Saving Mr. Banks

I must start this by saying: I don’t care about or have much interest in Mary Poppins or Walt Disney, but since this movie is about those things only on one level, and does in fact have a much deeper emotional intent, there is certainly something in the film for me to respond to and write about.

I read the screenplay a while ago, because I like to read whatever produced scripts I can get my eyes on, and I didn’t think it worked. It had charm and style and humor, sure, just like the movie does - it’s well-written in that respect - but the same issues I encountered in the text show up on film.

One thing I advise screenwriters not to do, in the course of my coverage and feedback, is employ clichés, and a particular form of which I find rather grating is the interruption of a conversation for the purpose of having one character correct another in how to address them. This usually takes the form of things like “Don’t call me Mr. Smith, that was my father, call me Bob” or just a flat out “Bob, please” which is always followed by the other person saying “Bob” before continuing. Ugh. Please spare me these exchanges.

This movie and screenplay are made up of so many moments of this precise nature it is practically the entire premise.

Seriously, it’s that pervasive. People repeatedly call her Pam or Pamela no matter how many times she says Mrs. Travers. Not only does it slow down the story by constantly interrupting what could be meaningful dialogue for supposedly cute little moments that are merely aggravating, but it makes it look like none of these people are able to listen to or comprehend even the tiniest little thing being said to or asked of them. If someone says don’t call me that, call me this, you do it! It ain’t difficult. What kind of a person is such an ignorant jerk they constantly refer to someone in a manner they have been expressly and repeatedly informed not to? Most of the characters in this movie, that’s who. I just don’t get it. I don’t know who thinks this is entertaining, or a valid form of conflict. It’s just stupid.

All right. Rant ended.

As for the story itself, the other major issue I had with both script and film is the lack of clear motivation for some of the other major actions the characters take or avoid, in order to maintain an obvious conflict. Her father’s drinking, for example. I understand some people have addictions and can’t stop themselves, but why does he continue such destruction when he knows and sees what it’s doing to himself and his family? The story doesn’t address that, or ask why he doesn’t address it. The story simply watches him fall without giving him enough cause to stumble.

Then there’s the point at which she rejects everything due to the planned use of animated penguins, as that’s the moment in the plot when it needs to take a downturn, because it’s just taken an upturn when she approved the song about flying a kite. There’s nothing wrong with the change in tone, it’s wholly appropriate and perfectly timed, the problem is the method by which the movie shifts its weight. They make it seem like Walt tricked her, or at least that she felt tricked, in that she believed there would be absolutely no animation whatsoever when all he said is that the film would not be animated, it would be live action. Nobody lied, nobody deceived. But the movie needs this moment so it does whatever it can, using the ol’ innocent misunderstanding. It could have been done better.

A lot of the rest of the conflict mostly comes from her not telling the writers what she wants, just saying everything is wrong and walking away. They also rarely seem to attempt to explain what they’re going for, they just shrivel at her harsh tone and move on. As a screenwriter who often works for others in order to produce their vision, I respect and appreciate that aspect of this movie, in that a group of people are doing their creative best to please someone who seems to disagree with everything, or simply doesn’t know what she wants them to achieve. But when it plays as though she refuses to cooperate, how am I supposed to empathize with her? I get that she doesn’t want what’s close to her heart to be tarnished, but one has to communicate effectively in order to precipitate successful adaptation. If you don’t try, you just get nothing.

Past all these issues, the movie is decidedly better than the screenplay, largely due to the fabulous cast - especially Paul Giamatti, who does so much with so little and makes it looks effortless - and of course I love the message that storytellers instill hope, that we restore order with imagination. I can’t help but be moved by these small moments, as being coldly insensitive is not something I’m capable of, but the movie as a whole is held back by its repeated and frustrating lack of progress.

Eventually the triumph of art and creativity does free the movie of its drawbacks, somehow managing to outshine the disappointing aftertaste of so much halting, faltering energy.

If only it made me want to watch Mary Poppins...now that would have been some kind of magic.