what Adam had done to make people detest him so much. Apparently, not a lot.

I would have preferred to see Cooper’s character burn out in the opening half than witness the dull aftermath. Some of the reasons were a little petty and boring while most of the group forgave him far too easily just because of his “reputation”. Best described using a Star Wars reference, “If he gets one more Michelin star, he’ll be like the Darth Vader of cooking”.

Cooper played it well as always. He had enough charisma to carry the piece BUT for every tense scene or engaging moment, there were a dozen cliched ones. Matthew Rhys was perfect as Adam’s old sous-chef (now bitter rival). If anything, I wished he was in it more. Their exchanges and fractious relationship was ripe for more heated confrontations. Unfortunately Knight only really scraped the surface.

And that was the problem. A great cast not used to their full potential. I couldn’t believe the amount of actors that popped up in this film. It was ridiculous. Daniel Bruhl didn’t do a bad turn as Tony. The son of a respected restaurateur trying to keep his late father’s legacy alive. The only problem was that his initial stubbornness and anger was always going to lead to the inevitable.

It was also a surprise to see Uma Thurman as a respected food critic. Shame that her character was only a passing cameo. Alicia Vikander was tragically wasted in her role. She looked stunning and had potential to cause so much more trouble for Adam. BUT it was resolved far too easily and didn’t even attempt to put out the fire burning between Cooper and Miller.

Sienna Miller and Bradley Cooper reunite once again (American Sniper). Their tense headbutting and predictable romance did enough to keep things ticking over. Cooper’s Ramsey-esque meltdown at her was brutal and nail biting. Miller was actually very good as the single mum battling to keep her catering career alive. The hokum romance did spoil things BUT their chemistry was good enough to roll out the doughy bits.

Emma Thompson was brilliant as Adam’s therapist. But heavily underused. Merely dishing out advice and keeping tabs on the recovering drug addict. A shame as the pair worked well together.

The shots of the meals and courses had my stomach rumbling. Food porn for the foodies out there. It was easygoing and pleasant enough with Adam’s tough guy demeanour finally cracking. There were even some zippy one liners; “What happened to your angel looks? Drink, cocaine and Louisiana”.

There just wasn’t enough made of the story or the cast. The second half lulled and sizzled out with a quite abrupt and corny ending. It was far too patchy, formulaic and predictable. That’s not to say it wasn’t watchable. Just disappointing.

2.5/5

*NEW* A WALK IN THE WOODS REVIEW *NEW*

A-Walk-In-The-Woods-Poster

A walk to remember? Jog on.

A watchable if incredibly tame affair sees two ageing screen icons having fun. Shame, it didn’t live up to much.

After spending two decades in England, Bill Bryson (Robert Redford) returns to the US, where he decides the best way to connect with his homeland is to hike the Appalachian Trail with one of his oldest friends (Nick Nolte).

From the opening, I knew Redford would be a perfect Bryson. Quick witted and bored. We watch the frustrated travel writer meander along. Uninterested with life and New Hampshire. His awkward socializing at a funeral said it all.

A passing comment from a morning show host about never travelling in his own back yard and it isn’t long before Bryson yearns for another adventure. And what a trek. The 2,200 mile Appalachian trail.

Emma Thompson was delightful as Bryson’s long suffering spouse. She worked well with Redford. I was disappointed to see so little of her. I would have been happy to watch more of the pair. Deliberating leaving articles about bear attacks, murder mysteries and poisonous everything around the house in a hope of unsettling the stubborn fool.

However, a deal is made. Bryson must travel with someone. Cue the grisly bear that is Nick Nolte. A gruff overweight husk of a pensioner. An old friend that Bryson desperately tried to keep off his list.

Redford and Nolte made a likeable pair. They worked well together and shared some good banter. As soon as the pair began, they struggled up the first hill. Teens and kid scouts skipping past them without a care in the world.

The film had an air of Grumpy Old Men with a Wild vibe. It was easygoing and light hearted enough as the pair bicker, grunt and groan. Nolte hasn’t aged well at all. I couldn’t tell how much was put on for the film. BUT he was still a slick charmer with his smart ass commentary.

John Bailey’s cinematography certainly captured some picturesque shots of the trail through the different seasons. It almost made me want to pick up a bag pack and go.

Despite seeing two screen icons slumming it and having a laugh, it was all a little tame and predictable. You knew that their bickering would unearth deeper resentments. The fact the pair hadn’t talked for nearly 40 years was a clue alone. You knew that inevitable heart to heart moment would soon be on the cards.

It wasn’t all bad. There were fun moments to be had with Nolte being chased by a redneck for chatting up his wife. The pair screaming and waving their arms around like nutters to scare off some bears.

Kristen Schaal (The Flight of the Conchords) was funny and oh so irritating in her camping cameo as the hiker from hell. Her constant put downs and know it all attitude soon sets these two old codgers running for the hills.

I was impressed with the supporting cast. It was a shame that Schaal was the only one to make a lasting impression. Nick Offerman (Parks and Recreation) was completely wasted in his blink-and-you’ll-miss-it role as the tent guide. His deadpan style wasn’t used to its full potential. A quick sarcy one liner about a rain cover wasn’t enough.

And the wafer thin subplot, if you can call it that, with Mary Steenburgen’s character was a waste of time. The flirty exchanges with Bryson and Steenburgen’s motel proprietress were tame. You just knew that he would never be tempted and it surmounted to nothing. Shame.

There wasn’t a lot going on after an easygoing opener. It tended to drag and soon fizzled out by the closing moments after the pair had their epiphanies. It didn’t help that it ended so corny and predictably.

There was enough charm to make this a watchable and lighthearted romp BUT memorable? Not for me, I’m afraid.

2.5/5

*THROWBACK REVIEW* MEN, WOMEN AND CHILDREN REVIEW

poster-trailer-for-jason-reitman-s-men-women-children-has-arrived-b9407028-750c-40cd-bdfa-ae140fb858b8

DO. NOT. BOTHER.

Jason Reitman pens a delightfully dull and dreary commentary on the woes of social media.

Certainly not what I expected. Which worked in one aspect BUT failed on so many others.

The recent spate of trailers seemed to market this as a romantic drama seen through the platform of social media i.e. Facebook, Tumblr, etc.

BUT all I got was a slow, dark and sombre social drama that made some fair points but didn’t really back them up with any substance, tension or story.

Merely a movie of moments. A shame considering the talent.

So what is it about? A group of high school teenagers and their parents attempt to navigate the many ways the Internet has changed their relationships, self-image and how they communicate.

It really does sound as boring as you think. BUT it’s not a complete disaster.

The opening sequence was quite strange. A visually stunning but unnecessary tracking shot of a satellite travelling through the solar system. Eric Steelberg’s cinematography was superb (in this sequence). The wonderful Emma Thompson provided her vocal gravitas to the appropriately titled character, “Narrator”.

However, she soon blathers on about how sounds and videos were recorded in a capsule during 1977 to send out as a welcome message to extra terrestrials. Interesting. But what is the relevance?

None, apparently. It didn’t really fit in with the message or the tone of the film. Granted, the songs and messages highlighted how far we have progressed technologically to a minor extent BUT we still haven’t contacted extra-terrestrials. That we know of. If there are any. If we care. And if there are, they obviously didn’t like our noises.

BUT what does that have to do with social media impacting the everyday?

It felt a little pretentious for my liking and certainly didn’t get things going.

It eventually zipped along and was watchable. BUT the story lines and content just didn’t have enough for the two hour running length.

The only statement that I felt Reitman made well was the desensitisation and over-sexualisation of teenagers.

The scene in which a group of 16 year old cheerleaders are talking about how many men they have slept with and supposed sex acts they have inflicted was uncomfortable to listen to BUT all too true.

The fact that it is so easy for young teens to access porn and sexual images in this digital age paired with their ever-increasing hunger to grow up quicker was and still is a scary prospect.

Olivia Crocicchia was very good as the deluded Hannah Clint. A ruthless and overly ambitious young lady who will do what it takes to get what she wants. Her relationship with her mother Judy Greer was captured well and it was interesting to see the gradual change from something that seemed so innocent as a little modelling site soon becoming something much more.

Some of the story lines excelled, while others merely gave us a taster and then fizzled out into nothing really.

Kaitlyn Dever and Ansel Elgort played the outsider high school couple well, I suppose. BUT it wasn’t original or interesting. Their story line was a little stale. Hiding in the library and sneaking out to cuddle by a waterfall or river. I can’t remember. Lost interest. The closing minutes certainly came to a tense, if predictable, finale.

Jennifer Garner played Dever’s overprotective mother perfectly. Not enough of her. I was determined to see if there was more to her obsession with controlling and knowing her daughter’s whereabouts.

BUT no! The world is a terrible place and the Internet is worse. Her embargoes on the household Wi-Fi and mobile phone tracking apps certainly hinted at the cons of digital gadgetry.

The whole fear of online predators is still an important issue. Even more so with trolling and cyberbullying. BUT Reitman doesn’t even bother penning a story line featuring this shocking new development.

The whole affair felt quite dated. This would have been a lot more hard-hitting a decade ago, to be honest, when instant messaging and blogging had first popped up in the domain.

Dean Norris’ football loving dad arguing with Englert for dropping out of the team after his mum flew the coop was predictable guff. Englert’s video game obsession felt dated. I mean World of Warcraft is still a highly popular game BUT surely there’s a new one. Plus it wasn’t really explored that well.

J.K. Simmons was wasted in his role as the father in Elena Kampouris’ bulimic daughter story line. Her situation was one that should have been covered a little better. Hiding in her room trying not to eat while talking to online forums about fighting hunger pains was crazy.

Her story ended quite abruptly after hitting a crucial juncture and deserved more screen time, especially with vulnerable teens that are constantly battling with image and oversexualized music videos, media coverage and fashion magazines.

Adam Sandler was finally given another serious role and he did quite well but his character was so bland. The whole porn desensitising the average male debate was a valid point but who wants to see Mr Deeds getting hot and heavy while watching smut? Not me.

Reitman raised a good point in how teenage lads in particular will be looking for a particular woman after being subjected to such videos. Sandler’s son developing a crude taste for domination videos was a taboo that should have been explored. BUT Sandler’s character never confronts him properly about it.

In fact, he sees his son’s videos and has a bash himself. A little dark and comical BUT the tone didn’t really fit. I couldn’t tell how serious Reitman was trying to be. The film went too serious one second and satirical the next.

Sandler’s storyline was mediocre at best. It had a fair point about how couples lose intimacy and seek extra marital companionship online. The ease in what you can do on the Internet is a crazy and unsettling thing.

The affair sequences were certainly different BUT didn’t really amount to anything which was surprising, considering they “confronted” each other at the end. It just infuriated me because they seemed to blame their lost innocence from 9/11. Emphasizing how it changed everything.

I mean it could have been inappropriate timing that they changed as the world changed at that moment but I felt the reference lazy and unnecessary.

The sequences in which we see what people are texting, along with video inserts, was a nice touch. Especially when you see what people are texting about others who are in the same room.

BUT it’s hardly original. Hollyoaks milked that speech bubble text talk thing to death.

It made some good points BUT ones I’ve seen dealt with a whole lot better. It felt like a missed opportunity to expand, debate and explore new developments and how families are growing up with them.

It’s watchable BUT if you’re looking for hard-hitting, thought provoking Internet-related drama, I recommend Cyber Bully.

2.5/5 (Just)

THE LOVE PUNCH REVIEW

The_Love_Punch_Poster

I loved the cast. I just wish the gags had more of a punch.

It’s OTT, corny and absolutely ridiculous but fun enough with the odd laugh (BUT not as much as I hoped). However, one thing that this film does prove is that talented actors can make mediocre material much much more watchable.

Critically it’s a bit of a mess but for a cheap movie night, it’s worth a gander. So what’s it about? A divorced couple scheme to recover their stolen retirement money from a ruthless French businessman.

The opening chugged along as Emma Thompson (Sense and Sensibility/Nanny McPhee) and Pierce Brosnan (007! Come on!) snapped and griped at each other. Desperately trying to keep up appearances for their friends; the hilarious Celia Imrie (Calendar Girls/The Borrowers) and Timothy Spall (The Harry Potter franchise).

Brosnan and Thompson were a great pairing. They had good chemistry and you could tell they were having a laugh. Their bickering was certainly relatable and ticked all the boxes for any couple.

The realisation when their last child has flew the coop tied in with having to start all over again in their fifties was an interesting premise in itself. But that is soon thrown out of the window with a crazy crime caper that predictably reignites old flames and passions. Hardly a spoiler. It’s just that sort of film.

The supporting cast was a little disappointing. Tuppence Middleton’s (Tortured/Long Way Down) part was very flat and, to be honest, needless. Especially when some of the better jokes and screen time was spent on their interaction with their son Matt (Jack Wilkinson). An ongoing joke with a Skype conversation was actually quite funny. Great to see Ellen Thomas (Adoha from Rev) as Brosnan’s secretary. Kept expecting her to say “Hello Vicar!”. She manages to make a memorable impression in her two minute cameo. Shame.

The gag rate is very hit and miss. Spall and Imrie do deliver some of the better one liners from Spall’s random ex-war veteran tales to Imrie trying to handle a gun, “Hands up Melon Farmers”. The beautiful Louise Bourgoin was a stunner to boot but her character got incredibly annoying by the end.

Despite moving at an easygoing pace, the film does seem to run out of ideas and climaxes in sheer pandemonium. I mean this was never going to win plaudits for clever story telling but posing as American businessmen with the hope that maybe the slick French businessman Tom Morton (with a very mashed up accent) hadn’t met them before when he already had? Really?

It all gets rather silly and crashes into a ridiculous cheesy, predictable finale which downplays some of the more serious moments in which Brosnan and Thompson cross examine their relationship.

Without spoiling too much, there is a scene which perfectly shows what lies in store with this mad little movie. Both Brosnan and Thompson’s characters have allergies; Brosnan with cats and Thompson with flowers. They infiltrate a room which contains (what do you know) those very things.

The French landscape is shot beautifully. The content, well. At it’s best, a TV movie. But thankfully a well acted cast help The Love Punch get away with it. Almost reminiscent of the old sixties crime capers. Easy going, cheesy but dated.

A guilty pleasure if ever there was one.

2.5/5

SAVING MR BANKS REVIEW

saving_mr_banks

Thank you for saving me from burning my Unlimited card!

A pleasant surprise to come out of the cinema after a film with a smile. An easygoing, heartwarming, brilliantly written and superbly acted drama.

Be warned, there will be no rant or comical anecdote. The critic in me is in action. Apologies.

Now for those who aren’t familiar, I have an Unlimited card which entitles me to see whatever I want at the cinema. A challenge that has drained me.

I have found it incredibly difficult to answer people when they ask, “What’s your top 10 this year?”. I feel that films this year have either failed to hit the mark, contained brilliant BUT poorly executed concepts or were merely poor rehashes of classics that didn’t need to be touched in the first place. However, I may finally have a contender to add to my 10.

Now, I’m a fan of Disney. And I’ll admit I loved the film Mary Poppins (Yeah, losing serious man points here but hey ho). When I first heard that a film had been made about the story behind the story of Mary Poppins, I was intrigued.

As soon as the film begun, I was hooked by the sheer acting grace of one of my favourite actresses Emma Thompson. We join the uptight snobby PL Travers as she is invited to LA by Walt Disney himself to discuss signing over the movie rights to Mary Poppins.

Strapped for cash and afraid to lose her home, Travers is reluctantly forced to consider his proposal BUT finds his charm offensive offensive. And as flashbacks reveal, her connection to the character is a lot more personal than anyone could have imagined.

As soon as Travers breached the loud, bright, OTT enthusiastic Californian bliss of Disney Studios, you knew you were in for a treat. From the flight complaints regarding a baby’s noise levels to the stray suitcase invading her designated space. Even the crazy terms that she demanded; NO animation, NO music and absolutely NO Dick Van Dyke?! Hilarious BUT true. This did actually happen.

The supporting cast were brilliant. Paul Giamatti was charming as the nauseatingly enthusiastic chauffeur. BB Novak and Jason Schwartzman were very funny as the mad song writers. However, cudos must be awarded to the legend that is Tom Hanks, who truly captivated Disney and stole the show at every chance.

Watching Thompson and Hanks banter and compete with one another was fantastic. Disney truly has his work cut out for him. I was disappointed that Thompson didn’t get an Oscar nod after all the consideration.

What sets this film apart was the flashback sequences. They slowly unearthed Traver’s past from her childhood in Australia with her father (Brilliantly portrayed by Colin Farrell). As we delve further into Travers’ past, we get to see why she’s so reluctant to let Mary Poppins go and why she has become the woman that she is today.

I felt that Ruth Wilson (who played Alice in the brilliant TV drama Luther) was wasted in her role. Understandably, the film’s focus was always going to be on Travers’ relationship with her father. A pivotal point in Poppin’s development BUT it was a shame. However, she was given a moment to shine in an emotionally tense scene. I don’t want to say too much now because I want people to see this.

An endearing little affair. If a little long at the tooth BUT I didn’t need a spoonful of sugar to make this go down (Come on, I had to get one in).

I initially thought that Travers’ character was exaggerated for the feature BUT during the closing credits (Hardly a spoiler), an old recording of a conversation with the real Travers and some Disney execs was played. Thompson really did do her justice.

Great acting, great writing, good film.

4/5