Disney May Have Found Their New Mary Poppins

By September 17, 2015

A few days ago the news broke that Disney and the Into the Woods director Rob Marshall were working together on developing a sequel, set twenty years after the events of the 1964 classic, Mary Poppins. The film will follow the Poppins character and her continued adventures with the Banks family in a Depression era London, with a new songwriting duo coming on to craft a new soundtrack and score for the movie as well.

This continues in Disney’s latest trend of revisiting some of their most classic films and stories with new and fresh(?) takes on them, like Maleficent, Cinderella, or even Tim Burton’s Alice in Wonderland. While the formula has worked to varying degrees of critical success so far, the movies have all seemed to do well financially for the studio, and with Jon Favreau’s live-action take on The Jungle Book having the potential to be something really special – it’s easy to see why the studio already has several more similar projects in development.

However, with Mary Poppins, it seems like Disney might have to face some of their biggest hurdles yet. The original movie has become a hallmark of the studio’s long filmography, but not only that, the cast seems almost irreplaceable. With iconic turns from actors like Dick Van Dyke and Julie Andrews as Poppins herself, and the one-of-a-kind look and feel linked to the film’s era, it seems almost blasphemous to imagine anyone else in those roles.

According to a new report by Den of Geek though, Disney is reportedly eyeing Sicario actress Emily Blunt to play the lead role of Poppins in the sequel, who would be taking over for Andrews over fifty years after the actress’ original performance. While no discussions have reportedly taken place between Blunt and the studio, the report states that she is the frontrunner for the role in the studio’s mind. This should of course be taken with a grain of salt and treated as rumor though, since neither of the mentioned parties have commented on the news yet.

Considering not only Blunt’s current star power right now, but also her work with Rob Marshall on Into the Woods too, it does make sense that the studio might want her for the role though, and she does have a similar look to the Poppins character. There have been rumors of several other actresses being up for the Poppins role over the past few years, but considering how relevant Blunt’s name is in pop culture right now, as well as the recent sequel announcement, it looks like this one might have some legs.

Personally, I couldn’t care less about this sequel honestly. Mary Poppins has always felt like one of those movies that works not only because of how well it was made, but also because of the time period it was made in. I don’t know how well the film’s story or characters will work in today’s market, and the idea of seeing anyone else in those roles just doesn’t really make much sense in my opinion. Blunt’s one of the most talented actresses working today, and has been receiving big Oscar buzz for her performance in this year’s Sicario, but not many actresses could manage to duplicate the kind of charisma and elegance that Andrews brought to that role. Could she be one of them?

The Mary Poppins sequel is currently in the works.

Make sure to keep checking back for more updates — right here on GeekNation.

The following two tabs change content below.
Alex Welch

Alex Welch

Alex dreams of meeting a girl with a yellow umbrella, and spends too much time* staring at a movie screen. His vocabulary consists mostly of movie quotes and 80s song lyrics. *Debatable
  • David Johnson

    So Mary Poppin’s was 12 in the original????

    • Yeah, I really have no clue how they’re going to pull this sequel off.

      • David Johnson

        You’d think disney would understand the difference between a Reboot & a Sequel after as many as they’ve released!!!

        • CurseofZodLovesMaude

          Reboot is a seqeul. Remake is a redo, do-over, re-imagining whatever…

          • David Johnson

            No the new Ghostbusters is a Reboot not a Sequel.

          • CurseofZodLovesMaude

            NO. It’s a REMAKE. Reboot/sequel mean the same thing. You don’t remake your computer when its slow, you REBOOT it, to revive it, start again…

          • David Johnson

            Google “Reboot or Sequel” they are completely different, don’t care what you do to a computer were talking film terms!

          • CurseofZodLovesMaude

            It’s wrong. Reboot is to restart…or sequel….. REMAKE is remake.

          • David Johnson

            Do you know how to Google?????????????????? Type in Movie Reboot & read the words!!!!!!!

          • CurseofZodLovesMaude

            its’ bullshit.

          • Not trying to argue here, just asking an honest question: Why do you think a sequel is to “restart”? A sequel is a continuation of a story, similar to prequel means an earlier start to the story.

            It’s actually very simple.

          • CurseofZodLovesMaude

            Because Reboot means to restart…. sequel is a continuation, or a revival, restart of a franchise…. Trek 09 is a reboot. NOT a remake. Maybe that’s the confusion. Remake is remake…. reboot needs to go away.

          • Sorry CurseofZodLovesMaude but, “Reboot/sequel mean the same thing” is incorrect.

            “In serial fiction, to reboot means to discard all continuity in an established series in order to recreate its characters, timeline and backstory from the beginning. The term is used with respect to various different forms of fictional media such as comic books, television series, video games, and films among others.”

            “A sequel (also known as a follow-up) is a narrative, documental, or other work of literature, film, theatre, television, music, or game that continues the story of, or expands upon, some earlier work.”