"We tried to cross-pollinate between four different things: 1906 Australia, the Mary Poppins books, the time P.L. Travers spent in 1961 Los Angeles, and the eventual movie Mary Poppins," explains Hancock. "Because we were playing with time in such a way, we weren't looking for an absolute reality."
I am sold on this tactfully heart moving film made by Disney (obviously being generous and sympathetic to their namesake founder on his pursuit for the rights to make "Mary Poppins"). Actually, I would rename this film as "The Making of Mary Poppins". One thing this film is not, its not about the final creative disagreements after the film had "sailed". "She cried and never allow any of her other books to be adapted into films, even expressly stipulating in her will that no American can ever adapt her work again." "Saving Mr. Banks may not be the unvarnished truth its critics want it to be, but it's a film about how a creator must let go of her trauma in order to fully realize her work and herself. And that's more emotionally rich and honest than I ever expected from a Disney film."
Emma Thompson has performed superbly as the proud, prickly, sarcastic-tongued and cash-strapped Pamela L. Travers. I love the little things she does to convey an extra emotion dropping hints of suppressed conflicting behaviour. Hanks convincingly acts as the twinkle smiling drinking-smoking powerful businessman Uncle Disney (who is capable making a killing, pumping sugar water down your throat). Their characters are polar opposites of each other.
I genuinely believed the timeline whether it was "two-weeks" of post-war 1960s America or even the flashbacks of Australia. Those scenes depicting 1906 charming Australia was a treasure as I got more delicate "daddy complex" back-story which gives the film its gravity. This is not a family film and touches some dark unresolved pasts.