Sunday, May 13, 2012

Mary Poppins!

Yay!  :D

(Warning:  It has just barely been 24 hours since I saw this, so excessive fandom will appear in this post, as well as some spoilers.  If you want to avoid spoilers, you should probably skip this post. ) Hey all!  I had a wonderful opportunity this weekend to see "Mary Poppins" with my cousins, aunts, and grandma in St. Louis.  We had a fantastic time!  I have listened to some of the Broadway album for the past year or so.  I have also watched numerous videos on Youtube.
  Anyway, the production was well done.  The story did deviate a bit from the 1964 movie with Dick Van Dyke and Julie Andrews.  To me though, the changes made sense.  For instance, in the movie Mrs. Banks was a suffragette, always eager to do anything for women to get the vote.  In the stage version, that part is cut out and replaced by a Mrs. Banks who is eager to be a good wife and mother.  If you think about it, the 1960s was a time of the women's revolution.  Women around the country strove to be treated like men.  They wanted to be a part of the workforce and to have more weight in society.  In the movie then this idea is very much a part of Mrs. Banks' character.
The decision of the writers to change this in the production makes for an interesting observation.  In the stage version, Mrs. Banks tries hard to be a part of the high society that she belongs to, but to no avail.  No one accepts her invitation to tea, leaving her feeling distraught and rejected.  This makes me wonder what the writers are trying to convey to their audience.  Are they suggesting that women have pushed beyond who they are meant to be?  Or are they simply suggesting that being popular and in power isn't for everyone?  What do you think?
The view from where I was sitting in the Peabody Opera House.  Isn't it just beautiful?
Now to the excessive fandom part of this post.  ;)  "Step in Time" was my favorite number.  I have been watching the video here for some time.  It was just amazing to see it in person! The dance was almost exactly the same, even with Bert tap dancing on the ceiling! We were so glad that he didn't fall!
I have also found the instructions for spelling out "Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious" like they do here.  It's a new challenge for me. ;)  Oh, and here are the directions.  Yes it is silly, but fun > silly.  :D

Mary Poppins herself was quite different than Julie Andrews' version.  She had a lot more "can-do" attitude, bordering on pride.  It was okay though; and seemed to fit her character better in this version.  The "Jolly Holiday" number was also a lot of fun and very colorful.  Everyone was dressed in flower-like colors, with Mary Poppins in bright pink! 
The children, Jane and Michael, were rotten.  Ugly.  Spoiled.  Just.  Horrible.  They did eventually change.  Actually the problem was their distracted father and overindulgent mother. Until the parents turned around, the children could not learn any better, as often happens in real life ("Supernanny" is on of my favorite shows. ;)
Bert was my favorite character.  He was an important person in the development of the story.  He was also a good comedic relief. ;)

Overall, "Mary Poppins" was great.  I loved every minute of it.  If ever you have the chance to see it yourself, I highly recommend it.  If not, there are plenty of videos and clips online. ;)

Have a Supercalifragilisticexpialidocious week!

No comments:

Post a Comment