I think he either misunderstands or grossly overestimates the cinematic (or rather franchise) potential of Mary Poppins. It's not comparable to either of those properties, a more apt comparison would be to works like Paddington, Nanny McPhee, Winnie the Pooh, and even Patricia Highsmith's Ripliad. A collection of stories that are self-contained and there are no sequel hooks or an overarching narrative, but there are obvious references to other stories in the series.Sotiris wrote:Director Rob Marshall confirmed the production team are already on the case for a follow-up, which would see Emily Blunt return as the lead. In an exclusive interview, he said: “It is early stages but I will say right now that there were eight books, so there’s a lot of great material still to mine. That’s what we worked from, those incredible eight books of P.L. Travers. So, you know...”
He also claimed the franchise could follow in the footsteps of James Bond and Star Wars — and just keep on going. He said: “Listen, how many Star Wars films have there been, you know what I mean? Or James Bond films. If there’s a great character and story to tell, why not?”
In any case, as much as I liked MPR, I don't think another sequel should be made any time soon. Give it at least several decades before making another one, with a completely new lead actress as Mary Poppins. It would make each film in the series much more special and fresh.