Mary Poppins Returns

Mary Poppins Returns (2018)

2 corrected entries

(4 votes)

Corrected entry: Mr. Dawes Jr. states that the tuppence (two pence) invested by Michael grew into enough to pay off the mortgage on the house. Interest rates over that 20 year time period were about 4%, which would have made that 2p grow to all of 4p. Go nuts and assume an impossibly high return of 15% per annum, compound, consistent over the twenty years. Despite the fact that not even Bernie Madoff offered ridiculously high returns like that, after twenty years the original two pence investment would be worth 39p. As an aside, houses of the time cost about £750, far below current London prices, but still considerably more than 39p.

wizard_of_gore

Correction: In the movie, Mr Dawes said "We did just that, and thanks to several quite clever investments...that tuppence has grown into quite a sum" - so the investment didn't grow by interest alone. Growing a £0.02 investment to £750 is unlikely, but not impossible, especially if the friendly bank president fudged a little and pulled it off losing investments and only counted winning investments. And of course, Dawes could have been telling a white lie to make up for the way Wilkins treated the Banks family and planned to pay off the loan with his own funds.

sfbiker1

Absolutely. The 2 pence was an investment, not a deposit. It is perfectly in keeping with the whimsical magic theme of the movie that the investment should have grown exponentially. Real world investments have done better. A 5 cent Bitcoin investment (about 2 pence!) grew to about $15,000 in less time.

Corrected entry: Mr. Wilkins, hoping to foreclose on Michael Banks' home, leafs through a register listing all the bank's shareholders, then tells Michael, "I don't see your name." After Michael leaves, Wilkins rips out a page and throws it into the fireplace. At the top of the page is the name "Banks" in large letters but each of the other pages lists several names all written in small letters in a column on the left side of the page.

Steven Lee

Correction: Why is this a mistake? There could be several reasons why Banks' name is more prominent. It could be based on the fact that George Banks was an important bank official or it could be dependent upon the number of shares owned.

wizard_of_gore

Other mistake: As established in the original and this film, when the Admiral fires his cannon, everything in the house falls off walls and mantles, and everything needs to be caught to prevent them from being damaged. However, when he fires his cannon as Mary Poppins and the children are going out to have the bowl repaired, Michael has already left for work, Jane and Ellen are standing outside, and Mary, the children, are getting onto Jack's bike - leaving no-one in the house to catch the falling objects which would therefore all be smashed or damaged.

More mistakes in Mary Poppins Returns

Jane Banks: What brings you here after all this time?
Mary Poppins: Same thing that brought me the first time: I have come to look after the Banks children.
Anabel Banks: Us?
Mary Poppins: Oh yes, you, too.

More quotes from Mary Poppins Returns
More trivia for Mary Poppins Returns

Question: P.L. Travers hated Disney's film adaptation of Mary Poppins so much that she refused to have Disney make any more adaptations of Mary Poppins. How could a sequel be made without the consent of Travers, especially since she died in 1996?

Answer: Travers was never entirely opposed to having a sequel made. She initially refused Disney's sequel ideas, and attempted to impose her own demands and concept on what any additional film would be. In the 1980s, Travers and a friend wrote their own screenplay. The Disney company, now with different management, considered it but eventually dropped the project amid casting problems and other issues and conflicts that emerged. After Travers' death, Disney could then negotiate directly with Travers' estate.

raywest

Answer: The short answer is *because* she died. Control then passed to her beneficiaries/estate. She didn't forbid Disney from making a sequel, and she couldn't legally prevent it either. The deal she had with Disney just meant that they had to agree on it as she had creative control, and despite their (and apparently her) best efforts, they could never find a sequel idea everyone was happy with, especially given her dislike of the original film. Her will stated: "Any payments received by my Trustees in respect of or any future commercial production or exploitation in any form whatsoever of any books I have written (including any sequel to the film "Mary Poppins") shall be held by my Trustees upon trust to distribute..." On her death creative control passed to her trustees, in terms of sequels and the stage show, and they managed to agree on a sequel idea.

Jon Sandys

More questions & answers from Mary Poppins Returns

Join the mailing list

Separate from membership, this is to get updates about mistakes in recent releases. Addresses are not passed on to any third party, and are used solely for direct communication from this site. You can unsubscribe at any time.

Check out the mistake & trivia books, on Kindle and in paperback.