MovieChat Forums > August Rush (2007) Discussion > The problem with 'it's a fairy tale'

The problem with 'it's a fairy tale'

posted 17 years ago by action-barry
46 replies | jump to latest

I have just watched this unmitigated disaster of a motion picture and was astonished to see its relatively high rating on IMDB. I immediately came to the boards to try and figure out why the people who like this movie like it.

I see that most supporters are into its "fairly tale" elements. That is certainly a fair thing to enjoy, and I'm not going to knock that. I won't tell someone they're wrong to like or dislike a movie.

That being said, I have seen a number of people who DISlike this movie raise extremely valid negative issues with the movie only to have a hoard of fans rebut with "it's a fairy tale." This is an insufficient response to valid concerns.

A good fairy tale doesn't have people walking out and pointing out the less-than-realistic elements of the story. A good fairy tale effectively sets up the rules of the universe in which it exists and then works according to them. This movie did not do that. Why are so many willing to swallow that this little boy literally follows sounds he hears to New York and in doing so is reunited with his parents (a completely fantastic notion that, in this fairy tale, I didn't object to at all) but are NOT able to swallow, say, his needing to be taught by an adorable little girl how to plop notes on a piece of sheet music but then suddenly knowing how to write complex notation (which immediately struck me as ludicrous)? The latter is, frankly, far less bizarre -- so why is it so much more objectionable? I think it is because the movie doesn't ground this incredible ability of the boy in anything that happens in the movie. Indeed, it even suggests a direct (and false) correlation with Mozart, seemingly suggesting that this sort of fantastic wunderkind ability is humanly possible (which it isn't). A fairy tale doesn't do any of this kind of dangerous mixing of the real and the fantastic. A fairy tale doesn't give you a magical wizard and then tie the wizard into the natural framework of reality. That's dangerous and, frankly, rather misanthropic.

I find this sort of so-called "fairy tale" completely reprehensible. Fairy tales are supposed to be fantastical demonstrations of some real, human truth. The point of Cinderella isn't "if you're downtrodden you can count on magic to help you out" -- it's, among many other things, the classic ugly duckling tale. What is August Rush? If you are Superboy, you will do Superthings? My, how sad I am to not be Superboy. I will not be able to do Superthings now. Thank you, August Rush, for highlighting my painful normality. Ho-hum, back to the office with me.

Indeed, I shudder at the thought of a young person watching this movie and being taught that talent isn't worked at -- it is merely given to you. By magic.

In short, this movie can only be called a "fairy tale" because certain supernatural things occur in it -- primarily Superboy's magical music gifts. Literally everything else in the movie is the stuff of reality and coincidence.

As such, I don't consider this a "fairy tale." I think "fairy tale" is a nice sounding phrase for what this actually is -- undistilled cheese.

What does it say about a fairy tale if you can remove the fantastic from it and actually have a BETTER movie? If you strip all the supernatural elements from this movie it might have actually been a bit cute.

(Also, as a Mozart fanatic, I'm immediately offended whenever any movie continues to promulgate the completely absurd notion that Mozart didn't work his butt off at his music -- that he was simply transcribing notes that were magically popping into his head. This trilling, romantic notion is demonstrably and completely untrue and is an insult to one of history's greatest composer's difficult labors.) (But this is an aside, just another little gripe :)

[–] amk5028 17 years ago

YES. You hit the nail on the head perfectly. And people can call it creative license, or whatever, that makes this movie successful in their eyes, but I find it to be an excuse. Sure, it's up to the creators, but that doesn't mean we can't critique it. It IS poorly constructed cinema...a premise with such potential that for me is ruined by forced EVERYTHING, from script to acting to direction. You can't bank an entire story on suspension of disbelief. Every part of the story has to be challenged and the ending has to be inevitable. August Rush is just a linked series of chance events -- the definition of weak storytelling, fantasy or not.

[–] words_words_words 16 years ago

Well put. I can't disagree with a thing you've said. Thanks for articulating what I was trying to explain to someone recently about why I didn't care for the movie. You put it much better than I did.

[–] sincerely_raven 16 years ago

I like your point, but I disagree. There are examples of modern fairytales that do blend reality and fantasy in the same way.
And his innate ability to write musical notation, so complex in such a short period of time, is fairy tale-like. It's suggested to be "humanly possible", but it's no different than super hero flicks, when a guy falls in a vat of toxic waste and comes out with super powers (in reality, he'd probably just get really sick, or die.)

I think it has more to do with your unwillingness to see this for what it was; just good old fashioned fantasy, or tall tale. Like, Paul Bunyon. That story is very impossible, and it's supposed to be "true" and "humanly possible," but we all know people don't grow that big, oxen aren't blue, and no man can chop down an entire forrest in a single chop.

People came into this movie expecting a serious tale about a boy and music. Don't say "no," because that's what I was thinking at first. This movie isn't that, which left people a sour taste in their mouths.

IDK, maybe I just like fantastic stories, and entertainment value, because I enjoyed it. And I watch a ton of movies, I get 5 free rentals a week from Blockbuster. Like anything, it depends on the person. My Dad, for instance, is both a musician and higly logical banker with an extensive knowledge in a lot of things, from science to mathematics to random trivia, and he loved this movie. The difference between you and my Dad is that he's also a bit of a dreamer (where I get it from, I suppose.) You have to watch it with a child's eye... sort of like Peter Pan. If you watch it, knowing all you know as an adult and being overly analytical, of course you won't like it. It's not Babel, don't watch it like that.

Also, I don't know that fairy tales set up their world prior to introducing the story to you. Most of them just start with a girl or boy or family in normal life for the time period, then fantastic things start to happen. Trust me, I know a lot about fairy tales... I sort of study them just out of odd obsession. They start with "There was a farmer and his wife living in the country, and they had no money." Just average situations for the times. It usually isn't until after the initial introduction, that we learn of the fantastic event. "One day, the farmer came across a large fish in the pond, and the fish said..."

Get what I'm saying? Anyway, I do respect your point, though.

I just like to shake things up a bit...

[–] junknow 16 years ago

I have to disagree with all of you. The kids talent definitely isn't what makes it unbelievable, a realistic setting doesn't make it unbelievable.

When I watched it I thought it was fairly similar to Good Will Hunting, that didn't seem like a real fairy tale, just somebody who was extremely gifted. Sure, he knew a lot about math, but he didn't learn it from books, he didn't learn how to solve equations never solved from books. Maybe he learned how to do math from a book, but he extrapolated knowledge to crazy lengths, similar to this movie.

AND it is based in truth, in the movie Good Will Hunting they mention a mathematician named Ramanujan who extrapolated math theorems from simple math books. This isn't that far from what happens in August Rush, learning how to play an instrument and learning how to write a song that must have been going through this kids head for years doesn't seem that difficult compared to the story of Ramanujan, who was finding his own theorems at age thirteen.

[–] kathykato 16 years ago

I'm a big fan of science fiction. I can appreciate fantasy when it's logical enough for me to be able to suspend my belief system and enter into the reality of the fantasy. Star Trek is an example of this--no matter how silly some of the alien costumes are, the characters and situations are made to be believable because the logic within its context is consistent.

There were so many ridiculous inconsistencies and flawed logic in August Rush that tried as I did, I couldn't enjoy this as a fantasy film.

As some have already pointed out, it's ridiculous to believe that the woman's father could have given her baby away after birth in the hospital without her prior written, legal consent. It's more ridiculous to believe that the woman wouldn't have asked to speak with hospital staff about what had happened, or request to see the baby to say goodbye, or request some type of burial for it.

It's ridiculous to believe that Julliard would have allowed this child to attend classes without having some kind of ID from him and parental consent. It's ridiculous to believe that the minister's family would have harbored this child without alerting child protective services and trying to find out his identity.

Learning to play the guitar immedately is believable, but even a prodigy would need some instruction to learn how to operate an organ.

If the writers had put a little more time and effort into providing at least vaguely plausible explanations for the above, then I could have accepted the overall fantasy premise of a musically gifted child using music to seek out his birth parents in NYC.

[–] Ms_Collards 16 years ago

kathykato,

Yours was the exact response I anticipated after watching August Rush. It was the exact reaction I had to the film. While I was able to wrap myself up in the rosy romance of an orphan being tied to his parents through a mutual love of music and the reuniting of torn lovers, I could not allow myself to swallow the "Give me a break" moments that were all too frequent during the film.

I know a lot of supporters of the film want to push the suspend disbelief, creative license argument of the film and yes, everyone is entitled to their own appreciation (or lack thereof) of any film. I was simply disappointed with this film.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] paramitch 16 years ago

LOL! Totally agreed on all counts. I'm laughing because I just posted a big rant elsewhere on these boards about everyone who simply answers the criticisms with, "But Mozart wrote music when he was four years old!" As if Mozart was wandering around in the breeze making up symphonies without training... drives me nuts.

I felt the same way about this movie and felt the same sense of insult at both the "it's a fairy tale!" answers to all the inconsistencies, as well as the real strange insult I felt as a real-life musician watching this. I know the film meant well but ultimately I found it syrupy and unpleasant and deluded.

[–] DarkShadowForever 16 years ago

GODD*MN IT PEOPLE. ITS A *beep* MOVIE.

Let the movie be itself, it doesn't need idiots like you polluting its drive.

I loved this movie, because of one thing: THE MUSIC.

Thats what the film was centered on, music, and the music was amazing.

[–] cludinsk 16 years ago

quite possibly one of the top ten worst movies i've ever seen. the music was banal, the storyline laughable. if this is a modern "fairy tale" i'll take a well-written old one any day.

i also have no concept of how anyone could give this a good rating.

[–] Redai02 16 years ago

"A fairy tale doesn't do any of this kind of dangerous mixing of the real and the fantastic. A fairy tale doesn't give you a magical wizard and then tie the wizard into the natural framework of reality. That's dangerous and, frankly, rather misanthropic. "

I realize I'm a bit delayed in responding, but let me first say that I agree with some of your points, actionbarry. I will, however, disagree with the above; Gandalf the Grey in Lord of the Rings is indeed a wizard, but he has to abide by the rules of his superior (Not going to get into the geeky details of it all) NOT to use his full power while in Middle Earth, so while he is a wizard and can perform magic, he still has to abide by the rules. Saruman did not and turned evil; Sauron is the same race as they, and look what he does with all that power.
Just refuting your claim about magical wizards not being part of a realistic framework, otherwise, you do make some good points I hadn't even considered.

[–] Dash_Rendar 16 years ago

I'm surprised that anyone could feel offended by this movie. I think many of you fail to realize that Evan was not an ordinary boy. He is a prodigy, a superhuman, the chosen one...etc. If music skill was like Star Wars, his midiclorian count would be a record high. That's what makes it a fairy tale. The movie was never trying to make a serious statement on learning the art of music. So if you rolled your eyes at the unrealistic characters or situations, then you missed the point.

_____________________________
Greedo shot first. Get over it.

[–] paramitch 15 years ago

Fair enough.

But as a musician myself, I guess what I found most offensive here was the (ahem) "fairy tale" myth as presented that music does not need to be learned, music is truth without effort... when that's an insult. Even a melody that occurs in a happy moment -- a melody captured and transcribed -- comes from some basis in training, or listening. Even in savants.

In short, music is hard. Music involves dedication, practice, and training. Music is about interaction and collaboration, about listening. It's about being willing to practice until the muscles know every note by heart so that the real virtuosity can follow. In composition, it's about studying music theory until you know the keys, the tabulature, the chord progressions, the possibilities, to music (even if you plan to break them).

The secret that some have figured out is that this movie isn't about making music at all, but about appreciating music. Honestly, it was quite obviously written by people who don't know anything about it -- not about real music education or training (couldn't someone have done a few hours' research just to present a realistic Juilliard?), musical savants, not about the music business, and not even about music performance.

In short, it's insulting because it's about someone's vague idea of what making music must be like, but presented through lazy half-@ssed writing in which nobody bothered to learn the first thing of what an August would REALLY be like.

And that's a shame.

[–] kay_cee_d 11 years ago

But as a musician myself, I guess what I found most offensive here was the (ahem) "fairy tale" myth as presented that music does not need to be learned, music is truth without effort... when that's an insult. Even a melody that occurs in a happy moment -- a melody captured and transcribed -- comes from some basis in training, or listening. Even in savants.

Wait....you're upset that a movie about a boy who can "call or pull" his parents to him with music (magically, I assume) shows the same boy (with the magical ability to call to his parents with music) with a natural gift for music that doesn't need as much training as everyone else. I mean....even though everyone else is shocked SHOCKED that this kid is so good in such a short amount of time, it is definitely saying that music is easy. I mean...ANYONE can do it! Well...I mean it only shows the kid being able to grasp and fully demonstrate amazing musical ability but its clearly saying that music is easy for most people. Even though it shows that most of the performers have spent years honing their talents and still aren't quite there. But still...

[–] jeryll0722 8 years ago

Amen brother !

[–] danaelambros 8 years ago

Agree with you 100%, this is a movie full of great music! This is a movie first and foremost, ABOUT music: its power, mystery and beauty. Secondly, I think it's a movie about a boy who finds his identity and purpose through music, and through that, he finds his parents - or rather - they find him. I had no problems with the movie ending the way it did: this wasn't a story about a man and a woman who become a couple again, as some hinted at earlier in this thread, and how they were disappointed with the way the film ended. I thought the ending was perfect. This is a movie full of imagination, and all those logical types out there criticizing it, surely will be disappointed. Great music!!

[–] makeshiftcar 16 years ago

I bought into this fantasy world. I just think everyone has different opinions on what passes as a legitimate fantasy world, and, to me, either I did not notice the plot holes or was satisfied with what was explained in the course of the movie. As an example of a movie that I thought did not create a legitimate fantasy world, was "Wanted" which I thought was ridiculous in how it defied basic laws of physics. I definitely would rate it lower then what it currently is listed as.

[–] missbittens 15 years ago

You know what my problem with saying it's a fairy tale is? Fairy tales are a part of the fantasy genre, and if this was a fantasy, it wasn't very clear about it - it seemed to be saying not that these things are happening in a world different than ours, but they happen or can happen in our world. And if that is indeed what is was meant to be saying, it makes the "fairy tale," excuse... Exactly that, an excuse.

Now, if the writers meant this to be part of the fantasy genre, they should have been clearer in the film on that point, but more power to them. However, if they meant this to be a drama, then it's just lazy writing covered up with cries of "It's a modern fairy tale!"

[–] paramitch 15 years ago

Well said. I utterly, completely agree.

For all the people defending the movie with "it's a fantasy!" "It's a fairy tale" -- where? Where does this movie show us that it takes place in a magical or alternate universe?

There is not one moment of inexplicable onscreen magic to show us that, in fact, this is a fairytale. Think of moments like the boy and girl taking flight in The Boy Who Could Fly, or the 'grail' in The Fisher King, or Peter Sellers walking on water in "Being There," or the feather wafting its way back to Forrest's foot. There is never a moment that tells us gently that this is a magical universe and simply a parable.

Instead, it takes place in a rather nasty-spirited present universe in which I have to watch Robin Williams abuse kids while the kid August Rush abuses guitars (almost as bad).

There's another word for all this: Lazy, bad writing. Writing that just fills in the holes with "it's a fantasy! it's not meant to be real!" Which I guess is why August actually cannot play a guitar correctly (or maybe honestly Freddie Highmore, who can be very good in the right role, simply wasn't able to learn??)

The people who keep talking about how sweet this movie was, and how they can't wait to show it to their kids, just floor me, because the characters were by and large utterly unpleasant and truly nasty -- Keri Russell's evil father, Jonathan Rhys Meyers' evil bandmates, Robin Williams' Fagin-like figure, etc. One of the kids even sacrifices himself to this evil man (after he has bamboozled the staff at JUILLIARD, which again, sorry, I don't think so) so that August can get away. Right. That's super-cheerful stuff. And unfortunately this movie was not written by Dickens and cannot balance that light and dark, unfortunately. The light is too preposterous and the dark is too genuinely icky and creepy.

I'm glad others found something to love here, but the sheer cartoony unpleasantness of most of the movie as well as the complete lack of reality when it came to both music performance AND composition (!!!!!!) just still make me almost too angry to type about it. The kid is so talented he doesn't need to learn music notation... or how to actually play an instrument... AGHGHGHG. Right. Because music is like maaaagic. Blech.

I really like some of Nick Castle's other stuff. I love "The Boy Who Could Fly," OK? But man oh man, did I hate, hate, hate this movie. Hate. Hate. Hate. Haaaaaaaate. I found it sloppy, unpleasant, yucky, and mean-spirited, with a thin glaze of sicky-sweet. Like a pile of poo covered with maple syrup.

Doesn't matter. It's still poo.

And P.S., this doesn't make me "filled with hate" in general, as if I cannot see the sweetness and love in the universe -- it just means, well, I hated it, and that I disagreed with you about this movie and how it can cure cancer and save puppies and bring springtime to the world. Etc.

Oh, and except for JRM's very nice impromptu rooftop performance, the score and songs were just horrible. Sorry. And for the front-page poster going on and on about being a musician and how the movie has inside stuff about being a musician, I want to ask in all seriousness -- really? Which thing was a real look at life as a musician? the part where the kid couldn't play? Couldn't compose credibly? Sorry. Don't see it at all.

Yep. Still hate it. Hate.

[–] toddkreuz 15 years ago

I agree totally.

The movie is a "Romantic/family Drama". Its billed as a "Drama".

Say you're watching a typical romantic drama, like Tender Mercies.

And halfway into it, Robert Duvall's character suddenly and magically floats over his pickup truck in mid air to reach the drivers side so he can get in.

Nobody with half a brain is going to say "Hey, its a fairy tale! Suspend your disbelief!!"
Of course not, it would be absolutely insane, and you would have to turn the movie off immediately or risk brain damage.

The kid suddenly being a virtuoso guitarist with no physical practice is absolutely comparable to Robert Duvall floating off of his feet into mid air, and flying around town.

You shouldnt have to be a guitarist, or even a musician to realize this.
Oddly enough, i happened to be a guitar prodigy growing up, im the son of a guitar teacher, and im a prof guitarist to this day. 35 years now.

There are prodigies, sure. But as has been said. Mozart studied and practiced to write music, which is how he was able to begin writing symphonic works at such a young age. He didnt just look at a symphony one day, and start whipping out french horn concertos.
Jaybird learned how to play quickly, but he wasnt a physical/instrumental virtuoso within 10 seconds of seeing a cello. He practiced.
People seem to think 2 and 3 year olds cannot work hard or practice, yet they can somehow be virtuosos on a physical instrument such as guitar, or cello.

No matter how musically virtuosic or genial somebody is "in their own mind",
mastering an instrument takes physical practice.
Somebody used "GoodWill Hunting" as an example of mathmatical ability with no "practice". Well, one can do math problems in their mind. The character in that movie would have had to, for instance, practiced to be great with an Abacus. No way around it. Its a physical law of the universe.
Its not possible. Again, if the movie was billed as a fantasy, or called "The Neverending Story of August Rush and the Baron Munchausen" then yeah, anything is possible. But ITS A ROMANTIC DRAMA!!!

How about if in "Titanic", the Titanic floats out of the water, and flies over the iceberg?
Can you really defend that?

What am i saying, of course there are plenty of friggin idiots here that would defend it with "its a fairytale". Oh well, nevermind, ignore this post.

I love movies. I hate people.

[–] One_Man_Army 15 years ago

Hey, idiot, you may want to continue to do your research there. Jaybird was, in FACT, an instrumental virtuoso within 5 seconds of seeing a cello. His own parents can vouch for that. Immediately after seeing one for the first time, he started playing it perfectly. The same actually goes for Mozart. Your idiocy shows. You know that, don't you? It is clear you know NOTHING of prodigies, at all. Maybe you should at least learn a little about them before talking out of your rear end, moron. For a prodigy, musical talent is built in. Jaybird played the cello perfectly within seconds of seeing one. He taught himself to read and write music, not just forward but backward as well, at the age of 4. Nice way to destroy his accomplishments, moron, and nice denial of the facts, idiot. The fact that you say it's not possible when it's been done too many times to count shows your complete and utter ignorance. Do some more research, please. Also, Mozart did, in FACT, look at a symphony one day, and start whipping out french horn concertos. You saying that he didn't shows how much you love to deny the facts because that fact about Mozart is in the public record. That is EXACTLY what Mozart did. You might want to quit denying facts that have already been proven, moron.

As I told you before...

EPIC FAIL.

ALL HAIL THE HIGH QUEEN!!!!!

[–] bnicolec2001 15 years ago

Its true that there have been prodigies , I actually have several people in my own family who have been able to pick up an instrument and play it . Yes for most people it does take hard work and practice ,but there are people out there after watching people play or hearing something being played , have learned how to play music quickly and with in a few seconds . One of my friends in high school could play the piano wonderfully and composed his own pieces . Even though he had no idea how to read music , and he had learned how to play all by himself . Played by ear , that was how he did it . He would hear something and then play it . I know many people who have worked hard at learning to play do not want to accept that there are people out there that can just play music with out doing and going through what they have ,but from personal experience I can say there are . Now on the this is an awful movie because I can't possibly believe that this would happen . I am sorry you feel this way and want to over analyze things so that you can break it down just cause you don't like it . Its a movie as was stated , a wonderfully feel good movie . It makes most people smile at the end , to believe that the "impossible" is possible . There are no rules to story writing , and everything in it is at the story writers discretion . It has no boundaries they could have a werewolf come out of central park if they wanted to , I am not trying to be mean but get over it . Don't watch it if you don't like it , and I am watching a movie with Keanu Reeves and this woman's face just turned into that of a demons no set up for that. I don't know if the being able to find his parents part through music is possible , but the love between those two people are possible. The musical prodigy thing is possible. The man forcing kids to work in the park is possible . Its all possible ,but highly unlikely .

[–] One_Man_Army 15 years ago

(Also, as a Mozart fanatic, I'm immediately offended whenever any movie continues to promulgate the completely absurd notion that Mozart didn't work his butt off at his music -- that he was simply transcribing notes that were magically popping into his head. This trilling, romantic notion is demonstrably and completely untrue and is an insult to one of history's greatest composer's difficult labors.) (But this is an aside, just another little gripe :)

Okay, I know you probably won't respond to this post considering how long ago you wrote it but I after rereading your post and coming to this bit of stupidity, I had to say something.

It is a proven and undeniable FACT that Mozart did, in FACT, transcribe notes that were magically popping into his head. Please, nearly every single biographer of him explained his abilities in just that way. This thrilling, romantic notion is demonstrably and completely true because this thrilling, romantic notion has been proven time and time again by some of the world's greatest musical prodigies, not just by Mozart, either. You might want to do some more research concerning Mozart because as a Mozart fanatic, it's amazing you know very little about him.

ALL HAIL THE HIGH QUEEN!!!!!