Saving Mr Banks (or why I cry whenever I see this film)

So while this film was released a while ago, I only got to see it in Easter with my brother. I'd never really heard of P. L. Travers, though I'm sure much to her chagrin, I had watched the Disney version of Mary Poppins and always loved it. Unlike many Disney films it is the one that holds a really special place in my heart, because whenever I went to see my granny, I would always watch Mary Poppins at her house. I was never an entire convert to Disney, unlike some of my friends. I wasn't keen on Sleeping Beauty, because I loved the original ballet, I never really watched Cinderella or Snow White, I only like Beauty and the Beast, because Belle read books and so did I!

Perhaps it's because I've always liked tragedy in stories, that the Little Mermaid left me unimpressed (where was the suicide? Where was the true heartbreak?) and the Hunchback of Notre Dame, became a Disney film I hated (the witchhunts, the madwoman, the nonacceptance of society of sexual relationships outside marriage, were all wiped out). You would be forgiven in calling me strange or even precocious, but then I adored Grimm fairy tales and Greek myths and legends when I was younger, so in many ways I can easily understand Travers' disgust of Disney's sweetening of traditional fairytales and the lessons to children that all they need is 'a spoonful of sugar!'

I'm not denying that there is something good about innocence and acceptance, which many children have, but there does seem to be now a bit of a backlash towards some of the more sugary, sweet stories. We have Harry Potter, A Series of Unfortunate Events, the Hobbit and even some of the Disney films are getting darker in tone. Mary Poppins (film) still dealt with a distant father, too concerned with making money and keeping order, to really notice his children. The version of Mary Poppins in the book is rather different from the film version, who Travers certainly considered too trivial and sweet. But perhaps one of the things in the Mary Poppins film was how easy it was to identify with the film's protagonists. I have a younger brother, a feminist mother and at one point a father who became very distant from me and my brother.

With Saving Mr Banks this theme of redeeming a relationship with a father, became even more applicable to me. I certainly enjoyed the brilliant acting of Emma Thompson (Pamela Travers) and the witty one liners in the script, but what makes me weep without fail is Pamela's past with her family, and her father especially. For me, I can watch a dozen romances without shedding a tear, because I have not been in a similar situation and I always need to emotionally identify with a film before I cry. Having learnt a little more about the truthful account of Travers and her relationship with Disney, I realise there's a fair bit of sweetening, and bias in Disney's favour, for the sake of a happy ending. But I didn't expect an entirely truthful depiction, because this a biopic and not a documentary. And I am perfectly fine with that, because the story and acting are wonderful.

During my childhood, I had admired my father a lot, he is intelligent, creative and inventive. He taught me about birdwatching, gardening, read me stories and even made them up at times. He encouraged my imagination, my learning and my playtime. In the same way Pamela Travers/Helen Goff shares a similar relationship with her father. He has all the time in the world for her, loves her and urges her to pursue whatever it is she wishes to accomplish. But the need to make money at the bank he works at, and the sinking depression Travers Goff fell into, sours this relationship and those of the family.

The same happened to my family, soon my father was making money because he needed to, not because he wanted to. After every family outing or day out shared with my father I was expected to count every penny we had spent, even if I didn't want to, because I wanted to enjoy the day we had spent together. Sadly, this also happened around my teenage years, so I began to have less and less to do with my father. While I don't blame anyone, Pamela's feelings of guilt, reminded me of my own, because I winded up spending very little time with my father. When I watched the film I was reminded how much I had loved and respected my dad, but through our own mistakes we had driven each other away. Saving Mr Banks concerns the saving of all fathers, either if they mistakenly put money before their children's happiness or forget their own happiness with a need to make money. As the Sherman brothers so succinctly, and ironically, put:

You're a man of high position,

Esteemed by your peers.

And when your little tykes are crying,

You haven't time to dry their tears,

And see them grateful little faces,

Smiling up at you,

Because their dad, he always knows

Just what to do. 

You've got to grind, grind, grind,

At that grindstone,

Though childhood slips like sand through a sieve,

And all too soon they've up and grown,

And then they've flown,

And it's too late for you to give,

Just that spoonful of sugar,

To help the medicine go down.

Pamela Travers certainly had a difficult past, which she tried (and in many ways failed) to hide away. I think really she didn't want a film to be made at all, and when it had to be, made the process as difficult as possible through her many complaints. Partly because of psychological trauma, partly loyalty to her books, but mostly because she wanted to. But for me the film means a whole lot more than a woman making a fuss over the movie interpretation of her book. It's the closest a film has come to representing my childhood and knowing I've been lucky to still have a chance to continue loving and admiring my dad, and knowing he still loves and admires me.

A New Era for Women and Disney?

Frozen has become central for debates regarding feminism, a potential new era for Disney and dividing people down the line. So what I'm here to argue is...it's a middle ground. I'm not going to argue it's really revolutionary, because how long do we have to wait before we get both a decent strong female character and a strong plot? We seem to get stuck in a situation of either/or and it's frustrating. There have been loads of great Disney/Pixar films regarding male leads and their adventures, e.g Wreck it Ralph, Ratatouille, Toy Story. But when it comes to female leads and their adventures, the plots tend to fall flat or rely on the old 'and they fall in love and live happily ever after.' trope.

There's something that's always bugged me about Brave, for example, and up until recently I couldn't quite work out what that was. Then I sort of realised. Despite the ending culminating in Merida forming a better relationship with her mother and her mother letting her hair down (pun entirely intended!), we're still being taught that a girl with an adventurous, bold streak will end up being in trouble. Brave has the two wonderful characters of Merida and Elinor, it questioned the bond between mother and daughter, but had this been about a boy seeking acceptance from his father I can't help thinking the plot would have been different. Would he be almost 'punished' for his adventurous, daring streak? And as usual we get the whole marriage theme (albeit Merida not wanting to marry at all).

But her adventure falls flat, because in reality she doesn't change her fate at all. The will o' the whisps and the witch do. Yes, she might have avoided the loathsome issue of marriage, but when we really think about it, Merida has no real say over her journey. In a similar vein to Ratatouille, Merida wants to go on an adventure to find out more about the world, her passions in life and the choices she has to make. But unlike Remy, she really ends up with little say about this, because rather than the adventure being important, it is still her family and her responsibilities as a Princess that are important, not Merida herself. Does she wind up with the choice to remain single? For some reason, I doubt it. Young MacGuffin's apparent gibberish in the film, is actually Scottish Gaelic, and what he does say at one point is 'The Princess should decide who she marries.' This may imply that despite Merida's timely escape from marriage for now, she will still have to marry someone in the future. Because the stability of the surrounding kingdoms rely on her eventually becoming a brood mare.

Another issue I'm taking with Disney films is the amount of boys. I appreciate that may sound wrong, but let's look at every single heroine who has had to be surrounded by a gang of guys (or at least male gendered counterparts). Rapunzel, from Tangled, had Flynn/Eugene, Pascal and Maximus; Tiana, from the Princess and the Frog, had Prince Naveen, Louis and Ray; Pocahontas had John Smith, Flit and Meeko; Anna, from Frozen, had Kristoff, Sven and Olaf...hmm, I'm noticing a pattern here! It's apparently impossible for a female lead to get from A to B, without one potential love interest and two goofy sidekicks. No way we can drop just one for a female sidekick? Who could talk maybe? No...? Ok.

But it does mean, apart from one, often naive or even foolish woman, that young girls have no one to identify with. Even those females with a grain of sense and determination are seen as foolish. Tiana is told her dream of owning a restaurant won't mean anything without a man at her side. Whether she met someone or not, I am certain her father would be damn proud of her. I felt cold, when her exclamation of needing to work harder to gain her dream, was treated with ridicule. Her hard work and no nonsense attitude should be seen as admirable, not as idiotic. We shouldn't regard Tiana as lacking something, because she has no romantic inclination at the time. If we compare it with another film, regarding the same desire of owning a restaurant and cooking. Ratatouille focuses more or less on Remy's desire to cook. Yes, he's told he's a fool, but he defends his dream to the hilt. But the thing is I don't recall Remy being told his dream of owning his restaurant would mean nothing without a female rat by his side.

Hades = The Devil? I Don't Think So.

How long? How long do I have to wait before I see a version of Greek Mythology that has not been Christianised within an inch of its life? Seriously, Hollywood, stop pissing me off...Well maybe not just Hollywood. I'm seeing a whole lot of this going on. And new Hercules...um...Gladiators?! Stop putting f***ing Gladiators in Ancient Greek films/tv shows.

Ah, hello readers. I shall calm myself and structure this into a proper argument.

As a Pagan, I am getting increasingly annoyed with how my beloved Gods are portrayed. Yes, I get it. You can't have a man-whore Zeus, a callous and jealous Hera and a not-quite-a-villain Hades in a Disney film. That's understandable. And in a way, as a writer, I completely understand new interpretations of Greek mythology; that has gone on for years and there are multitudes of different stories (some we probably don't even know about)!

I guess it's just all the romanticising that goes on. Myths aren't meant to be nice little fairytales (even fairytales aren't always fairytales - check out the original Brothers Grimm stuff, f***ing hell!). The main thing that's bugging me, is the way my friends (who aren't pagans or fountains of literary mythology knowledge), assume they know more than me about Greek mythology because they've read Percy Jackson or seen Atlantis (BBC TV Series). And all I can really do is sit there and shake my head. Because in reality, they only know the bastardised version of Greek mythology. The one that's been painted and preened till it's more wholesome and easier to swallow.

One of the reasons I chose to follow the Ancient Greek Gods, wasn't to be cool or unique, it was because they were more human than the Christian God I had followed. They weren't pinnacles of morality or righteousness. Half the time they did not stop the monsters, they caused them. Perhaps there's an immorality and a chaotic nature within me, that innately calls to that idea of passion and chaos. I don't want life to be easy and uncomplicated, where's the fun in that? You might say I am asking for trouble. Maybe I am, but the last thing I want in life is to live out a path that really means very little, either to myself or anyone else.

So in a way, I don't want to see my Gods neatened and dressed up, till they fit within a nice little Christian theme. Stop telling me and others that there is only good and evil. That for those of us who aren't 'evil', we won't ever become it or be able to understand it. And for those of us who are, there's really no escape from that path. Stop changing my view of life and death, for yours. I don't want to see your view of Hell, as my view of the Underworld. The respect and companionship we once had with Death, is now irrevocably changed. We now fear the expected, which is madness, yet we waste this current life worrying about it. Stop telling me that the Mother should be sweet and kind, the Father brave and resourceful and the Devil is without goodness.

I want my Paganism to be shown fully on TV and Films, without frills or censorship. I want there to be more than archetypes and stereotypes. And for once in all my life, I don't want to see Gladiator fights on an Ancient Greek film. Get those men entirely naked and running round a field! Or wrestling. I don't care, just make sure they're naked, check your historical facts first and then go to the myths for inspiration. There's nothing wrong with new stories and ideas, I just want some of my religion left behind when I see the final product and not a sweetened version of it.