Mary Poppins Returns [Includes Digital Copy] [4K Ultra HD Blu-ray/Blu-ray] [2018]

Been wanting the steel book edition for the longest since it's been sold out and I finally found a store that had one more. I love the cover artwork for the steel book and it's a perfect edition to starting off my 4K collection. Definitely recommend.

Mary Poppins Returns is such a well played rededication of a well known and well loved movie, here to delight generation to come!

Even better than the first. Emily Blunt has out done herself in this movie!

Classic Mary Poppins the best but you will enjoy!!

I love Musicals also Emily Blunt is a fantastic actress

The Disney magic of cinematic legend is in fine shape in the new “Mary Poppins Returns,” even if the imagination of the fabled Disney Imagineers is a little rusty. The stars of the picture during publicity appearances have been going out of their ways to stress that the movie is not a remake of the fabled Academy Award-winning 1964 classic “Mary Poppins,” but a sequel. And that might very well be. But viewers who mistake the picture for a remake can be forgiven, because “Mary Poppins Returns” pushes its narrative through the self-same template of the original, right down to the placement of the musical numbers. Only the haunting and heartbreaking place occupied in the original picture by actress Jane Darwell and “Feed the Birds” is left vacant. In fact, about the biggest difference between “Mary Poppins” and “Mary Poppins Returns” is that this time around the magical nanny has three children in her charge instead of two. Set some thirty years after the events of the original picture, in “Mary Poppins Returns” Jane and Michael Banks are now adults who barely remember their childhood adventures with the nanny who literally drifted down from the clouds. Jane has taken after her suffragette mother and is now a political activist fighting for the rights of oppressed workers. And Michael, a recent widower unable to support his three young children as an artist, has recently taken a part-time job as a teller in the Fidelity Fiduciary Bank where his late father once toiled as a senior partner. Already disenfranchised by the death of their mother, Michael’s three adorable children are soon additionally troubled to learn that the bank is about to foreclose on their family home. Michael’s absentmindedly forgotten to make the three most recent payments to Fidelity Fiduciary after mortgaging the property to meet the family’s expenses. The family will be evicted if they’re unable to pay off the loan in full by Big Ben’s final toll of midnight, three days hence. To breathe some desperately-needed order into this chaotic situation, Mary Poppins returns, literally descending from the clouds to return the children’s kite during a stormy day. And with the help of her old chum Jack the Lamplighter, a former apprentice to the original film’s Bert the Chimney Sweep, the magical nanny endeavors to teach the Banks children the value of organized imagination...and remind the grown-up Michael and Jane of the love and wonder often left behind when children become adults. The biggest danger of producing a new movie founded upon the magic of a beloved motion picture classic is that the new movie will inevitably and automatically be compared with the original, a risk that Disney of all studios knows well. Since...well, since forever, the studio’s been occasionally pilfering their own vaults to wring new memories--and money--from old classics. Fortunately--thankfully--”Mary Poppins Returns” is strong enough and contains sufficient movie magic to not only withstand comparisons with the 1964 musical classic, but also to stand on its own feet. The viewer can’t help comparing the two pictures, but the filmmakers seem to expect the comparisons, if not welcome them...and even challenge them. And you know what? They win the challenge. There’s been some minor complaining about actress Emily Blunt’s characterization in the title role being...well, a little nasty, snotty with a capital B. Detractors suggest Blunt invests the beloved nanny with unnecessary amounts of sternness, conceit, arrogance, and a chilly exterior. Translation: Emily Blunt is not Julie Andrews. But that’s just the price the actress pays for her characterization being accurate to Travers’ storybooks. Julie Andrews could sing through a smile even when she was weeping tears of heartbreak, an attribute which worked well for the 1964 picture. But Blunt, who has a surprisingly strong singing voice and has been referred to by co-star Lin-Manuel Miranda as “human sunshine,” is primarily known, and lauded, as a dramatic actress. Occasional eye-rolling aside, Blunt brings all of her artistic qualities to bear in the picture, and more than holds her own in the choreography department also.

My favorite part was when Mary Poppins and Jack were singing about, “don’t judge a book by it’s cover.” To see the books come alive and then dancing through them. So cool!! Also, I loved when the "Bert" danced on the bank desk. Plus, when Mary Poppins, Jack, and the 3 children jumped into the broken China bowl and fixed the carriage to take a ride. And of course, when Mary Poppins draws them a bath and you see a real dolphin pop out. The music was wonderful!! I loved Emily Blunt’s delivery and she did everything “Mary Poppins perfect”! Jack’s singing was wonderful as well and then when the lamp-lighters danced and sang, it was just awesome. I loved how they added choreography with the bike tricks. Super cool. Everything was beautiful but what was best of all — is how Disney still brought in new magic BUT! held onto the old magic all at the same time. That is so hard to do! They could have done crazy things but they just held onto the original Mary Poppins magic and tricks all while putting a new spin on them. I just loved it!!! Excellent job Emily Blunt! Excellent job Disney! You all did not disappoint!

I purchased this movie for my kids to watch after having shown them the original. They thoroughly enjoyed it and it will make its way into the typical Disney movie rotation. The production value was great, as well as the casting. She did great in taking over where Julie Andrews left off. I'd say her interpretation of the character was much bolder, where Andrews' version was more sly/cheeky in how she influenced others or took command of a situation. Not a knock in the least, just a noticeable difference and I think more representative of the time period in which this movie is supposed to take place. The only "bad" thing I can say about it is that none of the songs were really that memorable. After watching the original, the songs sort of get stuck in your head, even the kids go around singing them for the next day or so. However, I honestly could not tell you how one song goes in this movie. However, that may just more subjective and the difference in having seen this as an adult vs seeing the original throughout childhood, and now adulthood with my own children. Still, a must watch for fans of the original.