大梦想家

华特·迪士尼是迪士尼公司创始人。

特拉弗斯夫人是《欢乐满人间》的原创作者。

两人都是业界翘楚。

迪士尼希望将《欢乐满人间》制作成为电影搬上荧屏。

特拉弗斯夫人坚决不同意，不同意的理由就是她的作品的人物都死她的家人，变成电影就会有金钱的味道，她讨厌金钱，但又离不开金钱。

从第一年到第二十年，迪士尼从来没有放弃这一努力。

直到特拉弗斯夫人即将破产之际，她不得不想办法挽救自己避免破产。

于是夫人来到美国，和迪士尼合作关于自己的作品改编电影的可能性。

一切进展都是那么艰难，特拉弗斯夫人是个固执的老太太，迪士尼和他的员工无论怎么做都不能让他满意。

这是因为老太太受自己家庭的影响，准确的说是她爸爸的影响。

特拉弗斯先生一事无成，可是却是一位棒极了的父亲。

他的女儿金蒂从小就被他培养出讲各种有趣的故事的能力。

金蒂就是后来的特拉弗斯夫人。

特拉弗斯先生的事业可谓非常不幸，几乎没有做成功过一件事。

特拉弗斯先生在城里的房子被卖掉，一家人只得来到乡下苦苦维持生计。

特拉弗斯先生三天两头换工作，无论什么工作似乎都不能做出色。

在做银行经理时，特拉弗斯先生搞砸了一切。

不过，他非常爱自己的女儿，从小金蒂就异常反感金钱，因为他爸爸不喜欢。

整部影片都贯穿了这段往事回忆，不过这也才有了《欢乐满人间》伟大作品。

就在特拉弗斯夫人回到家里之际，迪士尼一同跟来，他终于搞清楚了特拉弗斯夫人的心结所在。

两人都有类似童年的故事，终于达成共识。

迪士尼也成功将《欢乐满人间》搬上了荧屏。

艾玛·汤普森饰演的固执老太太特拉弗斯夫人表演真是给力，我认为要比汉克斯表演得好。

尽管我更喜欢后者。

“影片的英文名为《Saving Mr.Banks》，这里面包含了几个意思。

有华特迪斯尼的出发点，也有崔佛斯固执的原因。

”至今我还没看过哪部由汤姆汉克斯参演的电影是无聊的。

首当其冲的原因应当是我看片少，这里就不再罗列我看过的汤姆汉克斯电影了。

比如受众面很广的喜剧片《幸福终点站》，改编自史蒂芬金小说的《绿里奇迹》，北美年轻人普遍看不懂的《云图》，编入中国教科书的《荒岛余生》，改编自畅销书的《达芬奇密码》和《天使与魔鬼》，影响力甚广的《阿甘正传》，让人想到《猫和老鼠》的《猫鼠游戏》，两部作品中的猫还都叫汤姆。

不同题材的还有《拯救大兵瑞恩》。

当然由于类型限制，2013年改编自真实事件的《菲利普斯船长》，个人认为少了些趣味但更加真实。

而1999年的《绿里奇迹》，则是我最喜欢的影片之一。

以上均是随脑举例，并未全部罗列。

至于这部《大梦想家》，没看电影之前我还以为讲的是关于迪士尼创始人华特迪斯尼的故事。

然而随着影片的播放，六十年间两世剧情的不断穿插。

实话实说对于片中《欢乐满人间》一无所知的我，只一遍就将这部《大梦想家》看了个通透，我自己都有点儿引以为傲了，哪还有闲功夫琢磨到底谁才是影片题目中的“大梦想家”。

那么到底谁才是《大梦想家》这部电影的标题所指？

这个问题就有些复杂了。

由两位两届奥斯卡得主主演的《大梦想家》可称得上是相当精致。

汤姆汉克斯携艾玛汤普森合力贡献的“闷拳”式表演直击人心。

两人还对片中人物的口音做了很大研究，一位反复研究了崔佛斯的生前录音以便模仿她的口音。

一位也为模仿迪士尼的口音下了很大功夫。

相比两位主演在人物口音上的努力，饰演崔佛斯司机的保罗看上去并没有刻意的展示自己。

作为配角的他却也成为了影片中的一个亮点，虽然戏份不多，但足够出彩。

另一位相当出彩的配角则是另一个时间线上的老崔佛斯，个人觉得这次科林法瑞尔在影片中充分展现了自己的表演天赋。

这个在银行工作却郁郁不得志的立体形象，为片中的《欢乐满人间》，也为整部影片埋下了一个大伏笔。

“东风渐渐袭来，带来阵阵薄雾”。

《欢乐满人间》中班克斯家有四个小孩，妈妈请了个保姆来照料小孩。

有一把鹦鹉头伞的玛丽波平斯随风而来，她神通广大，为孩子们带来了无限乐趣。

《欢乐满人间》是崔佛斯根据自己童年经历创作的童话。

在《大梦想家》中可以逐一发现班克斯与玛丽波平斯的原型，甚至可以发现女主角为自己取名崔佛斯的原因。

影片的英文名为《Saving Mr.Banks》，这里面包含了几个意思。

有华特迪斯尼的出发点，也有崔佛斯固执的原因。

影片的中文名叫《大梦想家》，这里面也影射了几个人。

最后，影片奉行了迪斯尼公司的一贯政策，没有任何吸烟的镜头。

这部电影看得我泪流满面。

一旁老公莫名其妙地看着我，惊诧我能理解到这种程度。

严格来讲，这不算是影评，勉强算是观后感。

这部电影没有特别出彩，剧情一般，拍摄手法一般，胜在演员演技精湛。

可是就是被这样的电影打动了，也是许多年来第一部想为她写篇长评。

许多人心中都会有这样的时刻，无力回天痛恨万分。

我看着剧中的海伦，仿佛看到了自己。

原来不知不觉已经过了这么多年，可是当时的感觉一点都没有淡化，只是我渐渐学会克制自己的情绪了。

6年前，敬爱的外公与世长辞。

我遭受了迄今为止最大的打击。

我知道外公身患重症，我想过许多许多他会离开的情景，来临的那一刻还是措手不及。

那是怎样的一天呢，我还是和往常一样去上班，半路上手机被偷了，到办公室给妈妈打电话说了下手机被偷的事情。

那时候发生的事情那么正常，即便中午突然从睡梦中惊醒，还是轻松地写下手机被偷的留言。

可是我不知道啊，外公在那个中午就去了另一个世界，我不知道啊，办公室电话坏了妈妈她们打不进来。

海伦买梨回来，得知她爸爸病逝，她说她把梨买回来了。

她来迟了一步。

她对梨是迁怒吗？

不是，那是生命中无法承受之重。

外公喜欢看报纸，去看他我都会带报纸给他看，他走了后我再也不去那个报亭了，因为它会一直提醒我，我失去我生命中最重要的一个人。

我们再也看不到生命里那些美丽的色彩了。

好长一段时间，我看不到其他的美好，行尸走肉地生活工作，绝口不提有个人离我而去，仿佛只要不说他去世的话语他就还在。

生命一遍遍地轮回更替，是多么正常的事情。

但那又怎样呢，那些人不是我曾爱过的人啊。

美好和悲伤交杂在一起，显得那么弥足珍贵。

海伦看着电影泣不成声，我看着海伦泣不成声。

我不愿猜测她是悲伤、解脱、回忆或是奢望。

我只希望，女巫真的存在，拯救我爱的人。

Winds in the east,mist coming in.Like something is brewing and about to begin.随着这段悲伤独白作为开篇，这个故事以双线平行穿插的形式贯穿头尾。

中肯来说剧本中规中矩，有冲突，有感动，有悲情，也有泪点。

作为Disney出品的片子必然会出现一定的商业元素，然而却并不让人讨厌，并不像某GOOGLE电影有那么严重的商业痕迹。

这是一部几乎适合所有年龄层观看的影片，它关于家庭亲情，关于原谅，关于心灵的救赎以及追寻幸福。

赶上周日最早一场的我几乎在影院里泪流满面。

作为又一部建立在真实故事上的电影，导演在处理双线穿插的时候过于追求情境的冲突而稍显僵硬，Walt Disney最后的说词十分没有说服力甚至前半段让我频频出戏，不过这些简单的大道理是Disney电影的必走流程了。

以及母亲走入河中那段过于Drama显得有些刻意而老套。

但是！

以上这些缺点都无法阻止我被感动得一塌糊涂，都说围绕亲情的电影必然是最催泪的电影，然而能够通过一个孩子的成长去影响其终身是家庭教育，两者结合起来加上戏剧冲突，才是这部电影最精华的部分。

我在这里要大赞国内对片名的翻译，大梦想家。

想必译者是动了心思的，Mr.Travers影响了Allen一生的，便是那番：Don't you ever stop dreaming,you can be anyone you want to be.至于演员方面尤其要大赞Colin Farrell,我直到片尾字幕出现时才惊觉道：什么！

这货竟然是Colin？！

明明他在我心里一直是个酱油挫男的形象这次突破如此不一般。

至于Tom Hanks&Emma Thompson两位老戏骨实在没什么好说，演技还是那么棒。

BTW，刚才在IMDb上看见很多影评在八Disney发展史，大家有兴趣可以搜来看看。

建议本片在观看《Mary Poppins》之后，食用效果更佳。

两部影片，很不巧我是因为汤影帝先看的本片，再看的《Mary Poppins》。

一开始播放的时候我就已经注意到了本片是迪士尼的出品，我没有任何“警惕”没有任何顾虑，因为我带着“这是一部花絮电影”这样的心态来观影，看着看着甚至都已经相信了这个故事，看完后甚至我觉得是部好电影，可以给五星呢。

我没有立刻写影评，直到看完了《Mary Poppins》。

像传记、写实类或是“基于真人真事改编” or whatever you name，这类片子，就算拍的再好，其真实与否会直接动摇我对片子的评价。

本片中我们可以得知，Mrs. Travers（以下简称T）对改编有诸多要求（so many "NO"s），但实际上映的 《Mary Poppins》，就我个人感觉的话，是大失T所望的：Mary Poppins does not sing.（Walt（简称W吧）取了折中方案：她唱，但不轻佻不蹦蹦跳跳（也算满足原作者的要求），音乐也确实不错）A live-action film. No animation.（真人插大量动画）No Dick Van Dyke.（没改）No grand house, but normal one.（大且富丽堂皇）No hint of romance between Poppins and Bert.（你会发现还是会有那么一点“暧昧的火花”）Mr. Bank is cuel.（他还是当面撕掉了孩子们的广告并丢进了壁炉，后面用happy ending作补偿，也可以说是妥协吧）......以上就省略那些挑字眼或是可能是因为赌气而提的要求吧："No red in the picture."光是这些就够她受的了，T试图证明没有人比她更懂自己的作品，事实证明她也是对的，因为这群试图将她的作品搬上银幕的人，直到真正和T合作之前都没有搞清楚原著的内涵：要拯救的不是两个孩子，而是孩子的父亲。

本片也因此得名。

少不了"The big shot's special requirement"：Mr.Bank's mustache.虽然片子没有直接说明W为什么这么要求，从片子观察看来，我的个人猜测是：得把他自己标志性的八字胡用上，把掌门人的标志放入片子算得上是一种宣传？

营销的手段？

T在本片中，一个尖酸刻薄、吹毛求疵、执着到近乎疯狂的老女人，最后在W和他的团队努力下被感化，准确来说W还是MVP，最后交出了“视为家人”的作品，接受“改造”，然而电影的首映式居然没被邀请？

只能说，我并不是当事人，这个故事的真实性无法考究，里面的情节有多少被改编了我不得而知。

但是包括我在内的观众应该能感受得到，有关于W和他的迪士尼帝国，都太过完美，而有关于T的一切，又是那么的不堪。

仿佛是天父在地狱门前向徘徊的灵魂伸出了手，这个灵魂最终得到升华位列天堂。

洗白片。

自说自话。

迪士尼的主旋律。

一瞬间，脑中浮现的都是这些词。

一瞬间，W那些举动回想起来，just make me feel sick。

T最反感的其中一个点：A spoonful of sugar"All they need is a spoon and some sugar and a brain full of fluff and they equipped with life's tools.""She(Marry Poppins) doesn't sugarcoat the darkness in th world that these children will eventually, inevitably come to know."All I see is :《Mary Poppins》is a spoonful of sugar for the children.《Saving Mr. Banks》and Walt's Disneyland is a spoonful of sugar for the adults.Maybe sometimes I need this spoonful of sugar, but not today.

边看边在纸上记了很多关键词、台词，关于这部电影有太多的感受感悟亮点。

但是全片看完被打动落泪，却觉得之前记下的这一切都不是那么重要了。

所以就不组织了，只琐碎的记录一下。

每次遇到真实事件改编的片子有较大幅度的美化我就会不可避免的降低好感，但是单纯影片本身真的拍得够好，且卡司都是我的大爱，表演够好，所以值得上五星。

Emma Thompson演的真好。

一出场就把一个刻薄的英国老太太演绎的那么生动准确。

可是倒也不让人讨厌，因为会被她那股认真执着劲感染。

然后随着剧情深入越来越了解她的童年过往，就越来越理解现在的她——包括那一系列的具体符号：梨（为了不忆起父亲的死，也为了不忆起自己曾经让父亲失望）、编造词（父亲曾在嬉闹中编造过一个词）、胡子（父亲说为了女儿的脸也一定要把胡子剃干净；而后来Walt Disney在伦敦忆起自己的父亲来则提到说父亲有那样的胡子所以才希望片中人物也有那样的胡子。

这两相辉映很赞，都是体现对父亲的爱）、红色（父亲的血——然而有一个特写显示，她的脚趾甲上涂的是红色的指甲油）、湖（母亲险些在湖中溺死）、两便士（父亲临终前给的买梨钱）、茶（姨妈到来时拿出的茶杯），都在现实和回忆的切换中找到了对应。

这整个叙事结构很赞，节奏也很流畅。

酒店房间里Pam清理毛绒玩具很可爱，尤其是最后把米奇扔去面壁。

而这反倒映衬着后来她抱着米奇入睡以及和米奇相对而坐说出一句Enough后签下授权合约的情节更加温馨。

Pam在酒店吧台前用茶，想和bartender聊几句以派遣寂寞，还没开口人已走远，尽显独自一人远在洛城的孤独悲凉感，同时体现的也是她成年后人生和生活的孤独——没有伴侣，独守空房，还一直被童年亲情的噩梦纠缠着。

好在还有愿意去了解她和她沟通的Ralph在。

不知道电影里小女孩的名字Jane跟他的女儿Jane是否有关系。

Walt登场时背后架子上一字排开的Oscar小金人真是闪瞎眼。

编剧三人组被Pam训斥时太好玩了。

这整个创作过程本身也很吸引人，不断的碰撞激发。

Jason Schwartzman是我的大爱，但是这次收拾的干干净净的一开始都没认出来——收拾干净了真好看，歌声也好听。

风筝。

这个意象是童年回忆中未曾出现的，但它也在回忆中有着对应的隐喻，那就是fix。

姨妈到来时说会fix everything，但没能做到，父亲离开了。

所以Pam会眼含泪水的冲编剧们喊为什么就不能把风筝给fix好，因为风筝或许就隐喻着父亲的生命和自己生命的快乐，如果风筝能修好或许就能愈合她内心的伤口。

我猜在她原著小说中风筝最后是没修好的，所以当编剧们决定将情节改变时，她会那么高兴，甚至略显突兀的手舞足蹈。

看到几篇影评中提到，现实中Pam在首映时因为动画企鹅非常愤怒，以致落泪，且并没有发生Walt前往伦敦和她推心置腹的那番交谈。

我不知道她落泪到底是因为愤怒还是因为感动，但至少我是在片子演到那里时被打动流泪了。

有一句我喜欢的影评或许很适合放在这里做个注脚：不论Traverse是否已对当年影片的事释怀，这部电影是给她的。

就像是不论伦敦的那番对话是否真实发生过，Tom Hanks在片中说的那番话也都有其现实意义。

他说，"You expect me to disappoint you, so you make sure I did. Life disappointed you."，忘掉痛苦的那几天吧，多想想那些快乐的日子，学会原谅，不是原谅其他，是原谅自己，"Life is a harsh sentence to lay down for yourself"，原谅了才能重拾快乐，重拾生活。

Saving Mr.Banks，不仅仅是拯救当初这个险些流产的影片项目，也不仅仅是拯救自己内心中的父亲和伤痕，更是拯救Mrs.Traverse，以及我们每一个有过类似经历的人的心。

电影中的首映最后，Pam笑了。

在那时她回忆起的是看到父亲吐血后的对话，"Don't leave me." "Never. I promise." 我想她之所以笑了，是因为这部电影，这部电影最后被修好并放飞的风筝，以及她参与这部电影创作慢慢释然慢慢解脱的整个过程，使得父亲得到了拯救，从而能够兑现诺言永远陪伴着她——在心中。

片尾的老照片和当年真实的录音带很赞，海报上两个人的影子极赞。

在迪斯尼的动画和快乐中学习到了，积极乐观的精神。

这位女作家的父亲曾经也是乐观充满想象力的人。

生活蹉跎不幸让他压抑快乐生活，注意到，她的母亲是一个很犹豫愁眉苦脸的人。

最后父亲被负面的情绪吞噬了。

家里到处回荡着负面情绪了。

曾经喜欢梦幻和想象力的女作家，在父亲无法救活之后再也不相信生活的美好和积极这点让人很悲伤很悲伤。

知道快乐是可以感染和培养的。

迪斯尼的伙伴们在和她交流中，培养了快乐和乐观。

会发现迪斯尼里充满了快乐的正能量。

她的性格的转变是电影看点。

所有人都有办法拯救，从此乐观积极的生活下去。

生活可以困苦，迪斯尼先生说了自己童年的生活，比我们过得都困苦艰难。

但是他的梦想和正能量非常非常的强大。

让他把快乐以至于变成了一个源源不断输送快乐和想象力的能源工厂。

也许就是大梦想家这个名字的来源吧。

向大梦想家致敬。

Is ‘Saving Mr. Banks’ too hard on ‘Mary Poppins’ creator?DEC. 28, 2013 12 AM PTBYREBECCA KEEGANhttps://www.latimes.com/entertainment/movies/la-xpm-2013-dec-28-la-et-mn-disney-mary-poppins-saving-mr-banks-travers-20131228-story.htmlIn the winter of 1933, in a thatched cottage in Sussex, England, a complicated woman named Pamela “P.L.” Travers began to write “Mary Poppins,” the first in a series of novels that would inspire the beloved 1964 Walt Disney movie and supply generations of children with a magical fantasy nanny.The reality of Travers’ own turbulent childhood — and her reluctance as an adult to relinquish control over her characters to Walt Disney — are the subject of the movie “Saving Mr. Banks,” which has just gone into wide release. Directed by John Lee Hancock, “Saving Mr. Banks” follows Travers (Emma Thompson) as she travels to the Disney lot in Burbank for two weeks in 1961, tangling with and tormenting the studio chief (Tom Hanks). The L.A. visit inspires Travers to recall her childhood in Australia, in particular her father, a charismatic drunk played by Colin Farrell.Some critics have complained that “Saving Mr. Banks,” which Disney itself produced and distributed, is too hard on Travers and too easy on the company’s founder. Travers is cold, critical and strange — arbitrarily objecting, for instance, to having the color red in the movie and dismissing Disney’s “silly cartoons.” “Uncle Walt,” by contrast, is jovial and encouraging, with few flaws to speak of save for a bad smoker’s cough.ADVERTISEMENTVIDEO: ‘Saving Mr. Banks’: Watch cast, crew discuss the filmAlmost all of what appears in “Saving Mr. Banks” is true. Travers really did hector and frustrate the people at Disney, a fact substantiated by 39 hours of audio recordings of the author’s sessions with “Mary Poppins” screenwriter Don DaGradi, who is played here by Bradley Whitford, and songwriter brothers Richard Sherman (Jason Schwartzman) and Robert Sherman (B.J. Novak).But the makers of “Saving Mr. Banks” admit they took some liberties with Travers’ often tragic life story — they say they actually added a spoonful of sugarYour gift makes a difference in the lives of working dogs, handlers and those affected by disasters here and around the world.“[Travers] was an incredibly difficult person and actually much more difficult than she’s portrayed in the film,” said Kelly Marcel, who shares screenplay credit on the movie with Sue Smith. “But the more I found out about her childhood, the more I felt for her. A lot of children’s authors create these characters from places of tragedy and darkness. I felt it was a beautiful story even though she was an absolute pain.”Australian producer Ian Collie, who made a documentary about Travers in 2002, hatched the idea for a biopic about her, eventually involving independent producers in Britain, a path to the screen that was initially free of Disney input.“This was a script completely developed outside of Disney,” Hancock said. “It would have been difficult for this script to happen inside the studio walls.”Smith, an Australian writer, penned the first draft of the screenplay, which focused on Travers’ strange single-motherhood tale; in real life, the creator of one of fiction’s most beloved caregivers had promised to adopt twin boys, and at the last minute decided to raise only one, never telling him about his brother. (Travers’ son, Camillus, died in 2011, having eventually met his twin brother as an adult in a bar.)When Marcel came onto the project, she decided to leave out Camillus and split the script instead into a dual narrative, with one thread focused on Travers’ childhood, the other on two weeks of her decades-long feud with Disney. She also introduced a fictional character, an optimistic driver played by Paul Giamatti, with whom Travers finally shares a human moment.“I felt we didn’t have a bridge to her feelings,” Marcel said. “We need someone to like her.”Marcel’s script earned a spot on the Black List, a list of hot, unproduced screenplays circulating in Hollywood, which attracted the attention of executives at Disney — in reality the only studio that could have made a movie so laden with Disney intellectual property.“Once Disney bought the script, my big fear was, they’re going to try and sanitize Walt,” Marcel said. “There are going to be so many rules and stipulations, they’re going to say he can’t smoke, he can’t drink. And then they didn’t.”Instead Marcel got access to Disney’s vast archive, including the 39 hours of tapes, which Travers had demanded be made, and to Richard Sherman, who consulted on the movie.Sherman recalls Travers as frustrating and unkind. “The first thing [Travers] said to us was, ‘This is not going to be a musical,’ ” Sherman said, remembering the weeks he spent with Travers in 1961. “[“Saving Mr. Banks”] feels so real to me, it knots my stomach.”Marcel said one change the studio asked her to make to the movie, which is rated PG-13, was to remove a swear word. Disney is also not shown smoking but does stub out a cigarette in one scene.Disney — the man and his creations — have been the subject of interest in multiple media lately, including a critical opera by Philip Glass called “The Perfect American” and a dark independent movie shot surreptitiously at Disney World, “Escape From Tomorrow.”According to Hanks, the fact that “Saving Mr. Banks” is really about Travers, and only spent a narrow time frame on Disney, absolved it of having to deal with some of the more unsavory parts of Disney’s history, such as his role in Hollywood labor issues in the 1940s and his relationships with some well-known anti-Semites.“It was very prescribed what the screenplay was going to be,” Hanks said. “Everybody asks about the strike and the anti-Semitism. But by 1961 it was far enough in the past. He was at the studio and he was — I don’t want to say that he was beloved, but Walt was beloved.”Reviews for the film have mainly been more positive than negative, and Thompson has earned Golden Globe and Screen Actors Guild nominations for her performance. But some critics have objected to what they consider a pro-Walt slant in a movie coming from the man’s own studio. LA Weekly’s Amy Nicholson wrote, “There’s something sour in a movie that roots against a woman who asserted her artistic control.”Marcel said she’s surprised by the critique. “I think I’m incredibly sympathetic toward [Travers] in this film,” Marcel said. “I don’t understand those reviews, but she’s a tricky character.”Disney never invited Travers to the “Mary Poppins” premiere, but she came anyway, afterward telling Disney they had “lots of work to do” to ready the film for release (Disney dismissed her). Privately she told friends she found the film too saccharine.“Kelly Marcel’s script poses a great what if,” Hancock said. “We know Travers didn’t care for the [“Mary Poppins”] movie. We know she wasn’t invited to the premiere. We know she didn’t care for the animation. We do know she cried at the premiere and nobody knows why. Kelly took that as an opportunity for a what if: What if these two weeks were a cathartic experience?”Travers spent her later years writing other novels, poetry and nonfiction (none as commercially successful as “Mary Poppins”) and pursuing an interest in various spiritual ideas, including the teachings of the mystic George Gurdjieff and Zen mysticism, before dying in London in 1996.Valerie Lawson, author of the Travers biography “Mary Poppins, She Wrote,” who has seen “Saving Mr. Banks,” defends its portrait of a difficult woman.“Travers was prickly, but she had good reason to be unhappy as she went through many private struggles and, in many ways, was a woman who could rely only on herself,” Lawson said. “She tried to keep her private life very private so it would have been very confronting for her to see, or even think of herself as a film character. Then again, if she was alive, I can’t see how the film could have been made at all.”--I heard that P.L. Travers ruined the lives of two boys. Is that true?https://www.historyvshollywood.com/reelfaces/saving-mr-banks.phpThough it was not shown in the film, author P.L. Travers did not weave similar magical tales when it came to her personal life. In 1940, she became aware of a destitute family that she knew in Ireland who were looking for someone to adopt their infant identical twins. The children had been born to an irresponsible father and an inept mother, and were in the care of their grandparents who were having trouble coping with the responsibility of raising four children. They arranged for a family friend from London, Pamela Lyndon Travers, to adopt both of the infant twins, at least that was their understanding. Travers was approaching her 40th birthday and had given up hope on finding a lasting relationship that might produce biological children. She was attracted to the literary lineage of the twins.

Trying to choose between two identical twins, P.L. Travers selected her adopted son Camillus based on advice from her astrologer. She refuseTrying to choose between two identical twins, P.L. Travers selected her adopted son Camillus based on advice from her astrologer. She refused to take them both.The twins were the grandchildren of Joseph Hone, an Irish writer and the biographer of poet W.B. Yeats, Travers's idol whom she knew personally. Upon her arrival in Ireland, Travers chose to adopt only Camillus Hone, but not his twin brother Anthony, subsequently splitting up the pair. She based which one to choose on the advice of her astrologer, who had advised her to select the first-born boy. While Camillus Hone (pictured at right with Travers in the 1940s) was whisk off to a life of wealth and privilege in London, his brother Anthony was left to be cared for by neglectful relatives. "Pamela Travers saw herself as Mary Poppins and thought she could play Poppins with poor little Camillus," says the boys' oldest brother, Joseph Hone. "I don't think Travers was fit to bring up children." Appalled by her new son crying at night, at one point Travers considered sending the infant to a babies home in Tunbridge Wells. She eventually got along better with the child, but still shipped him off to boarding school while she continued to focus on her career. -Telegraph.co.ukThe twins reunited at age seventeen when Tony showed up unannounced on P.L. Travers's doorstep to meet his brother Camillus. Travers had previously told Camillus that he was her own and that his father had died of an accident in the colonies where he was a wealthy sugar magnate. The two brothers had little in common other than a fondness for alcohol and would only see each other occasionally in the years that followed. Camillus eventually developed a drinking problem and spent six months in prison after being arrested for driving drunk without a license. His twin brother Anthony would also develop an alcohol problem, which would cost him his family and his career in public relations. Prior to Anthony's death, his ex-wife Frances would tend to his basic needs as she listened to him "moaning" about his brother's good fortune. -DailyMail.co.ukIronically, Camillus's widow, also named Frances, says that he had been left "disappointed and sad" after being made aware that he had been plucked from his natural family. "He would have liked to belong to them because they were artistic and interesting, and as he grew up he didn't have any brothers, sisters or aunts and uncles, or a Daddy — only her." -DailyMail.co.uk

在春色满人间这部由Disney投拍的经典歌舞电影上映50周年之际，Disney公司发行了影片的重制蓝光碟，以及一部纪念电影——大梦想家，讲述春色满人间从筹拍到上映历经坎坷20多年的花絮。

春色满人间的原小说作者P. L. Travers是个正宗的（伪）英国人，精致，严谨，一口英伦腔极尽刻薄之能事；而投拍电影的Disney老板Walt Disney是典型的美国人，热情，乐观，一脸笑容温暖人心。

起初P. L. Travers对Walt Disney及参与春色满人间电影项目的工作人员百般刁难，然而最终，做作英伦腔在与美式正能量的撕逼大战中败下阵来，影片得以投拍，并取得了巨大成功，和P. L. Travers本人的肯定。

-装正经废话完结线---好吧，其实这些都不是我的关注重心。

作为Colin Farrell的长期脑残粉，囧哥的出演才是我的点。

影片有两条故事线，1906年的澳大利亚和1961年的洛杉矶。

前者道出了P. L. Travers的童年经历，对于 解释她的性格成因，行为细节，以及Mary Poppins小说的创作初衷其关键作用。

小囧哥就存在于这条线，因为故事相对独立，没有Emma Thompson和Tom Hanks两位公认的严肃艺术家压制，我囧哥作为不严肃艺术家的才华得到充分释放。

其实以我对Colin Farrell的演技的认可程度，即使让他和二老对戏我应该也会觉得演得很好的。

只是肯定会有很多人做出如下反应，“好莱坞浪荡公子Colin Farrell的光芒完全被两大戏骨压制，演技还需磨练”，呵呵，呵呵呵呵……可是囧哥饰演的P. L. Travers的爹，Mr. Banks的原型，怎么那么像个林黛玉啊……他是真正的大梦想家，虽为生活颠沛流离，却有着赤子之心和孩童般的笑容；他性格乖僻，无法和世俗相容，却对家人有最深沉的爱。

他虽然没有两湾似颦非颦罥烟眉（他眉毛粗得像蜡笔小新还是囧字形的），但他有一双似喜非喜含情目，他哭时背对Ginty，看不到泪光点点，但能感受到娇喘微微……更关键的是，他吐血啊，他吐了一次血之后，从演讲台上摔下来，从此就躺在床上，直到戏份完结再也没起来过，就那么吐啊，吐啊，最后吐得一身血，死了。

这不是林黛玉是什么啊，摔！

大梦想家（Saving Mr. Banks）---看到这部电影完全是个意外，但是影片结束时我不得不说，我太tm喜欢这部电影了。

电影是以双时间线跨时空交错叙事，讲的是Walt Disney为了完成对自己女儿的承诺，花了整整二十年时间说服自己最喜欢的女作家Mrs. Travers将小说《欢乐满人间》搬上电影屏幕的故事。

影片的视觉效果特别出色，一直是高饱和的温暖色调，好几处画面美得叫人浮想联翩。

可是这样的镜头下描绘的却是一个无比悲伤动人的故事，我是从头到尾哭着看完，到后半段早已泣不成声。。

艾玛·汤普森的表演几近完美，在Mrs. Travers不断闪回出现的回忆里，我们渐渐读懂了她的固执，严苛，独断和难以相处，看到她后面一点点的放下、释然、与世界和解，更重要的是与自己和解，相信每一位观众内心都深深为她感到欣喜。

而好莱坞选择Tom Hanks来演迪士尼先生也是再合适不过，一位是深受全世界小朋友爱戴的，一位是全世界成年人都喜欢的。

影片中编剧三人组（有时是四人组，迪士尼先生也时不时会加入进来）和女作家合作的戏份是全片最有趣的部分，几人总是小心翼翼的编写剧本以尽量贴近原著，可无论怎样都无法让老太太满意，在几位编剧出场时，我惊呼这不是“Office”里的Ryan嘛，简直像是闲逛时突然撞到多年未见的老熟人一般亲切😂另外，片中女作家的司机拉尔夫无疑也是电影中一处非常暖心的人物设置，戏份不多，但足够出彩影片的英文名称是《Saving Mr. Banks》，中文译名却是《大梦想家》，可究竟谁才是大梦想家呢？

In a word，如果满分是五颗星的话，我给这部电影六颗星！