Saving Mr. Banks

There are few names as instantly recognizable, as iconic as Walt Disney, the hugely successful businessman who helped create the immense Disney empire. I grew up watching animated Disney movies with my sister, family and friends having been introduced to the older Disney genres at the same time so for me the 1950s and 1960s were the empire at its ultimate best. Think of all the backstories, all the explanations, all the little tidbits explaining how all those movies and TV shows came to be, like the classic 1964 film Mary Poppins, which we see in 2013's Saving Mr. Banks.

Struggling financially to make ends meet in her London home, Pamela 'P.L.' Travers (Emma Thompson) has agreed to do something she's avoided for 20 years. She agrees to meet Walt Disney (Tom Hanks) in Los Angeles to discuss selling the rights to her hugely successful children's book, Mary Poppins. While she could clearly use the money, Travers also is less than psyched to sell the rights to her most famous book, the one that put her on the literary map. The book, the story and the characters, they all mean too much to her, and she worries Walt Disney will "Disney-fy" it, adding animation and songs and a far-more lighthearted tone than her original book intends. Having long wanted to turn Travers' book into a feature film (having promised his daughters he would do so), Disney is going to put the full-court press on the author to get the job done. Who's going to buckle first?

There's something to be said for movies like this. Blend a well-written, entertaining story with some fun, memorable characters, throw some style in there for good measure, and let things fall where they may. It isn't trying to rewrite Film, instead it is content to tell that story and hopefully resonate that way. Director John Lee Hancock is a specialist at that type of film, and I mean that in the most positive sense. In terms of what it is trying to accomplish, it reminded me of two other Hancock films, The Rookie and The Blind Side. It certainly helps if you're a fan of the original Mary Poppins to get some of the jokes, the lines, the background, but it's not essential. The story is a good blend of drama and comedy, and don't be fooled. Hancock's film is most definitely trying to pull at your heart strings. Oh, and it does, and does it well.

The movie's success rides on the shoulders of stars Emma Thompson and Tom Hanks. I don't know if either will get any Academy Award nominations, but these are two very human, very layered performances. Over the last couple weeks, 'Banks' has taken some public grief because of its portrayal of Disney -- not too many flaws in view, read more HERE -- as that flawless, pretty perfect hero, but at no point was this a huge, digging character study of a movie. This is about two very stubborn folks who are willing to stick to their guns, Thompson's Travers and Hanks' Disney. Their scenes together crackle, Thompson perfectly cast as the icy, brutally honest author who wants to protect her own story, Hanks breathing life into a likable, charming and even then iconic Walt Disney. Thompson makes it hard at times, but you like both these characters. You're rooting for both of them.

So while I point out this isn't a movie too interested in the characters' real-life flaws, it also doesn't gloss over too much. While much of the story is spent in Los Angeles in the 1960s, a fairly large amount of time is spent in a flashback in the early 1900s in Australia, watching a young Travers grow up, seeing what becomes her inspiration for Mary Poppins and its characters. We see young Ginty (Annie Rose Buckley), her well-meaning father (Colin Farrell) with a drinking problem, her mother (Ruth Wilson), overwhelmed by her husband's drinking problems that affect all aspects of their life, and ultimately, Aunt Ellie (Rachel Griffiths), Travers' inspiration for Mary Poppins. Of the two halves of the story, I enjoyed the 1960s Disney portion more, but both hold their merits. It's never overdone even if its obvious where the 1900s Australia part is going. I was just more interested in how Mary Poppins came together, a battle of wills between Travers and Disney.

There isn't a weak performance in the movie. The supporting parts are filled out with some big names too, parts that are meant to flesh out the lead roles. My favorite part went to Paul Giamatti as Ralph, Pamela's appointed driver to chauffeur her around L.A. as she decides whether to sell the rights to her book. An eternal optimist with a bright outlook on life, even Travers' almost non-stop negativity can't weight on him. Bradley Whitford, B.J. Novak and Jason Schwartzman as Don DeGradi, the screenplay writer, and Robert and Richard Sherman, Mary Poppins' writers of the music and lyrics. The trio's scenes with Thompson are pretty perfect, three talented individuals seemingly working against a brick wall. It's also fun to see these rehearsal scenes coming together, seeing a handful of iconic scenes from Mary Poppins coming together, including some of its best and most memorable musical numbers. Also worth mentioning are Kathy Baker and Melanie Paxson as two secretaries working with Disney and Travers, almost as middlemen.

An underrated aspect of 'Banks' is the style. Immediately I felt transported back to Los Angeles in the 1960s. The look of the film is perfect from seeing Disneyland in the 1960s to the big boats that were once called cars to everyone wearing immaculate suits to work. The early 1960s were the Disney empire at a high point -- Swiss Family Robinson, 101 Dalmatians, The Sword and the Stone among many others -- and on a simple level, it's just fun to get an inside look at the making of one of Disney's most iconic films. Another positive is Thomas Newman's score, good without being overbearing. Mostly though, it's the moments that work. Through all the laughs, the emotional, dramatic moments work the best, especially as Thompson's Travers opens up a little, 'Let's Go Fly a Kite' providing a great moment.

It's a really good movie. That's it. Go see for yourself.

Saving Mr. Banks (2013): *** 1/2 /****

Men in Black 3

Released in 1997, the original Men in Black is the rare film. It's really smart, but it's really entertaining too, a great example of what a summer blockbuster can be. It made a whole lot of money -- some $589,000,000 -- and naturally led to an inferior sequel that couldn't live up to the original's success. Not surprisingly though, that sequel made a whole lot of money too. Not exactly an immediate follow-up, but here's yet another sequel, 2012's Men in Black III.

Working for Men in Black, Agent J (Will Smith) and Agent K (Tommy Lee Jones) have been partners for 15 years now, working together to police extraterrestrial issues all over the Earth. Their partnership has just been dealt quite an issue though. A former Boglodite assassin, Boris the Animal (Jemaine Clement), has escaped from a prison on the moon, shaking off 40 years of a sentence. He wants revenge on the man who put him away back in 1969....Agent K. After one run-in with Boris though in NYC, J wakes up one morning to find himself in a world where K never existed. What happened? Did his partner up and disappear? How about a solution? J has to go back in time to 1969 when these "new" records indicate K was killed. Who does he quickly find upon arrival in 1969 New York City? His old partner, but he's far younger. Hopefully J and Agent K (Josh Brolin) can work together to save the world in time.

I grew up watching the original Men in Black so after not especially enjoying the first sequel (to put it lightly), I was skeptical about a second sequel. Maybe the 10 years apart from the series was a good thing, but this was a really good continuation of the series. Director Barry Sonnenfeld gets back to basics, putting together an entertaining mix of science fiction, action and comedy that made the first movie so special. And let's be honest, how do you make science fiction better? Duh....time travel. J going back to 1969 adds a cool element to an already pretty solid story. Overall, that mix is there though. There's some gross-out moments, some good action scenes with all sorts of futuristic technology, and a surprisingly emotional ending. This is a movie that sat in my Netflix queue for most of eight, maybe nine months, but I'm glad I caught up with it.

It's pretty cool, even a little odd, to see Will Smith return to the series that helped make him a huge international star. When this film had been released, it was 15 years since the original hit theaters. 15 years for goodness sake!!! Maybe I'm just feeling old. In the years since, Smith has shown he's not just a movie star, but an actor too. Here, he's a movie star. Smith is a fun, cool movie star, his smartass and deadpan delivery landing just as well in 2012 as it did in 1997. Unfortunately, Tommy Lee Jones looks to be here because of some sort of blackmail obligation. He looks downright bored, no energy at all. I love TLJ as an actor, but this is almost painful to watch. Thankfully, he's only around for about 15 minutes of actual screentime.

As for the rest of the movie....Smith and Josh Brolin show the kind of chemistry that Smith and TLJ did in the original. It ends up being the best part of the movie by far, but there's a twist. Brolin isn't doing an impression the way commercials/trailers would have had you think although to be fair, he does a spot-on Lee Jones. The best twist is that we're meeting the Agent K character before the event that turned him into the Agent K we know. What is that event? We never find out for sure, but it's cool to see K crack a smile, make a bit of a joke, and basically not be the emotionless K we do know. There is a natural chemistry between the duo, and it plays well anytime they're on-screen together. Clement too is a great sci-fi bad guy, creepy alien rival. Also in the cast is Emma Thompson as Agent O, the new head of Men in Black, with Alice Eve playing her 1969 self, Michael Stuhlbarg as Griffin, an alien with the ability to see countless futures in an instant and holds the key to the universe's survival, and Nicole Scherzinger as an associate of Boris the Animal.   

While the movie is never slow, things pick up when J heads back to 1969 in a cool time-bending sequence when he jumps off a skyscraper to jump back in time. The technique is used again later with similar results. The look and style of the films come through back in 1969 as J explores the hippie, druggy subculture of the late 1960s. We even meet Andy Warhol (Bill Hader) but with a twist. The story twists and turns as J and K bond -- K assuming J's ridiculous time-traveling explanation is true -- and try to save the world from Boris' wrath. The timing is solid too, letting the story deal with the Apollo 11 launch and the eventual moon launch, the MiB agents heading to Cape Canaveral in a cool final sequence, with Mike Colter playing an army officer in charge of the launch's security. It is an ending that surprised me in not just delivering a solid twist, but how effective emotionally it is.

That's the movie. It was a big surprise, getting back to what the original Men in Black was so good at. It's fun, exciting and I enjoyed it throughout. I suppose that's a good thing because a fourth MiB flick is in the works. Yeah for sequels! Oh, and Pitbull sings too so we've got that going for us. Listen HERE.

Men in Black III (2012): ***/****