--- title: "Mary Poppins: the reviews" canonical: "https://film.one/film/mary-poppins/reviews" title_page: "https://film.one/film/mary-poppins" critics_score: 76 critics_reviews: 14 licence: "© Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL." --- # Mary Poppins (1964): what the critics said Critics' score 76 from 14 reviews: 11 positive, 1 mixed, 2 negative. Most critics are won over, and have been since 1964. Eleven of fourteen reviews are positive, and the praise gathers in the same places: Julie Andrews, whose nanny is repeatedly described as exact and a little unknowable; the Sherman brothers’ songs; and the sequences that put live actors among cartoon penguins. The chimney-sweep dance and Poppins’s arrival are named as set pieces that still work, and later writers, returning for anniversaries, find it has held up. The reservations are scattered. Dick Van Dyke’s Cockney accent is the commonest complaint, raised by Time Out and The Times. Empire finds it overlong and would cut it. The sharper dissent is contemporary: The New Yorker thinks the whole thing too polished and too expensive to feel true, an oversized St Paul’s standing for the problem, while The Times finds it softened from the books and heavy of touch. Slant, reading it as a muddled tract on matriarchy, is the outlier. The spread runs from thirty to a hundred, which is wide for a film this well liked. ## Radio Times — David Parkinson Rating 5/5. This is easily the best of Disney's experiments in combining animation and live action, and one of the studio's best-loved films. Julie Andrews is splendid as the prim nanny, with unforgettable sequences, adorable cartoon characters and timeless songs. [Read the review](https://www.radiotimes.com/movie-guide/b-kendz8/mary-poppins/) ## The Guardian Fi1m's normalised score 90/100 (inferred from the text). 27 August 2024. The critic hails the film as a dazzling, enduring Disney masterpiece and technical marvel that has not lost its shine on its 60th anniversary. They single out Julie Andrews' pitch-perfect, enigmatic performance as the vital X-factor that elevates the musical and keeps the character intriguingly complex. [Read the review](https://www.theguardian.com/film/article/2024/aug/27/mary-poppins-60th-anniversary) ## The Hollywood Reporter — James Powers Fi1m's normalised score 90/100 (inferred from the text). 28 August 1964. The critic calls the film irresistible and a triumph of cohesive intelligence, praising Robert Stevenson’s direction as making it the greatest musical of its kind since The Wizard of Oz. [Read the review](https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/wp-json/wp/v2/posts/1168686) ## The New York Times — Bosley Crowther Fi1m's normalised score 85/100 (inferred from the text). 25 September 1964. The critic finds the Disney adaptation a wonderful, cheering movie that adds visual and aural felicities including beautiful production values, animated sequences, nimble dancing, and a strong musical score. He singles out Julie Andrews’ performance as Mary Poppins for particular praise while noting strong support from the rest of the cast and inventive direction. [Read the review](https://www.nytimes.com/1964/09/25/archives/screen-mary-poppinsjulie-andrews-stars-as-famous-nanny.html) ## Variety — Variety Staff Fi1m's normalised score 85/100 (inferred from the text). 31 December 1963. The critic praises Disney’s all-out dream-world rendition of the magical nanny story and its introduction of wonders to the children. He singles out standout songs like “Chim-Chim-Cher-ee,” the chimney-sweep ballet, the live-action/animation penguin sequence, and the triumphant screen debuts of Julie Andrews and Dick Van Dyke. [Read the review](https://variety.com/1963/film/reviews/mary-poppins-1963-1200420599/) ## Los Angeles Times — Philip K. Scheuer Fi1m's normalised score 80/100 (inferred from the text). 16 August 1964. The critic calls it a Disney fantasy film that brings amazement and delight even to grownups and squares. He highlights the film’s successful blend of fantasy elements that appeal across age groups. [Read the review](https://documents.latimes.com/aug-16-1964-mary-poppins-review/) ## Time Out — FD Fi1m's normalised score 80/100 (inferred from the text). 10 September 2012. The sheer exuberance of Disney's adaptation should tickle the most jaded fancy, with its catalogue of memorable songs, dance routines and strong supporting cast; Julie Andrews delivers an Academy Award-winning portrayal. Dick Van Dyke's Cockney accent is a notable flaw. [Read the review](https://www.timeout.com/movies/mary-poppins) ## Empire — Emma Cochrane Fi1m's normalised score 75/100 (inferred from the text). 1 January 2000. The critic calls it one of Disney’s greats and praises the Sherman brothers’ songs, the magical arrival of Poppins, and the animated sequence as highlights that still work. They note that the film is overlong and drags in places but suggest it could easily earn five stars with some editing. [Read the review](https://www.empireonline.com/movies/reviews/mary-poppins-review/) ## The Times — From Our Film Critic Fi1m's normalised score 50/100 (inferred from the text). 17 December 1964. The critic views the lavish Disney musical as a splendid Christmas entertainment with colour, songs and star power, but finds it overly reliant on pastiche and softened from the source material. They single out the director's lack of light touch and Van Dyke's accent for complaint. [Read the review](https://www.thetimes.com/article/wonder-working-nanny-transformed-3kgbgcfs5) ## The New Yorker — Brendan Gill Fi1m's normalised score 40/100 (inferred from the text). 26 September 1964. The critic finds the film does not feel right, largely because Disney has made everything too good to be true with excessive technical facility and an enormous budget. He singles out the overly polished and enlarged production design (such as an outsized St. Paul’s) and the mixing of live-action with animation as detracting from authenticity. [Read the review](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/1964/10/03/1964-10-03-132-tny-cards-000276023) ## Slant Magazine — Eric Henderson Fi1m's normalised score 30/100 (inferred from the text). 27 January 2009. The critic describes the film as a relentlessly entertaining screed on matriarchy and female assertiveness beneath its surface as agit-pap, praising the alchemy of Stevenson, the Shermans, and the female cast that makes it a dotty, confused State of the Uterus address. [Read the review](https://www.slantmagazine.com/film/mary-poppins/) ## Eye for Film — James Benefield Fi1m's normalised score 90/100 (inferred from the text). 4 April 2009. The critic calls it a strong contender for the best children’s film of all time. It praises the film's whimsy and imagination, iconic songs, visual effects, set pieces, and Julie Andrews' Oscar-winning performance as practically perfect. [Read the review](https://www.eyeforfilm.co.uk/review/mary-poppins-film-review-by-james-benefield) ## /Film — Josh Spiegel Fi1m's normalised score 90/100 (inferred from the text). 19 December 2018. The critic deems the original the quintessential Disney movie for its memorable songs, family-focused story, excess, and technical innovation. It singles out Julie Andrews' serene perfection in the lead role and the Sherman brothers' unforgettable score as key to its timeless appeal. [Read the review](https://www.slashfilm.com/563067/mary-poppins-revisited/) ## Digital Spy — Emma Dibdin Fi1m's normalised score 85/100 (inferred from the text). 30 November 2013. The critic calls Mary Poppins a timeless escapist fantasy and one of the rare childhood films that holds up perfectly today. They single out its joyful songs, charming performances, and the moving story of Mr Banks learning to embrace his family. [Read the review](https://www.digitalspy.com/movies/re-viewed/a534847/re-viewed-disneys-timeless-escapist-fantasy-mary-poppins/) --- © Fi1m Ltd. Written by AI under a human editor; checked against sources before publication. Quote with attribution and a link to the canonical URL. Our review: https://film.one/film/mary-poppins.md