Mary Poppins

January 6th, 2007
Posted by kristy in: theatre

Mary Poppins

Last night Karl, Caroline and I headed off to Times Square to see the new Broadway sensation, Mary Poppins. One resident of Casa del Thomas decided not to join us. Not naming names…

But, boy, did that guy miss out! The musical absolutely rocked! The special effects were magical, the cast fab-o, and the set was jaw-droppingly good. 17 Cherry Tree Lane, the Banks children’s home, was brought to life by an enormous dollhouse that the cast ran up and down the stairs in. It’s difficult to describe, but sooooo beautiful.

g.com rating? 10/10. I can’t think of a thing I wanted them to do differently!

I read a review that said: “this version is considerably darker than the film, taking its inspiration much more from the original books”, and it surprised me for a number of reasons.

  1. There are adults out there who remember the movie well enough to confidently make such statements?
  2. There were original books? I didn’t know there was even an original book! Now I learn that there were eight of them, published between 1934 and 1938.
  3. The books were dark? It seems that the original Mary Poppins was more of a Professor Snape type, with dark magic and scary piercing stares. Not like Julie Andrews’ rendition at all.

Equally surprising, to me at least, was the little fact that the original author, P. L. Travers, was born in Maryborough, Queensland. Who’d a thunk it? And shouldn’t there be a Travers/Poppins tourist attraction up there? Or maybe I’m just starting to think like a Yank (Betsy Ross House, anyone?).

The best part of the musical had to be Mary’s exiting entrances and exits, flying about on her parrot-headed umbrella. With the aid of some “invisible” wires, Mary did the most miraculous things and adults and children alike gasped with delight.

I’m putting myself out there a bit, but the significance of Mary’s surname has only just (this moment) occurred to me. Am I the only one it has escaped all these years?! Mary Popp-ins? She pop’s in and then pop’s out again?

5 comments

#1 gerrod January 6th, 2007 at 2:48 pm

Sure, the set does sound like it was quite magical, but with all that repetitive singing, I probably would have had to rip my ears off well before the end of the show.

Plus, lets be honest, Mary Poppins is partially responsible for the obesity that is rampant among Americans. “Just a spoon full of sugar helps the medicine go down”?! That does not sound like something we should be encouraging!

#2 Shelley January 6th, 2007 at 11:54 pm

You may be surprised to discover that Maryborough is actually very proud of its Mary Poppins heritage. I believe there is a fading ‘Welcome to Maryborough’ Mary Poppins Billboard, and upon further research have discovered that there is also a large bronze statue of the lady herself, a tour of P.L. Traver’s house and workplace, an annual ‘Mary Poppins Market day’ (including a dress up day) and a ‘Proud Marys’ association for all women with the name ‘Mary’.

When you have a claim to fame…

#3 Ben January 7th, 2007 at 8:59 am

I applaud your decision in not going my man!

I’m with you all the way. My sister wanted to see a musical while she was over here too. We went and saw Chicago. Chelles and I aren’t big musical lovers but went along cause she was so excited and wanted desperately to see a West End show.

You know what happened? Leisa fell asleep.

No more musicals for us.

#4 meegan January 10th, 2007 at 7:53 pm

Sounds fantastic KJ :)

Your review has inspired me to seek out these MP novels now!
Wonder if Amazon have them…?

#5 nellie January 13th, 2007 at 8:56 am

Wish I was there to see it with you.