The original Nanny McPhee got a raw deal out of the gate. It was, I felt, dumped quickly and then pulled from theaters due to lack of public interest (perhaps), so-so reviews (I seem to recall), and virtually no awards attention at all. A shame. The film has since developed a following much the same way Julie Taymor’s Across the Universe has. Little by little, bit by bit.
What threw people about Nanny McPhee certainly wasn’t the story, written by Emma Thompson, and it certainly wasn’t the ensemble: Emma Thompson, Angela Lansbury, Imelda Staunton, Colin Firth, Kelly MacDonald, and all of those kids. It was probably the colors. No, I’m going to guess that what threw people was the art and costume design. And that is such an insignifigant annoyance it has definitely faded with time, perhaps even disappeared altogether.
Rope of Silicon’s Brad Brevet alerts us to the Variety story which gives some details of the Nanny McPhee sequel. Emma Thompson is back as screenwriter, actress and executive producer. The film will take place, according to RoS, 100 years after the first film and will follow a group of kids who are moved out of the city and into the country. It also stars Maggie Gyllenhaal, Rhys Ifans and will be directed by first-timer Susannah White.
I will be curious to see what the look of the sequel will be. Will they keep the gumball colored theme from the first film or will they fade it out to give it a less absurd look. I say this, though, being someone who really loved the film and who didn’t have any problem with how it looked.
21 Responses for "Nanny McPhee and the Big Bang"
I haven’t seen the original, but meant to. More curious about it now. It’s interesting that the first film did so poorly and yet they’re getting financing for a second one. It really must be doing better on DVD.
Poor Nanny McPhee, having to be up here right next to that Antichrist trailer with her bright colors and bad teeth. Something just ain’t right about that. (Or perhaps, poor Antichrist?)
I know this is cliche, even for RRA standards, but why does that title sound like a porno?
Contrary to the impression this article tries to give, the first one was actually quite successful. Which is no doubt one of the main reasons why there’s going to be a sequel.
I should watch this movie…don’t know why I never did.
I should’ve known you were a fan of the “actress” Beyonce
I think no one wants to watch a movie where the main character looks that ugly/disgusting
My cousin forced me to watch this film, and I am grateful, it was absolutely fantastic. I cannot wait for the sequel.
I have to agree with tim, I think people just weren’t attracted to a film whose title character appeared to be the baddie – it seemed like pitching Chitty-Chitty Bang-Bang with the child catcher as the lead.
And while I’m sure Emma Thompson is far too humble to think of herself as the star attraction, It’s probably rightly considered suicidal in Hollywood to have a star like Emma, who is so likable, and well liked appear to play such an ugly baddie.
But as an original story with no franchise, and no pixar like pedigree or a disney like marketing machine, its success would always have been limited; so I’m glad to hear of its continuing success.
Nanny McPhee is McPHEENOMENAL
cant wait for this sequel!
And Kate Winslet should’ve been Nanny McPhee right?
I loved the first film. So glad I was forced to go see it. I am a little anti-sequel though. For the sole reason that Emma Thompson won’t appear in either Deathly Hallows film because of it. I mean Dobby is coming back and even Madame Sprout! Trelawney should be back too, oh well.
Alfredo
she’s an actress…not “actress”
did you see Cadillac Records? enough said.
AJ, I doubt anyone outside of the Potter Fanclub will really care whatever Thompson returns for #7 or not.
But hey, for her tiny irrelevant part in 3 and 5 (was she even in #4?), she was good. I do think its funny she worked the same franchise as her ex. Imagined if the planned-Branaugh cameo for #3(or #4?) had gone through. That premiere would have been awkward.
Thompson and Branagh are both in The Boat that Rocked, RRA. Talk about awkward, wasn’t Order of the Phoenix star Helena Bonham Carter the other woman in that ’90’s drama?
Alfredo, yes, of course Nanny McPHEE could have been improved by the heavenly presence of Kate Winslet. That goes without saying!! But the movie turned out to be a whirlwind of whimsy, magic and artistic genius even without KAte the GREAT.
I also heard Maggie Smith was signed up
I’m not here to criticize the acting talents of Beyonce (which isn’t even the topic). In fact, I’m a giant fan of her as an entertainer. But are you really using your online name to promote Obsessed? It looks like The Hand That Rocks the Cradle but even stupider. The majority of us in the Beyonce fan community are making fun of that movie.
Nanny McPhee was a fun movie but I’m not sure I want to do it over again.
Nanny McPhee was very popular in Britain, so that’s why it’s getting a sequel. It’s true that it didn’t do very well in the U.S., but I think that’s changed over time with DVD.
I personally really liked it, and even saw it in the theaters when it first came out. Basically, I’m a huge fan of anything that Emma Thompson writes – from Sense and Sensibility, to her key rewrites to the 2005 Pride and Prejudice, to Nanny McPhee, the woman is a genius at doing screenplay adaptations. The fact that she is also a genius actress just makes me love her all the more.
it is going to be terrible because thomas sangster is not in it.**sniff** **sniff**
so Emma Thompson didn’t do Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows for THIS! poo*
jjaaja i cant to watch the movie and asa butterfield and ema thompson
Leave a reply
All comments should respect the Awards Daily House Rules. If you think a particular comment breaks these rules then please let us know, quoting the comment in question.