General

A Very “Mary” Christmas: Part I

In the first installment of a four-part series, Jim Hill talks about the significant impact that author P.L. Travers had on the production of the “Mary Poppins” motion picture.

Published

20 years ago

December 20, 2004

Jim Hill

With Disney’s stage version of “Mary Poppins” opening to great acclaim last week in London and the 40th anniversary version of this Academy Award winning film finally going on sale as a 2-disc DVD set, a lot of attention is suddenly being paid to “Poppins” creator P.L. Travers. With many reviewers questioning whether the late author would have actually approved of the darker tone that Disney Theatrical & Cameron Mackintosh chose to impose on their new stage show.

Of course, Disneyana history buffs have long known that Mrs. Travers had a somewhat prickly reputation. That the official Disney Company histories often portray the Australian-born author as being somewhat difficult to deal with. Take — for example — this passage from Bob Thomas’ “Walt Disney: An American Original” , which describes a particular memorable encounter between the “Mary Poppins” creator and Mr. Disney:

“Mary Poppins” was premiered at Grauman’s Chinese Theater in Hollywood on August 27, 1964. The industry responded with cheers, and Walt realizes that he had a hit of immense proportions. He was enjoying the triumphant glow at the post-premiere party when Mrs. Travers approached him. “It’s quite nice,” she began. “Miss Andrews is satisfactory as Mary Poppins, but Mr. Van *** is all wrong, and I don’t really like mixing the little cartoon characters and the live actors. When do we start cutting it?”

Walt smiled indulgently. “The contract says that when the picture is finished, it’s my property,” he replied. “We’re not going to change a thing.”

That’s the exchange that most Disneyana history buffs know Mrs. Travers by. Where she comes across as … Well … kind of a loony. A woman who walks out of the world premiere of “Mary Poppins,” a film that many have called Walt Disney’s crowning achievement, and insists that changes had to be made in order to “improve” the picture.

Well, the fact of the matter is … P.L. Travers was no loony. I prefer to think of her as the precursor to J. K. Rowling. You know, the author of the best-selling “Harry Potter” series? Ms. Rowling — when she finally sold the film rights to her much-beloved characters — didn’t just roll over for the executives at Warner Brothers. J.K. insisted having an awful lot of say in how the movie versions of her books were made. Thanks to the terms of the contract that Rowling worked out with Warner execs, J.K. had final say over where these movies would be made (the U.K., of course) and who would play he rcharacters (Rowling insisted on an all-English cast). She even has final approval over each of the films’ screenplays.

P.L. Travers — as it turns out — had similar powers over the production of “Mary Poppins.” Back in 1960, Disney was so desperate to make a movie based on Travers’ character that Walt did something that he had never done before. He gave the author final approval of the screen treatment of her stories. (That’s why you’ll see P.L. ‘s name listed as “Creative Consultant” in the film’s credits.)

And Mrs. Travers … Well, she took this responsibility very seriously. Don’t believe me? Then go out and pick up a copy of the new CD version of the “Mary Poppins” soundtrack. Among the extra features on this 2-disc set are recordings of story sessions that the author had with the composers of “Mary Poppins” ‘ score, Richard M. & Robert B. Sherman. And it’s really fascinating to hear how protective Pamela Travers is of the character she created.

Sure, it’s easy to read that excerpt from Bob Thomas’ Disney bio and think: “This woman really doesn’t have a clue when it comes to successfully translating ‘Mary Poppins’ to the big screen.” Ah, but that’s not really the case, folks.

Listen to the commentary track on your new “Mary Poppins” DVD. Or — better yet — read all the “Poppins Pop-Up Fun Facts” that the nice folks at Buena Vista Home Entertainment have embedded in this 2-disc set. And suddenly a very different impression of P.L. Travers starts to emerge.

How so? Well, what if I were to tell you that:

It was Mrs. Travers who suggested Mary Poppins — as part of the film’s “Jolly Holiday” sequence — warn Jane & Michael to be careful & not ” … fall and smudge the drawing.
That it was P.L. Travers who insisted that “Stay Awake” be kept in the film. At the time, the movie’s production team was worried that — what with “Stay Awake” & “Feed the Birds” — that the score for “Mary Poppins” had one too many lullabies. But Mrs. Travers felt that it was the perfect Poppins touch that Mary would use reverse psychology on Jane & Michael. That she’d sing a song that would insist that the Banks children “Stay Awake” even as it lulled the two children to sleep. Which is why that song remained in the picture.
Speaking of Jane Banks … P.L. Travers told Walt that she had seen a young actress named Karen Dotrice whom the author thought would be perfect for the part of Mr. & Mrs. Banks’ daughter. It was only then that Walt revealed to Mrs. Travers that he had already used Karen in his studio’s 1961 release, “The Three Lives of Thomasina.” More importantly, that Mr. Disney also thought that Ms. Dotrice was an excellent choice for Jane Banks. Which is how Karen eventually wound up with this role.
P.L. Travers was also the one who came up with some of the more memorable pieces of dialogue in the movie. Mary’s line — “And what would happen to me, I ask, if I loved all the children I said goodbye to?” — came straight from the author. As did Bert’s final bit of dialogue in the picture: “Goodbye, Mary Poppins. Don’t stay away too long.”

You see what I’m saying here, folks? This isn’t just some peculiar British author doing everything that she could to make life difficult for these Hollywood types. During that week that she spent on the Disney lot reviewing the proposed story treatment for the “Mary Poppins” movie, P.L. Travers was an active participant in the process. Sure, she was trying to protect her character. But — at the same time — Mrs. Travers wanted to make sure that the folks at Disney were actually making an entertaining motion picture.

And by insisting that Disney get all the little details (EX: That all the characters in the movie — except Bert, of course — always call the film’s title character by her full name, Mary Poppins) as well as all the big details (I.E. There was to be no absolutely hint of romance between Bert & Mary. That *** Van ***’s character was to remain a gentleman throughout the whole film) right, the end result was that “Mary Poppins” did ultimately become a very entertaining motion picture. One that has clearly stood the test of time.

Not in spite of P.L. Travers’ suggestions. But often directly because of them.

Of course, in the end, I guess all us *** Van *** fans out there should be grateful that P.L. Travers ultimately didn’t wind up having as much power over the production of “Mary Poppins” as J.K. Rowling does over the “Harry Potter” pictures. After all, J.K. has final say over who gets cast in what roles in the “Potter” films. Which is how Robbie Coltrane won the part of Hagrid over Robin Williams, the American actor that Warners execs had been desperately pushing on Ms. Rowling. With the hope that the inclusion of this Academy Award winning comic might help broaden the appeal of the “Harry Potter” pictures.

Well, Ms. Rowling held her ground against those studio execs. Which is why Mr. Coltrane wound up playing Hogwart’s much-beloved gameskeeper in the first three “Potter” films and seems almost certain to hang onto this role for the rest of the films in the series.

Whereas Mrs. Travers … Well, while she approved of Miss Andrews in the role of Mary Poppins (P.L. felt that Julie had the inner integrity for Mary Poppins. More importantly, that Andrews had just the right nose for the “Practically Perfect” nanny), P.L. is said to have detested *** Van ***’s cockney accent.

Truth be told, Travers had initially insisted that — just as J.K. Rowling had with the “Harry Potter” movies — that “Mary Poppins” feature an all-British cast. Walt refused P.L.’s request. Using the very same argument that those Warners executives used on Ms. Rowling, insisting that — by using only actors from the U.K. — the film would have limited box office appeal.

Clearly, Walt eventually won this argument. Which is how American performers like *** Van *** and Ed Wynn wound up with such prominent roles in “Poppins.”

But — as is demonstated by that excerpt from Bob Thomas’ book — P.L. Travers never ever warmed up to Van ***’s performance as the chimney sweep. Which was why — when the studio & the author began talking about doing a “Mary Poppins” sequel in the mid-1980s — Mrs. Travers insisted that Disney hire some other actor to portray Bert in the long-awaited follow-up to the 1964 smash hit.

What’s that you say? You’ve never heard anything about the “Mary Poppins” sequel that the Walt Disney Company wanted to make. Or — for that matter — any of the follow-up projects that Disney had wanted *** Van *** and Mary Poppins to star? Well, then maybe you should drop by JHM over the next few days. When I’ll try & fill you in on some of the details.

COMING ON WEDNESDAY: In Part II of this series, Jim talks about a “Poppins” follow-up project that was to have starred Julie Andrews and *** Van ***: “The Poet and the Nightingale.”

General

Seward Johnson bronzes add a surreal, artistic touch to NYC’s Garment District

Published

9 years ago

June 23, 2015

Jim Hill

Greetings from NYC. Nancy and I drove down from New
Hampshire yesterday because we'll be checking out
Disney Consumer Products' annual Holiday Showcase later today.

Anyway … After checking into our hotel (i.e., The Paul.
Which is located down in NYC's NoMad district), we decided to grab some dinner.
Which is how we wound up at the Melt Shop.

Photo by Jim Hill

Which is this restaurant that only sells grilled cheese sandwiches.
This comfort food was delicious, but kind of on the heavy side.

Photo by Jim Hill

Which is why — given that it was a beautiful summer night
— we'd then try and walk off our meals. We started our stroll down by the Empire
State Building
…

Photo by Jim Hill

… and eventually wound up just below Times
Square (right behind where the Waterford Crystal Times Square New
Year's Eve Ball is kept).

Photo by Jim Hill

But you know what we discovered en route? Right in the heart
of Manhattan's Garment District
along Broadway between 36th and 41st? This incredibly cool series of life-like
and life-sized sculptures that Seward
Johnson has created.

Photo by Jim Hill

And — yes — that is Abraham Lincoln (who seems to have
slipped out of WDW's Hall of Presidents when no one was looking and is now
leading tourists around Times Square). These 18 painted
bronze pieces (which were just installed late this past Sunday night / early
Monday morning) range from the surreal to the all-too-real.

Photo by Jim Hill

Some of these pieces look like typical New Yorkers. Like the
business woman planning out her day …

Photo by Jim Hill

… the postman delivering the mail …

Photo by Jim Hill

… the hot dog vendor working at his cart …

Photo by Jim Hill

… the street musician playing for tourists …

Photo by Jim Hill

Not to mention the tourists themselves.

Photo by Jim Hill

But right alongside the bronze businessmen …

Photo by Jim Hill

… and the tired grandmother hauling her groceries home …

Photo by Jim Hill

… there were also statues representing people who were
from out-of-town …

Photo by Jim Hill

… or — for that matter — out-of-time.

Photo by Jim Hill

These were the Seward Johnson pieces that genuinely beguiled. Famous impressionist paintings brought to life in three dimensions.

Note the out-of-period water bottle that some tourist left
behind. Photo by Jim Hill

Some of them so lifelike that you actually had to pause for
a moment (especially as day gave way to night in the city) and say to yourself
"Is that one of the bronzes? Or just someone pretending to be one of these
bronzes?"

Mind you, for those of you who aren't big fans of the
impressionists …

Photo by Jim Hill

… there's also an array of American icons. Among them
Marilyn Monroe …

Photo by Jim Hill

… and that farmer couple from Grant Wood's "American
Gothic."

Photo by Jim Hill

But for those of you who know your NYC history, it's hard to
beat that piece which recreates Alfred Eisenstaedt's famous photograph of V-J Day in Times Square.

Photo by Jim Hill

By the way, a 25-foot-tall version of this particular Seward
Johnson piece ( which — FYI — is entitled "Embracing Peace") will actually
be placed in Times Square for a few days on or around August 14th to commemorate the 70th
anniversary of Victory Over Japan Day (V-J Day).

Photo by Jim Hill

By the way, if you'd like to check these Seward Johnson bronzes in
person (which — it should be noted — are part of the part of the Garment
District Alliance's new public art offering) — you'd best schedule a trip to
the City sometime over the next three months. For these pieces will only be on
display now through September 15th.

General

Wondering what you should “Boldly Go” see at the movies next year? The 2015 Licensing Expo offers you some clues

Published

9 years ago

June 10, 2015

Jim Hill

Greeting from the 2015 Licensing Expo, which is being held
at the Mandalay Bay
Convention Center in Las
Vegas.

Photo by Jim Hill

I have to admit that I enjoy covering the Licensing Expo.
Mostly becomes it allows bloggers & entertainment writers like myself to
get a peek over the horizon. Scope out some of the major motion pictures &
TV shows that today's vertically integrated entertainment conglomerates
(Remember when these companies used to be called movie studios?) will be
sending our way over the next two years or so.

Photo by Jim Hill

Take — for example — all of "The Secret Life of
Pets" banners that greeted Expo attendees as they made their way to the
show floor today. I actually got to see some footage from this new Illumination
Entertainment production (which will hit theaters on July 8, 2016) the last time I was in Vegas. Which
was for CinemaCon back in April. And the five or so minutes of film that I viewed
suggested that "The Secret Life of Pets" will be a really funny
animated feature.

Photo by Jim Hill

Mind you, Universal Pictures wanted to make sure that Expo
attendees remembered that there was another Illumination Entertainment production
coming-to-a-theater-near-them before "The Secret Life of Pets" (And
that's "Minions," the "Despicable Me" prequel. Which
premieres at the Annecy International Animated Film Festival next week but
won't be screened stateside 'til July 10th of this year). Which is why they had
three minions who were made entirely out of LEGOS loitering out in the lobby.

Photo by Jim Hill

And Warner Bros. — because they wanted "Batman v
Superman: Dawn of Justice" to start trending on Twitter today — brought
the Batmobile to Las Vegas.

Photo by Jim Hill

Not to mention full-sized macquettes of Batman, Superman and
Wonder Woman. Just so conventioneers could then see what these DC superheroes
would actually look like in this eagerly anticipated, March 25, 2016 release.

Photo by Jim Hill

That's the thing that can sometimes be a wee bit frustrating
about the Licensing Expo. It's all about delayed gratification. You'll come
around a corner and see this 100 foot-long ad for "The Peanuts Movie"
and think "Hey, that looks great. I want to see that Blue Sky Studios production
right now." It's only then that you notice the fine print and realize that
"The Peanuts Movie" doesn't actually open in theaters 'til November
6th of this year.

Photo by Jim Hill

And fan of Blue Sky's "Ice Age" film franchise are in for an even
longer wait. Given that the latest installment in that top grossing series
doesn't arrive in theaters 'til July
15, 2016.

Photo by Jim Hill

Of course, if you're one of those people who needs immediate
gratification when it comes to your entertainment, there was stuff like that to
be found at this year's Licensing Expo. Take — for example — how the WWE
booth was actually shaped like a wrestling ring. Which — I'm guessing — meant
that if the executives of World Wrestling Entertainment, Inc. didn't like
the offer that you were making, they were then allowed to toss you out over the
top rope, Royal Rumble-style.

Photo by Jim Hill

I also have to admit that — as a longtime Star Trek fan —
it was cool to see the enormous Starship Enterprise that hung in place over the
CBS booth. Not to mention getting a glimpse of the official Star Trek 50th
Anniversary logo.

Photo by Jim Hill

I was also pleased to see lots of activity in The Jim Henson
Company booth. Which suggests that JHC has actually finally carved out a
post-Muppets identity for itself.

Photo by Jim Hill

Likewise for all of us who were getting a little concerned
about DreamWorks Animation (what with all the layoffs & write-downs &
projects that were put into turnaround or outright cancelled last year), it was
nice to see that booth bustling.

Photo by Jim Hill

Every so often, you'd come across some people who were
promoting a movie that you weren't entirely sure that you actually wanted to
see (EX: "Angry Birds," which Sony Pictures Entertainment / Columbia
Pictures will be releasing to theaters on May 20, 2016). But then you remembered that Clay Kaytis —
who's this hugely talented former Walt Disney Animation Studios animator — is
riding herd on "Angry Birds" with Fergal Reilly. And you'd think
"Well, if Clay's working on 'Angry Birds,' I'm sure this animated feature
will turn out fine."

Photo by Jim Hill

Mind you, there were reminders at this year's Licensing Expo
of great animated features that we're never going to get to see now. I still
can't believe — especially after that brilliant proof-of-concept footage
popped up online last year — that Sony execs decided not to go forward
with production of Genndy Tartakovsky's
"Popeye" movie. But that's the
cruel thing about the entertainment business, folks. It will sometime break
your heart.

Photo by Jim Hill

And make no mistake about this. The Licensing Expo is all
about business. That point was clearly driven home at this year's show when —
as you walked through the doors of the Mandalay
Bay Convention Center
— the first thing that you saw was the Hasbros Booth. Which was this gleaming,
sleek two story-tall affair full of people who were negotiating deals &
signing contracts for all of the would-be summer blockbusters that have already
announced release dates for 2019 & beyond.

Photo by Jim Hill

"But what about The Walt Disney Company?," you
ask. "Weren't they represented on the show floor at this year's Licensing
Expo?" Not really, not. I mean, sure. There were a few companies there hyping
Disney-related products. Take — for example — the Disney Wikkeez people.

Photo by Jim Hill

I'm assuming that some Disney Consumer Products exec is
hoping that Wikkeez will eventually become the new Tsum Tsum. But to be blunt,
these little hard plastic figures don't seem to have the same huggable charm
that those stackable plush do. But I've been wrong before. So let's see what
happens with Disney Wikkeez once they start showing up on the shelves of the
Company's North American retail partners.

Photo by Jim Hill

And speaking of Disney's retail partners … They were
meeting with Mouse House executives behind closed doors one floor down from the
official show floor for this year's Licensing Expo.

Photo by Jim Hill

And the theme for this year's invitation-only Disney shindig? "Timeless
Stories" involving the Disney, Pixar, Marvel & Lucasfilm brands that
would then appeal to "tomorrow's consumer."

Photo by Jim Hill

And just to sort of hammer home the idea that Disney is no
longer the Company which cornered the market when it comes to little girls
(i.e., its Disney Princess and Disney Fairies franchises), check out this
wall-sized Star Wars-related image that DCP put up just outside of one of its
many private meeting rooms. "See?," this carefully crafted photo
screams. "It isn't just little boys who want to wield the Force. Little
girls also want to grow up and be Lords of the Sith."

Photo by Jim Hill

One final, kind-of-ironic note: According to this banner,
Paramount Pictures will be releasing a movie called "Amusement Park"
to theaters sometime in 2017.

Photo by Jim Hill

Well, given all the "Blackfish" -related issues
that have been dogged SeaWorld Parks & Entertainment over the past two years, I'm
just hoping that they'll still be in the amusement park business come 2017.

Your thoughts?

General

It takes more than three circles to craft a Classic version of Mickey Mouse

Published

9 years ago

June 9, 2015

Jim Hill

You know what Mickey Mouse looks like, right? Little guy,
big ears?

Truth be told, Disney's corporate symbol has a lot of
different looks. If Mickey's interacting with Guests at Disneyland
Park (especially this summer, when
the Happiest Place on Earth
is celebrating its 60th anniversary), he looks & dresses like this.

Or when he's appearing in one of those Emmy Award-winning shorts that Disney
Television Animation has produced (EX: "Bronco Busted," which debuts
on the Disney Channel tonight at 8 p.m. ET / PT), Mickey is drawn in a such a
way that he looks hip, cool, edgy & retro all at the same time.

Looking ahead to 2017 now, when Disney Junior rolls out "Mickey and the
Roadster Racers," this brand-new animated series will feature a sportier version
of Disney's corporate symbol. One that Mouse House managers hope will persuade
preschool boys to more fully embrace this now 86 year-old character.

That's what most people don't realize about the Mouse. The
Walt Disney Company deliberately tailors Mickey's look, even his style of
movement, depending on what sort of project / production he's appearing in.

Take — for example — Disney
California Adventure
Park's "World of Color:
Celebrate!" Because Disney's main mouse would be co-hosting this new
nighttime lagoon show with ace emcee Neil Patrick Harris, Eric Goldberg really had
to step up Mickey's game. Which is why this master Disney animator created
several minutes of all-new Mouse animation which then showed that Mickey was
just as skilled a showman as Neil was.

Better yet, let's take a look at what the folks at Avalanche Studios just went
through as they attempted to create a Classic version of Mickey & Minnie.
One that would then allow this popular pair to become part of Disney Infinity
3.0.

"I won't lie to you. We were under a lot of pressure to
get the look of this particular version of Mickey — he's called Red Pants
Mickey around here — just right," said Jeff Bunker, the VP of Art
Development at Avalanche Studios, during a recent phone interview. "When
we brought Sorcerer Mickey into Disney Infinity 1.0 back in January of 2014,
that one was relatively easy because … Well, everyone knows what Mickey Mouse
looked like when he appeared in 'Fantasia.' "

"But this time around, we were being asked to design
THE Mickey & Minnie," Bunker continued. "And given that these Classic
Disney characters have been around in various different forms for the better
part of the last century … Well, which look was the right look?"

Which is why Jeff and his team at Avalanche Studios began watching hours &
hours of Mickey Mouse shorts. As they tried to get a handle on which look would
work best for these characters in Disney Infinity 3.0.

"And we went all the way back to the very start of Mickey's career. We began
with 'Steamboat Willie' and then watched all of those black & white Mickey shorts
that Walt made back in the late 1920s & early 1930s. From there, we
transitioned to his Technicolor shorts. Which is when Mickey went from being
this pie-eyed, really feisty character to more of a well-behaved leading
man," Bunker recalled. "We then finished out our Mouse marathon by
watching all of those new Mickey shorts that Paul Rudish & his team have
been creating for Disney Television Animation. Those cartoons really recapture
a lot of the spirit and wild slapstick fun that Mickey's early, black &
white shorts had."

But given that the specific assignment that Avalanche Studios had been handed
was to create the most appealing looking, likeable version of Mickey Mouse
possible … In the end, Jeff and his team wound up borrowing bits & pieces
from a lot of different versions of the world's most famous mouse. So that
Classic Mickey would then look & move in a way that best fit the sort of
gameplay which people would soon be able to experience with Disney Infinity
3.0.

"That — in a lot of ways — was actually the toughest
part of the Classic Mickey design project. You have to remember that one of the
key creative conceits of Disney Infinity
is that all the characters which appear in this game are toys," Bunker
stated. "Okay. So they're beautifully detailed, highly stylized toy
versions of beloved Disney, Pixar, Marvel & Lucasfilm characters. But
they're still supposed to be toys. So our Classic versions of Mickey &
Minnie have the same sort of thickness & sturdiness to them that toys have.
So that they'll then be able to fit right in with all of the rest of the
characters that Avalanche Studios had previously designed for Disney Infinity."

And then there was the matter of coming up with just the
right pose for Classic Mickey & Minnie. Which — to hear Jeff tell the
story — involved input from a lot of Disney upper management.

"Everyone within the Company seemed to have an opinion
about how Mickey & Minnie should be posed. More to the point, if you Google
Mickey, you then discover that there are literally thousands of poses out there
for these two. Though — truth be told — a lot of those kind of play off the
way Mickey poses when he's being Disney's corporate symbol," Bunker said.
"But what I was most concerned about was that Mickey's pose had to work
with Minnie's pose. Because we were bringing the Classic versions of these
characters up into Disney Infinity 3.0 at the exact same time. And we wanted to
make sure — especially for those fans who like to put their Disney Infinity
figures on display — that Mickey's pose would then complement Minnie.

Which is why Jeff & the crew at Avalanche Studios
decided — when it came to Classic Mickey & Minnie's pose — that they
should go all the way back to the beginning. Which is why these two Disney icons
are sculpted in such a way that it almost seems as though you're witnessing the
very first time Mickey set eyes on Minnie.

"And what was really great about that was — as soon as
we began showing people within the Company this pose — everyone at Disney
quickly got on board with the idea. I mean, the Classic Mickey that we sculpted
for Disney Infinity 3.0 is clearly a very playful, spunky character. But at the
same time, he's obviously got eyes for Minnie," Bunker concluded. "So
in the end, we were able to come up with Classic versions of these characters
that will work well within the creative confines of Disney Infinity 3.0 but at
the same time please those Disney fans who just collect these figures because
they like the way the Disney Infinity characters look."

So now that this particular design project is over, does
Jeff regret that Mouse House upper management was so hands-on when it came to
making sure that the Classic versions of Mickey & Minnie were specifically
tailored to fit the look & style of gameplay found in Disney Infinity 3.0?

"To be blunt, we go through this every time we add a new character to the
game. The folks at Lucasfilm were just as hands-on when we were designing the
versions of Darth Vader and Yoda that will also soon be appearing in Disney
Infinity 3.0," Bunker laughed. "So in the end, if the character's
creators AND the fans are happy, then I'm happy."

This article was originally posted on the Huffington Post's Entertainment page on Tuesday, June 9, 2015