Okay. It’s now late 1965 / early 1966. And “Mary Poppins” is the biggest thing to happen to Walt Disney Productions since … Well … Since “Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs” initially hit theaters back in December of 1937.
The profits from that picture keep pouring in. As do the awards and the acclaim. And Disney studio execs think: “Well, I could get used to this. Why don’t we just give audiences what they want and crank out another ‘Mary Poppins’?”
The only problem is … Walt Disney wasn’t your average studio head. After all, this was the guy who’d regularly trot out his “You can’t top pigs with pigs” speech whenever anybody brought up the subject of sequels.
But studio staffers knew that — starting in the early 1960s — the Old Mousetro has somewhat softened his stance on the whole “Disney doesn’t do sequels” issue. I mean, if that really wasn’t the case, then why would Walt have allowed 1957’s “Old Yeller” to be followed by 1963’s “Savage Sam”? Or 1961’s “The Absent-Minded Professor” to be followed by 1963’s “Son of Flubber”? Or 1964’s “The Misadventures of Merlin Jones” to be followed by 1965’s “The Monkey’s Uncle.”
You get what I’m saying here, folks? By this point in the company’s history, Walt Disney Productions was already in the sequel business. They just didn’t like people to notice.
Anyway … Disney execs are anxious to get another “Poppins” sized project out there. Another film that would hit and hit big. So — with Walt’s blessing — they tried a few more musicals: 1967’s “The Happiest Millionaire” and 1968’s “The One and Only, Genuine Original Family Band.” But even as they’re watching these still-in-production films in dailies form, it’s already painfully apparent that “Millionaire” and “Band” lack that “Mary Poppins” magic.
But what can Disney do? Walt’s still out there, telling the press that he doesn’t want to do a “Poppins” sequel. Saying things like ” Time is getting on, and I still have things left to do … I don’t want to go back and cover the same ground.”
It’s clear that Walt doesn’t like repeating himself. Otherwise why would he continue to block production of the already-in-development “Bedknobs & Broomsticks”? Out of concern that the proposed film — what with its mix of music, magic, elaborate special effects and animated sequences — already had far too much in common with “Poppins.” Which would allow Disney’s critics to say: “Ah, the old guy’s just out of ideas now.”
Which was why Walt — even though the Sherman Brothers had already written written songs for “Bedknobs & Broomsticks,” even though Don DaGradi had already storyboarded 80% of the picture — still refused to let production go foward. Maybe in a few years it would be a smart move for Walt Disney Productions to make a movie based on those Mary Norton books. But not now.
Which left Disney studio execs with precious few options. Until one enterprising executive went burrowing through the company’s archives — looking at projects that Walt Disney Productions had once considered producing — and came across that file for the long-ago-cancelled Hans Christian Andersen film.
You see, as far back as 1937, Walt Disney had been toying with the idea of producing a feature-length film that chronicled the life of this Danish-born storyteller. A motion picture that would skillfully combine live action & animation in an effort to bring such well-known Andersen fairy tales as “The Emperor’s New Clothes,” “Thumbelina,” “The Ugly Duckling” and — of course — “The Little Mermaid” to life.
The only problem was … Veteran Hollywood producer Sameul Goldwyn had already announced his intentions to produce a film based on Andersen’s life. Even going so far as to register the title for his proposed motion picture — “The Life of Hans Christian Andersen” — with the Hays Office.
Obviously, it didn’t make much sense for both of these two production companies to make separate Andersen bio pics. Which was why — in March of 1940 — a compromise was reached. Sameul Goldwyn & Walt Disney would work together to produce a single Hans Christian Anderson film. With Disney animating all of the fairy tale sequences to be featured in the picture, while Goldwyn would supervise all of the film’s live action sequences.
Sounds like a match made in Hollywood heaven, right? Well, it’s just too bad that World War II intervened. After the war, Walt Disney Productions found itself in a hell of a financial hole. Barely able to afford producing any of its own films, let alone helping to bankroll an ambitious co-production like “The Life of Hans Christian Andersen.”
Which was why — when Sameul Goldwyn finally decided to go forward with his Andersen bio pic in the early 1950s — he had to do so alone. At that point in the game, Walt wasn’t interesting in doing any co-productions. Disney had already moved to bigger and better dreams. Like Disneyland and his studio’s brave foray into the world of television production.
But still — while that Andersen bio pic co-production was still under consideration — Disney artists had churned out hundreds of conceptual drawings. Some of which show the tall, gawky author trying to make his way in polite European society. While still others colorfully illustrated the many fairy tales that Andersen could tell over the course of the picture, like “The Little Fir Tree” and “The Steadfast Tin Soldier.”
Clearly, this material had the makings of a great motion picture. One that Sameul Goldwyn had actually missed with his 1952 production, “Hans Christian Andersen.” (Don’t get me wrong, folks. That Danny Kaye film does have a wonderful score by Frank Loesser, not to mention some pretty amazing production values. But it’s not really the story of Hans Christian Andersen. The film’s screenplay — written by industry giants Myles Connolly, Moss Hart and Ben Hecht — actually disregards what happened to Hans in his lifetime. Preferring instead to weave out of whole cloth this totally bogus tale of how Andersen, the poor cobbler, supposedly fell in love with this beautiful ballerina.
Speaking of weaving … Here’s some interesting bits of trivia that show how “Hans Christian Andersen,” “Mary Poppins” and the world of Walt Disney are all tightly woven together : When Walt Disney was first considering which stars to cast in what roles for “Mary Poppins,” which Hollywood veteran did he initially consider for the role of Bert? That’s right. “Hans Christian Andersen” star Danny Kaye.
And — when that Sameul Goldwyn film was finally adapted for the stage in December of 1977 — which former Disney star wound up playing the title role in “Hans Christian Andersen”? Tommy Steele, who played the singing-and-dancing butler in “The Happiest Millionaire.” The movie that Walt Disney had hoped would eventually top “Mary Poppins.”
It’s really weird how so many of these stories are inter-connected, don’t you think? Speaking of stories … Let’s get back to today’s column, which is already in progress.)
As I was saying … This material clearly had the makings of a major motion picture. Which was why — starting as far back as 1966 — Walt Disney Productions execs began talking up this Hans Christian Andersen film as a possible “Mary Poppins” follow-up project.
Here’s the way that studio executives hoped that this project would eventually play out. *** Van *** & Julie Andrews would agreed to reteam in a film tentatively titled “The Poet and the Nightingale.” Van *** would (of course) play the role of Hans Christian Andersen, while Andrews would play Andersen’s love interest, the legendary concert singer, Jenny Lind AKA “The Swedish Nightingale.”
Supporting these two headliners would be virtually the entire “Mary Poppins” production team. Producer/writer Bill Walsh, director Robert Stevenson, screenwriter Don DaGradi, songwriters Richard M. & Robert B. Sherman, musical director Irwin Kostal, choreographers Marc Breax and Dee Dee Wood. Not to mention Disney’s army of animators, matte painters and special effects artists.
That sounds like a wonderful idea for a film, doesn’t it? Disney execs certainly thought so. Which is why they tried desperately to put this project in motion. But — sadly — I guess “The Poet and the Nightingale” just wasn’t meant to be.
What caused this project to derail? A number of things, actually. The success of “Mary Poppins,” for one. Julie Andrews & *** Van *** became such huge stars in the wake of that 1964 Walt Disney Productions release that they both wound up being signed up for a number of major motion pictures. Which meant that Julie & ***’s dance card was already filled for several years ahead when Disney execs tried to talk with the two stars about possibly appearing in “The Poet and the Nightingale.”
And — as for a “Mary Poppins” re-union film — Albert “Cubby” Broccoli already had one in the works (sort of) : “Chitty Chitty Bang Bang.” Given that “Mary Poppins” had actually out-grossed his own 1965 production, “Goldfinger,” Cubby decided that there was real money to be made in the family film market. Which was why Broccoli contacted Disney and asked Walt if he’d be interested in doing a co-production. A motion picture based on Ian Fleming’s non-James Bond-based book, “Chitty Chitty Bang Bang, or The Magical Car.”
As you might expect (given what happened with Sameul Goldwyn), Walt wasn’t very keen on the idea of doing a co-production. So he politely told Cubby “No.” But that didn’t deter Broccoli. If he couldn’t work directly with Disney, the man who actually produced “Mary Poppins” …. Well, he’d just hire away all of the talented people that had worked with Walt on that picture.
Which is why many people consider “Chitty Chitty Bang Bang” to be the unofficial “Mary Poppins” re-union film. After all, on this one picture, you’ve got “Poppins” star *** Van ***, songwriters Richard M. & Robert B. Sherman, musical director Irwin Kostal and choreographers Marc Breaux and Dee Dee Wood. The very people who made “Mary Poppins” ‘s musical sequences so memorable.
Sadly, “Chitty Chitty Bang Bang” finally opened in December of 1968, the film didn’t do “Mary Poppins” -sized business. Nor did any of the other original musicals — like 1967’s “Dr. Dolittle” or 1969’s “Goodbye, Mr. Chips” — that Hollywood put into production in the mid-to-late 1960s. Even films that were based on established Broadway hits like 1966’s “A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum” or 1969’s “Hello, Dolly!” failed to perform at the box office.
Clearly, audiences’ tastes were changing. The people who had initially embraced “Mary Poppins” hadn’t responded as enthusiastically to Disney’s follow-up films, “The Happiest Millionaire” and “The One and Only, Genuine Original Family Band.” Which indicated to Disney studio execs that the era of the original movie musical in Hollywood was now over. Which was these same executives reluctantly tabled their plans to produce “The Poet and the Nightingale” by the late 1960s.
Now don’t be too harsh in judging these execs, folks. You have to understand that these Disney Productions officials lost a lot of their confidence when Walt died back in December of 1966. Almost immediately, these execs began second-guessing themselves. Wondering if the decisions that they were making were actually the same sorts of decisions that Walt would have made if he were still alive.
Plus you have to understand that Disney studio executives had kind of lost their enthusiasm for *** Van *** by this point in the late 1960s. Some say that it was the remarks that *** had made to the press during the publicity tour for “Chitty Chitty Bang Bang” (Reports from that period have Van *** saying things like “This picture will out-Disney Disney”), while still others insist that it was just that solid string of flops that the sitcom vet had starred in in the late 1960s / early 1970s. Either way, *** Van *** was no longer at the top of Disney’s “A” list.
Whereas Julie Andrews … She remained the star that Disney most wanted to get back in bed with. Which was why — in late 1969 / early 1970 — when the studio was gearing up production for “Bedknobs & Broomsticks,” they offered Andrews the film’s lead role: Amateur sorceress Eglantine Price.
The only problem was … Julie couldn’t make up her mind about whether or not she actually wanted to take this role. Having so enjoyed working on “Mary Poppins” (and given that the “Bedknobs & Broomsticks” production team was made up almost entirely of “Poppins” veterans), she knew that this film would be a lot of fun to work on.
The only problem was … Andrews worried about how Hollywood would perceive her taking another job at Disney? Would this be seen as Julie taking a step backwards? That — rather than having her career moving forward — here she was, returning to work at the Mouse House. Appearing in yet another musical where she’d play yet another prim English woman who dabbled in magic.
So Andrews hemmed and hawed for months, trying to decide what to do. Disney executives — more out of fustration than anything else, thinking that Julie’s delay in deciding meant that she wasn’t really interested in performing the role — finally offered the part to Angela Lansbury.
Which was why — virtually on the very same day that the Broadway vet said “Yes, I’d love to be your Eglantine Price” — “Bedknobs” producer Bill Walsh recieves a telegram from Julie Andrews. Which says (in essense) that the “Mary Poppins” star had given this matter plenty of thought and that Julie had finally decided that — yes — she’d love to play Eglantine Price too.
Which was when Bill had to make that unfortunate phone call. Where he had to explain that Disney had just gotten tired of waiting around for Andrews to make up her mind. Which was why — in the end — the studio had wound up giving this role to Angela Lansbury instead.
The upside of this whole unfortunate situation is … Welll … This wouldn’t be the last time that Disney Company execs would call Julie Andrews and ask her to appear in a new film for the studio. And — no — I’m NOT talking about 2001’s “The Princess Diaries” and/or 2004’s “Princess Diaries II.”
COMING SOON: When this four part series continues, Jim Hill talks about what happened when Michael Eisner first arrived at the Walt Disney Company and immediately set the studio to work on a “Mary Poppins” sequel.