Mary Poppins may be practically perfect in every way, but Mary Poppins Returns has made
some interesting changes that actually contradict some of the details and events from the original
movie.
Yippee-ki-yay, movie lovers, I'm Jan and today I'm revealing six ways that Mary Poppins Returns
ignored what happened in the first film and I'll also explain why.
Some mild spoilers ahead though I avoid any significant plot reveals.
A snow globe of St Paul's Cathedral made a memorable appearance in the original movie
when Mary Poppins used it in the "Feed The Birds" lullaby she sang to young Michael and
Jane.
And that snow globe pops up again in the sequel, along with the wooden letter blocks and kite,
when the now adult Michael is searching through the attic for something he's lost.
The snow globe in this scene is used as a nostalgic way to remind us and Michael of
his time with Mary Poppins, and when he comments that he doesn't know why they've kept any
of this stuff, it shows us he's lost his child-like wonder.
The problem with this little easter egg though is that it's almost impossible for Michael
to still have that snow globe because, in the original movie, Mary Poppins took it with
her when she left the Banks family.
Yes, the magical nanny actually put the snow globe into her carpet bag, together with all
her other belongings, just before her departure, and unless she's been making secret visits
to Michael's attic to hide snow globes there during the 20-odd years since she was last
in Cherry Tree Lane, then it shouldn't have appeared there in the sequel!
When a robin accompanied Mary as she sang A Spoonful of Sugar to the Banks children
in the original movie, it was a delightful little moment.
But as sweet as that song/scene is, it's also guilty of a goof because despite the movie's
London setting, the robin that perches itself on Mary's fingers is an American robin which
is much larger than the European robin found in England.
The sequel actually fixes the original error via the decorative robin on Mary's hat, which
this time around is a European robin with a much smaller red breast than its American
cousin.
So, the new robin isn't just a fun easter egg to "A Spoonful of Sugar", but also a neat
little way of correcting that movie mistake from the first film.
Now, we've gotta talk about how Emily Blunt has introduced a Mary Poppins with a quite
distinct character to Julie Andrews' version in the original movie.
I think it's great that Blunt decided to create her own Mary rather than try and imitate what
Julie Andrews did, because, as Blunt herself has said, "No one is ever going to out-Julie
Julie Andrews."
I mentioned previously, in my comparison video, how Emily Blunt looked to author P.L.
Travers' Mary Poppins books for inspiration.
And in those books, the magical nanny is much more abrasive and ruder than the generally
more kind but firm character so many of us grew to love in Julie Andrews.
And that's why when Mary Poppins comes back in the sequel, she's got a slightly weirder
edge to her and you could say she comes across as a bit sharper.
We even see a somewhat more risqué side to Mary during her performance of the song "A
Cover Is Not The Book", where she drops her new very posh pronunciation for a Cockney
accent and sings lyrics laden with adult humour.
The very prim-and-proper nanny we met in the original movie is nowhere to be found during
this vaudevillian song-and-dance number.
In other words, this is not your childhood Mary Poppins!
When Mary Poppins returns in the new movie, so does her talking umbrella, but this time
around the parrot umbrella is quite different.
First of all, its colour has changed from green to a deep almost reddish brown colour.
And, secondly, it's also a lot more chatty.
In the original Mary Poppins film, the umbrella was silent throughout and only spoke at the
end to complain that the Banks children weren't grateful enough and to slightly scold Mary
for not admitting how much she really cared about the family.
"Practically perfect people never permit sentiment to muddle their thinking."
"Is that so?
Well, I'll tell you one thing Mary Poppins, you don't fool me a bit."
"Oh really?"
"Yes really.
I know exactly how you feel about these children."
"And if you think I'm keeping my mouth shut any longer..."
"That will be quite enough of that, thank you."
I imagine many people were pleasantly surprised when the parrot suddenly spoke for the first
time at the end of the 1964 film, and I think the creative team behind Mary Poppins Returns
realised the comic potential of giving the parrot umbrella a bigger talking part this
time around.
So, in the new movie, the umbrella gets a number of nice moments including some choice
comedic lines and a funny little interaction with Dick van Dyke, which is part of the plot.
However, the parrot's reply that 'Grown-ups forget, they always do', when Georgie asks
why his father doesn't believe that Mary Poppins arrived on a kite, makes me think the new
film has also given the parrot some aspects of the talkative jackdaw in PL Travers' Mary
Poppins books.
In the first book, for example, the jackdaw tells two of the Banks children that as kids
grow up they forget all about the magical things that happened.
As for the parrot's new look, the movie's production designer has said about the film
that "we want people to feel like they're seeing something they've seen before, but
[they're] really seeing it for the first time."
Fun fact, in the 1964 movie, the parrot umbrella was voiced by David Tomlinson, who also played
the children's father, while in Mary Poppins Returns, the voice is provided by Edward Hibbert,
who's best known as the snooty restaurant critic Gil from the TV sitcom Frasier.
Next, it's time to show how the sequel's new timeline has messed with Mary Poppins' age,
possibly confirming a popular fan theory that Mary Poppins may well, in fact, be a time
lord!
For anyone who doesn't know, the first Mary Poppins movie was set in 1910 and Julie Andrews
was 28 at the time of the US release.
However, Mary Poppins Returns is set in the 1930s, in Depression-era London, so the events
take place around 20 to 30 years after the first film.
Emily Blunt, though, is only 35, just seven years older than Julie Andrews was at the
time.
Of course, actors don't just play their own real age, but generally have a certain range
within which they're able to act convincingly.
However, whichever way you look at it, Emily Blunt doesn't look anything like 48 to 58
years old, which is what Mary Poppins would be based on Andrews' age at the time and if
Mary Poppins had aged 20 to 30 years like the time-gap between the two stories.
All in all, it seems that Mary Poppins has barely aged, even though the Banks children
have completely grown up, as has Jack, who knew Mary when he was a child.
The sequel knows this – and to be fair – owns the inconsistency, making a joke of it:
"Good heavens, it really is you!"
"You seem to have hardly aged at all."
"Really?!
How incredibly rude!"
"One never discusses a woman's age Michael.
Would have hope I'd taught you better."
As for the official explanation, the movie's producer Marc Platt has said that "Mary's
a character who lives outside of time.
She's magic.
And so she is the one character who actually doesn't age."
Admiral Boom and his first mate Mr Binnacle both return for what is actually a slightly
bigger part in the sequel.
Although the pair still fire their cannon to mark the time, in Mary Poppins Returns
there's a running joke about how they're no longer reliable, which is very different to
the reputation Boom had built up about his timekeeping in the original movie:
"What he's famous for is punctuality."
"The whole world takes its time from Greenwich, but Greenwich takes its time from Admiral
Boom."
When the sequel begins, we discover that Boom and Binnacle's cannon fire now runs consistently
late when measured against Big Ben, although Boom actually believes it's Big Ben that's
wrong!
While this is certainly a change from the 1964 film, if you've seen the new movie, you'll
know that Boom's time difference with Big Ben is part of the plot, though I won't spoil
the details.
And in a little further explanation of this change, the movie's novelisation also adds
that the admiral 'had slowed down in his later years and his sense of time had slowed with
him.'
Well, it's fun to spot these little differences, but you should know that Mary Poppins "never
explains anything", so we can probably put these changes down to Mary's magic.
Now, what do you think were the best and worst parts of the sequel?
Let me know in the comments below!
And if you enjoyed this, smash that subscribe button and notification bell so you don't
miss any new videos.
Next up, tap left to find out all the amazing details you missed in Mary Poppins Returns
or tap right for another Mary Poppins video you're sure to like.
Thanks for watching and see ya next time.
Yippee-ki-yay, movie lovers!