Thursday, January 9, 2014

Saving Mr. Banks (a movie review post)

Two years ago, when The Artist won Best Picture, it was not difficult to understand why. It's the kind of movie Hollywood loves whether it was actually best picture material or not. I was going to say that I don't really think it was but, upon looking back at the other nominees that year, it didn't have a lot of strong competition, at least from the movies I saw. Come on, War Horse? Really? Which is not to say that War Horse wasn't good, but best picture? That's the best they could do? And as for The Artist, Singin' in the Rain already told that story and did a much better job of it. But, anyway...

Saving Mr. Banks is that same kind of film, the kind that Hollywood ought to love. It's about how one of the most beloved movies in movie history got made. And it's the first time Walt Disney has ever been portrayed in a movie, so that's saying a lot. And, just to put all of this perspective, when Disney first heard that the movie was being made, they're first reaction was to buy it and squash it. See, there's a reason Walt has never been portrayed onscreen before. However, after looking at it, they decided not only not to do that but to produce it! It's that kind of movie.

And it's good. I mean, it's really good. I know it is because my wife cried through about the last third of it. I will be extremely surprised if it doesn't get the best picture Oscar this year. Overall, from what we've seen so far, I think it's most well rounded show out there. And it leaves you feeling good after having had a good cry.

Not to get into what the movie is about, but it's about how Walt Disney convinced P. L. Travers to give him the rights to make Mary Poppins, something it took him 20 years to do. Along with that story, you see the story of the defining moment of Travers' childhood, which shows why Poppins was so important to her. From what I've seen from fact-checking, the movie is fairly accurate, which is another plus. A big one, actually. They did have hours and hours of audio recordings from sessions with Travers and some of the people working on the movie (because she insisted that everything be recorded), so they wouldn't have had a good excuse for it not being accurate.

So, first, let's talk Tom Hanks. Oh, man, Tom Hanks was... incredible. There were moments, especially when they showed him watching himself on the old black and white TV show Walt introduced, where he was just like Disney. And, from everything I've read, Hanks did capture Walt to an amazing extent. I do know that the folks at Disney Studios shaved Hanks' mustache to the exact dimensions that Walt wore his. His only being called a supporting actor for this role, but I think it's a safe bet that he will at least get a nomination for it. I will not at all be surprised if he wins. Actually, I hope he does. [I haven't seen Captain Phillips, yet, but he's also being talked about for a best actor nomination for that one.]

Then, we have to talk Emma Thompson, and she may just deserve best actress for her performance. That's a tough call for me, though, because Sandra Bullock carried an entire movie virtually by herself, and that's an impressive feat. However, I'm not sure anyone else could have pulled off Travers the way Thompson did. It was a great performance, and she and Hanks were perfect together.

Paul Giamatti was lovable as Ralph, the chauffeur. This role probably wasn't especially difficult for Giamatti, but he was perfect in it. Jason Schwartzman and B. J. Novak were awesome as Richard and Robert Sherman. Not the parts called for too much, but it was great to see them in the movie. They were good, too. Especially this one part with Novak, but I don't want to spoil it, so you'll just have to see it; then, I'll tell you which one.

Which brings us to Colin Farrell. Farrell is one of those underrated actors who is almost always excellent despite the horrible movies he's in. I mean, Alexander wasn't really his fault, and how can you blame him for not turning down Total Recall? At any rate, he's wonderful and wonderfully tragic as Travers Goff. He was my favorite part of the movie. I mentioned that my wife cried, but there were some scenes of Goff with his daughter where I almost cried. That's kind of saying a lot for me.

I loved this movie. Of the possible best picture nominees, if you have to pick just one, this is the one I would recommend. Sure, Gravity is visually amazing, but this movie has heart that Gravity just doesn't have, no matter how you feel about Walt Disney. And let me make this clear, the movie is not about Walt Disney; the script was written (and not changed) before Disney (the Company) had a hand in it; the movie is about Travers and how she was ultimately convinced to allow Walt to make Mary Poppins into a movie. It's definitely worth seeing.

Also
Make sure you stop by Indie Writers Monthly today. Check out my post and the contributors and follow along. I'm not really sure where we're headed with that, yet, but, if you like sci-fi and/or fantasy, I'm sure it's going to be a good ride.

21 comments:

  1. I think Gravity is probably going to win but you're right this has a lot of Oscar friendly qualities. It's really going to be tough picking a winner in the acting categories. Lots of strong performances this year.

    mood
    Moody Writing

    ReplyDelete
  2. I still might get out to see this - wanted to over Christmas break, but didn't make it. Heard it's a great film. I can't see either Hanks or Thompson turning in anything less than stellar performances.
    As for Best Picture... While it might be nominated, there are a lot of great films vying for that spot. American Hustle is another one. However, I predict the winner will be 12 Years a Slave.
    And for the record, Hugo should have won Best Picture over The Artist. Stunning film.

    ReplyDelete
  3. It's on my list to see. Great review. :-) I love Emma Thompson and Tom Hanks has always been a favorite of mine--even his corny films.

    Sia McKye Over Coffee

    ReplyDelete
  4. I don't have much of an opinion on awards things, unless of course, *I* were ever up for an award of some type. Then I'd be all about them.

    But, as it stands, I'm not up for any awards that I know of, so I don't care that much about them. I mean, actors, directors, and such get compensated pretty well for the work they put in as it is, it's not like they are an under-appreciated group.

    Of course, folks that do Sound Design of VFX or something is different, the technical awards do interest me somewhat, so I might be a teeny bit hypocritical there, but whatever, it makes sense to me.

    That said, it seems like Hollywood really, really, enjoys movies about Hollywood. The more self-referential it is, the more it seems like it's award worthy. I actually have no examples to give, aside from the Walt Disney movie you reviewed above. I just 'feel' like that's how it is.

    Anyway, I may catch that movie when it comes out on Netflix, or HBO, or whatever. It sounds nice.

    All that was a preamble to my actual point, which I've forgotten. Dammit.

    ReplyDelete
  5. What I don't understand is who is Mr. Banks?

    ReplyDelete
  6. Looking forward to seeing this one, but Mr. Banks has to go into the rental cue due to the budget. Speaking of banks ... :)

    ReplyDelete
  7. That is interesting that Walt Disney has not been portrayed in a movie until now. I didn't think I wanted to see the movie...now maybe I will.

    Awesome blog. I follow.

    ReplyDelete
  8. mood: I think Gravity will get best visual fx and, possibly, Bullock will get best actress. I don't think the story is strong enough, overall, for it to get best picture.

    Alex: I don't think 12 Years a Slave will pull it off. Although it's certainly the kind of film that often gets best picture, I don't think it's quite strong enough. And Lincoln didn't win last year. Hustle is very entertaining, but it's not moving, so I don't think it will get chosen over Mr. Banks.

    Sia: Tom Hanks has certainly become something that I never would have considered back when he was doing Bosom Buddies.

    Rusty: Well, The Artist is certainly an example.
    You know, I hate when you forget your points almost as much as I hate when I forget mine.

    Pat: Mr. Banks is the father in Mary Poppins.

    David: Yeah, I know how that is. We really only see movies at specific times of the year for that very reason. Otherwise, I'd have movie reviews going on all year long.

    Tonja: Glad to have you along! And thanks :)

    ReplyDelete
  9. I want to see this movie...guess I will when it comes to Netflix. We used to see everything when it came out and I loved Oscar season, but now, I never have a clue. Dumb economy! :)

    ReplyDelete
  10. The thing for me is, other than horror movies, once you label something a "true story" I don't want to be involved.

    Here is (ironically) a true story: The other day I was browsing the library for a new audiobook, and I was interested in nonfiction. So I was thumbing through the books on my Kindle and I came across one called "True Story" and I INSTANTLY thought "Bleah."

    So even when I want a true story, telling me it's a true story is a turnoff.

    Plus, I really don't have any interest in the story here, true or not. So while I respect your review, I'm unlikely to see this one.

    What WOULD be great is if Tom Hanks won ALL the Oscars in a given year. I feel like he is reaching what I call the "NESTL-R" level of greatness, where we just ASSUME he won and move on to the next, the way Wheel Of Fortune now gives you those six letters automatically and the way we all agree that yes, if we could have lunch with anyone from history we'd of course include our Mom.

    Mom, meet Tom Hanks: you both are assumed to be in.

    ReplyDelete
  11. The thing for me is, other than horror movies, once you label something a "true story" I don't want to be involved.

    Here is (ironically) a true story: The other day I was browsing the library for a new audiobook, and I was interested in nonfiction. So I was thumbing through the books on my Kindle and I came across one called "True Story" and I INSTANTLY thought "Bleah."

    So even when I want a true story, telling me it's a true story is a turnoff.

    Plus, I really don't have any interest in the story here, true or not. So while I respect your review, I'm unlikely to see this one.

    What WOULD be great is if Tom Hanks won ALL the Oscars in a given year. I feel like he is reaching what I call the "NESTL-R" level of greatness, where we just ASSUME he won and move on to the next, the way Wheel Of Fortune now gives you those six letters automatically and the way we all agree that yes, if we could have lunch with anyone from history we'd of course include our Mom.

    Mom, meet Tom Hanks: you both are assumed to be in.

    ReplyDelete
  12. To be clear, I mean that in any year where Tom Hanks makes a movie, we should rename the award "The Best Actor Who Was Not Tom Hanks."

    ReplyDelete
  13. Oh Andrew, I was so nervous to click on this post when it showed up in my inbox, because I was hoping, hoping, hoping you'd give it a good review. Major sigh of relief. By the way, I did end up seeing Frozen with my daughter and we both loved it (though if I have to hear my daughter singing, "Do you want to build a snowman?" over and over for another week, I may lose it).

    ReplyDelete
  14. Not seen the movie yet, but I love Tom Hanks and Emma Thompson, both fantastic actors. I very much want to see Philomena too, Judi Dench is a brilliant actress as well.

    Captain Phillips looks good from the stuff we see on TV too.

    ReplyDelete
  15. RG: It is a dumb economy, but it's mostly due to dumb... um, I better not say.
    Anyway, I hope you enjoy the movie once it's available.

    Briane: So, wait, you're okay with movie makers twisting up book adaptations in whatever way they want, but you don't like "true" stories. I'm confused.
    Anyway...

    I think you'd actually find more of interest in this movie than you think. I wasn't interested in the subject matter, either. I mean, I could care less about the whole how-Disney-got-Poppins thing. However, this movie is about a lot more than that, and, where it really got me (other than the stuff about Goff and his daughter), is the stuff about the attachment between a creator and his/her creation.

    Jessica: I'm glad you liked Frozen!
    And, honestly, it made me chuckle that you were nervous to read the review. I'm not sure if that's good thing or not. That it made you nervous and that it made me chuckle.

    Jo: Philomena is on our list, but I'm not sure if it will hang on long enough for us to get a chance to see it.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Ohhhh... I've wanted to see Banks SO BAD... I can't wait. I've heard wonderful things about it. And of course Hanks is phenomenal, I'm sure. He is in everything!!!! :)

    ReplyDelete
  17. Saw it yesterday. I agree with everything you say here.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Oh interesting! Makes me wanna check it out sooner. I have mixed feelings about Disney--not Walt, but the entire empire. This sounds great tho!

    ReplyDelete
  19. Morgan: He is. It was a great job by everyone, actually.

    Tony: Thanks!

    Pk: It's hard not to have mixed feelings about them, but I think they have been doing a good job, lately, to make themselves better.

    ReplyDelete
  20. What I liked most about the film was how it didn’t present the Disney empire as a solution to any of the film’s problems, or even as a solution to any problems at all. Hanks’s big speech at the end reminded much of Hugh Jackman’s final monologue in THE PRESTIGE, where he talks about how magic is but a temporary escape from the harsh cruelties of modern existence. Anyone who thinks this is some kind of Disney hagiography isn’t paying attention.
    For Alaska fishing lodge info…

    ReplyDelete
  21. Cleo: Thanks for dropping by.
    I agree; it's certainly not any kind of pro-Disney movie. It just happens to not be an anti-Disney movie, and those are not the same thing.

    ReplyDelete