heatherneretlis

I was crying at the end and felt I didn't quite know why even though I knew exactly why, it was sad in a way that is primal and almost unconscious. This makes zero sense but there you go.

This episode has the saddest death I've ever watched. When Claire's mum dies and she is trying hold her in her arms but she's so limp and like her arms are just hanging there, man the feels hit me so hard.

Technically it was fantastic, with amazing visuals and great acting as well as hilarious accents that added a fun touch to it. But the music was lacking; it was either fast paced or extremely slow music with no inbetween. I don't know, the rhyming was weird or something, sometimes they tried to copy the fast pace of how the words were sung in the first but went almost too fast so you couldn't understand what was being said. The song I enjoyed the most was 'the place where lost things go' followed by 'a cover is not the book' but even then in the book cover song bits were sung so fast I couldn't understand. Some things felt forced emotionally, and the songs just lacked a sense of originality and heart, and sometimes the lyrics were odd or rather overdone and cringy. I guess the best phrase to describe what I mean is 'on the nose' but not in a good way. I liked the parallels but also didn't... It's an odd feeling to feel so conflicted but for example I enjoyed the parallel with Admiral Boom and the clocks because they expanded on it and incorporaed it in a new way but that was lost on some of the others. Such as the balloons at the end in place of kites, they didn't add anything and weren't a pre existing aspect of the movie like the kites were in the first one, so they felt thrown in at the end with a finale song that was lacking and didn't land. Though I uderstood that since Mary was there primarily to help the father again that the parallels in some aspects are justified, the quote from the first movie applies here per Bert; 'Can't put me finger on what lies in store, But I fear what's to happen all happened before..". Even so, some of the scenes felt like a template from the first, such as with Topsy because nothing ever comes of the bowl that they take to get fixed the whole scene feels pointless while in the first with 'I love to laugh' the joke of a wooden leg named smith ended up being the crucial plot device, so that scene was justified. Also, the magic in this movie felt more dangerous and more crucial to the happy ending, while in the first one the magic was more peripheral and only used to teach lessons while letting the individuals fix the problems themselves. In the first it was just a small joke that was passed along in the movie that got Mr Banks his job back not like in this where Mary Poppins has to interfere and physically move the hand of the big ben backwards. Which is again conflicting, because I enjoyed the clocks being used as plot device with the Admiral as a nod and joke to the original. As well as, the fact that there was a very real danger from doing things that people in real life wouldn't, rather than just having the fear of losing a house or job, there was a fear for the leeries climbing up the big ben, mainly Jack. Which they could have even taken in a different, more playful direction. An apsect I enjoyed about the first is that the normality of the mundane world took the primary residence for driving the plot, allowing people to understand that they can take the lessons that they learnt with jane and michael from Mary Poppins' magic, and apply them to their own very real lives. This movie felt more like a fantastical adventure.That being said there are lots of good messages in the movie for kids and adults alike to learn. Oh and I did like that the original kite was tied into the plot again (unlike those bloody balloons) and was where the important papers were, though again contradicting myself I feel even in his delirium at the time that Mr Banks wouldn't have used something that important to repair the kite given his personality and how important banking is to him. Not to mention that was the night he lost his job and gave the bank the tuppence so he wouldn't have even had the papers for the shares at that time, so plot hole. I enjoyed Dick Van Dyke's appearance, he added life to the movie in his short scene, though how the problem with the shares and whatnot was sorted out felit a little like a cop out. But I suppose in the original they did have a man die laughing and gave Mr Banks his job back because he was the one who told the joke and made the guy happy, soooo ? I enjoyed certain parts and other parts less so, it teetered between formulaic and heartfelt, I dont know but overall it is a good movie and not a terrible sequel. Also, how easy it to make comaprisons to one of my favourite childhood movies does make it also easier to critisize, so that has to be taken into account. I am disappointed that she didn't measure Michaels three kids because that could have been done without feeling copied since its different kids, and am also disappointed the most iconic word of all time 'supercalifragilisticexpialidocious' was not said at all.