STORY STUDY - MEDIUM: FILM “Saving Mr. Banks”
Classic Disney live action films tend to be missing in the popular conscience. Unlike their animated films, a majority of the live action films have been lost to time unless you do hard research. However, it’s hard to dismiss the fact that one of the most famous and most resonant of them is Mary Poppins. Everyone knows at least one song from it, one actor from it, and especially one scene from it. With the recent release of Mary Poppins Returns, it’s time to explore the second Mary Poppins-related film that Disney had produced.
Directed by John Lee Hancock, and written by Kelly Marcel and Sue Smith, Saving Mr. Banks is the story of Pamela Lyndon “P.L.” Travers, the author of the Mary Poppins books. Her approval of the script is the last step in getting the iconic 1964 film to be made, and she’s not going to make it easy for them.
Mrs. Travers holds onto her image of Mary Poppins very clear to her heart, as the film shows in its flashback to her childhood and her love for her father, Travers Goff.
She thinks, rightly so, that the superstar producer, Walt Disney, will adapt her character into a whimsical and charming musical with animated segments; a tone and image that he is very famous for. It’s this clash of ideologies that helps create a kind of film that is rarely produced from this studio.
I adore this film very much, from the production history to the actual story of the film. Now, of course, it’s a film about filmmaking… kind of. It never shows the cameras rolling, nor are there any sets from Mary Poppins. There’s not even a casting session. Aside from the flashback storyline, the film mainly takes place in a rehearsal room that is mostly occupied by Mrs. Travers, co-writer Don Dagradi, songwriters Richard and Robert Sherman, along with the occasional visit by Walt Disney himself just trading ideas of how to make the film and how it should look.
My favorite scene is when the Shermans and Dagradi are singing the “Fidelity Fiduciary Bank” number with some of the lyrics incorporated in Goff’s speech to promote a bank that he manages; the two scenes cross cuts with each other, both of them ending with a huge plot and character point for the father and daughter.
It’s all about the acting and dialogue, and everyone is giving their all in portraying their characters. In fact, it’s very reminiscent of theater given how the scenes in the rehearsal room are filmed.
With everything going well for this film, what kind of problems could this film have? Just one: it’s very existence.
Saving Mr. Banks started out the same way I wish my scripts would start out: a very good story that is out there with some people knowing about it and wanting to make it. Based on the film, it’s apparent that there is content that the Walt Disney Company had to sign off in order for the film to be properly made… and they knew it too, which is why they bought the script. With the purchase, they had two options: make sure production never starts, or co-produce the film with the other studios aiming to make it.
So, we have a studio producing a film which features their own studio and their original boss as the basis of the entire story. “Studio interference” wouldn’t even begin to describe the amount of Hell they could bring upon. A few cynical critics even described the film as “Disney propaganda,” an attempt to re-write their own history.
It’s hard not to argue that line of thinking; you can’t trust people with that amount of money. The ending of the Saving Mr. Banks also doesn’t help either, with Mrs. Travers watching the Mary Poppins at the premiere (spoiler, I know) in tears, implied to be having a cathartic experience. In reality, P.L. Travers vehemently disapproved of the film because of the amount of changes, especially the animated sequence. Based on that story, you’d probably think that Walt Disney is a backstabber.
Luckily, that’s where the film takes chances in portraying him as such… sort of. Walt Disney is portrayed as warm businessman. He’ll negotiate, comfort you with his words, even complying with a big personality instead of clashing with it, but in the end, he will get his way. It’s pretty genius in a Trojan horse kind of way. Add some scenes where he drinks, curses (seriously, watch the trailer), and stubbing out a cigarette, revealing his smoking habit, and you have a near honest depiction of a man who is supposedly the most noble man in the United States. He’s not evil, nor is his intentions are evil; it’s just one artist’s vision clashing with another.
This was one of the few films where I found out about as early as when they announced the film was going to be made. I really didn’t know what to expect, but when I saw the trailer, I knew this was going to be a very unique Disney film.
To me, Saving Mr. Banks is a big studio producing an indie film. Sure, it’s a period piece with one story set in the 1960s and the other in 1906, but when you break down the set locations, it looks like it could’ve been shot in areas the studio owns. The aforementioned rehearsal room in the Walt Disney studios is the actual Walt Disney Studios; the certain theme park that Walt Disney and Mrs. Travers go to is the actual theme park.
It’s easy to write this film off as a big studio wanting to rewrite history. As a writer myself, it’s hard not to defend an author who feels betrayed and lied to. However, as someone who loves films, this was a stepping stone for grounded stories made by a studio known for their whimsy, and I hope they make more like this very soon.
Don’t be irresponsible, and check it out.
