66 commentaires
There are two different points of view that FAIRYTALE's difficult story can be told: the children and the adults. Apparently, it looks like the adults will be far more interested than the children because of its long discussions about fairy sightings and its overly dramatic nature; this actually is the kind of audience this movie was shooting for. On the children's side, it is magical in the make-believe universe, but not without a couple of horrifying and sorrowful moments (the scarred-face soldier out of WWI, for instance), and may end up as boredom along the way. The fairies and their surroundings would have looked better on the screen if they appeared larger, but there some things to believe in, just as the opening scene tells you; they do exist as fantasy figures to enlighten a child's imagination. The two young girls pull off some charming performances, and some luscious scenery is vivid all throughout. FAIRYTALE should have been a real "family" fantasy picture in the way it is presented, but stands out its own way as a movie that focuses on a slight examination of sightings that is virtually unexplainable (almost similar to science fiction!). Children will most likely appreciate the fairies more than the movie itself. And where is Mel Gibson???
Everyone who's deeply interested in folklore, as I dare to say I am, knows the story of the Fairies of Cottingley, it's one nearly-epic story of the two girls who inadvertently made a half of the world actually believe in magical creatures (I don't count children, for they did, they do and they will believe, and that's wondrous), and the best part of the epic is that they had never straightforwardly confessed that they've forged it just not to ruin people's glimpse of faith in magical.
If that's what this movie should have been telling about then it certainly does not the job. Despite the wonderful and believable acting of Florence Hoath and Elizabeth Earl, the incoherent screenplay and direction ruin everything and only a shadow of the childhood magic remains in the dark corner pushed away by the social-drama clichés (they even managed to insert there a villain and the goddammit comic relief!). And the top-notch CGI doesn't help out. There's more magic even in ghost-story movies, such as 'Lady in White' or 'The Changeling'. Worth watching, but only once. I deeply hope that some day someone will make a movie worthy of this story's spiritual background, so you'd understand why some perfectly sane people believe in fairies, even without the photographs.
One of my favorite books is the collection of narrative tales, recorded in the middle of the 20th century among the Siberian villagers, mostly in the Chita region, by V.P. Zinovyev, and the thing I really love and adore in those stories is that those people actually believe all the folklore things they're speaking about! It's grievous that there are less and less such people live in this world, of that kind who believe because of the purity of the heart, not because of fear or passion. Some call those people dark and unenlightened, some laugh at them, but the thing they actually have is the faith, whilst everyone else have only a ghost of it. That who knows cannot believe.
If that's what this movie should have been telling about then it certainly does not the job. Despite the wonderful and believable acting of Florence Hoath and Elizabeth Earl, the incoherent screenplay and direction ruin everything and only a shadow of the childhood magic remains in the dark corner pushed away by the social-drama clichés (they even managed to insert there a villain and the goddammit comic relief!). And the top-notch CGI doesn't help out. There's more magic even in ghost-story movies, such as 'Lady in White' or 'The Changeling'. Worth watching, but only once. I deeply hope that some day someone will make a movie worthy of this story's spiritual background, so you'd understand why some perfectly sane people believe in fairies, even without the photographs.
One of my favorite books is the collection of narrative tales, recorded in the middle of the 20th century among the Siberian villagers, mostly in the Chita region, by V.P. Zinovyev, and the thing I really love and adore in those stories is that those people actually believe all the folklore things they're speaking about! It's grievous that there are less and less such people live in this world, of that kind who believe because of the purity of the heart, not because of fear or passion. Some call those people dark and unenlightened, some laugh at them, but the thing they actually have is the faith, whilst everyone else have only a ghost of it. That who knows cannot believe.
In 1917, two children take a photograph, which is soon believed by some to be the first scientific evidence of the existence of fairies.
First of all, much praise to Harvey Keitel in his portrayal of Harry Houdini. Whether there were camera tricks or not, his on-screen illusions look great. He also portrays the character rather well. Keitel, much better known for his foul-mouthed cop-and-gangster roles, really shines here.
As a whole, I liked the movie, and I think it presented a fairly accurate account of what happened in this case. I am a bit disappointed that it left open the idea that believing in fairies is a good, rational thing to do, but I guess that's just the cynic in me. I should be praising them for giving kids a sense of wonder.
First of all, much praise to Harvey Keitel in his portrayal of Harry Houdini. Whether there were camera tricks or not, his on-screen illusions look great. He also portrays the character rather well. Keitel, much better known for his foul-mouthed cop-and-gangster roles, really shines here.
As a whole, I liked the movie, and I think it presented a fairly accurate account of what happened in this case. I am a bit disappointed that it left open the idea that believing in fairies is a good, rational thing to do, but I guess that's just the cynic in me. I should be praising them for giving kids a sense of wonder.
The kind of movie that could almost persuade you that fairies were real. The story is that of the Cottingley Fairy photographs of the 1920s (taken by two Yorkshire girls who later revealed they were fakes) those fooled included celebrated writer Arthur Conan Doyle (played here effectively by Peter O'Toole) while cynics included magician Harry Houdini (a charming role for Harvey Keitel, who manages not to swear and keep his clothes on for once).
The supporting cast are excellent Paul McGann as the girls' dad/uncle; Tim McInnerny and Bill Nighy as journalist snoops; and Phoebe Nicholls as the girls' mother/aunt. The girls themselves are played with ease by Florence Hoath and Elizabeth Earl. Mel Gibson has a tiny cameo at the end (I don't want to spoil it by saying as what).
A thumbs-up, too, for the special effects achieved in this movie. The movie certainly is sentimental and does seem to come down on the side of the unknown and imply that the girls' claims were true, but it is a terrific family film I wouldn't hesitate to recommend.
The supporting cast are excellent Paul McGann as the girls' dad/uncle; Tim McInnerny and Bill Nighy as journalist snoops; and Phoebe Nicholls as the girls' mother/aunt. The girls themselves are played with ease by Florence Hoath and Elizabeth Earl. Mel Gibson has a tiny cameo at the end (I don't want to spoil it by saying as what).
A thumbs-up, too, for the special effects achieved in this movie. The movie certainly is sentimental and does seem to come down on the side of the unknown and imply that the girls' claims were true, but it is a terrific family film I wouldn't hesitate to recommend.
- Smile_U_SOB
- 8 août 2007
- Permalien
- Leofwine_draca
- 28 déc. 2015
- Permalien
- rmax304823
- 30 août 2012
- Permalien
This movie is very sweet.
A Fairy-tale might be just a FAIRY-TALE! But there do exist some other creatures called angels. Maybe this "fairies" in the movie really were angels? Truth is that especially children can be open enough to believe in the spiritual realm.
Unfortunately not all spiritual creatures are good, and we are warned against the occult things some people thrive in. It seems like Sir Arthur Conan Doyle did so. (So did NOT Houdini !) Nevertheless we need to accept what good things God has created, but be selective.
Maybe the true story behind the movie was not a fraud, but real ANGELS?!
(By the way: Why isn't Mel Gibson credited for his cast in the end?!)
A Fairy-tale might be just a FAIRY-TALE! But there do exist some other creatures called angels. Maybe this "fairies" in the movie really were angels? Truth is that especially children can be open enough to believe in the spiritual realm.
Unfortunately not all spiritual creatures are good, and we are warned against the occult things some people thrive in. It seems like Sir Arthur Conan Doyle did so. (So did NOT Houdini !) Nevertheless we need to accept what good things God has created, but be selective.
Maybe the true story behind the movie was not a fraud, but real ANGELS?!
(By the way: Why isn't Mel Gibson credited for his cast in the end?!)
Fairytale: A True Story is a truly charming and delightful film, that has all the charm of the enchanting Secret Garden and the equally wonderful Little Princess. The screenplay was very solid, and the film does look very, very beautiful, with perfect camera-work and splendid period detail. The simple but well-told story tells of two young girls who find and photograph fairies, and they manage to convince even Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (marvellously played by Peter O'Toole) that the fairies are real. The music was really lovely to listen to, and director Charles Sturridge manages to draw spirited (and exemplary) performances from his two leads Florence Hoath and Elizabeth Earl. The supporting cast include Paul McGann, Pheobe Nicolls and Harvey Keital, and all do more than a respectable job. Overall, a very pleasing and charming film, that does certainly leave you wanting fairies at the bottom of your garden, like the back of the video box promised. 10/10 Bethany Cox.
- TheLittleSongbird
- 16 juil. 2009
- Permalien
- anaconda-40658
- 7 oct. 2015
- Permalien
- dabedwards
- 24 mars 2015
- Permalien
When I saw the average for this film was 6.2 I was uncertain whether I would watch it or not - I am so glad I DID! It was simply delightful and the acting superb, convincing and absolutely fun. I recommend this to anyone who wants to be entertained with a purity and simplicity rarely seen in today's films. It should be rated G and not PG since there was nothing offensive in it and I can't wait to watch it again with my grandson! Peter O'Toole, Harvey Keitel and the little girls made it all so believable. The English scenery, the attention to detail to the time period around 1917 and the entire storyline was wonderful. I recommend this movie to anyone who just wants to believe that there really are fairies. Enjoy!
- jboothmillard
- 1 févr. 2012
- Permalien
Another reviewer here on the user-comments asks, "Is there anyone left in this world who objects to being lied to?
Yeah, I do!
The main drawback, however, even more than the absurdity of the story, is that it is simply boring. "Fairy Tale: A Boring Story" would have been truthful, not labeling it a "true story." To repeat: the headline on this film is an out-and-out LIE.
This is a supposed "true story" about two little girls in England who see and communicate with fairies - little Peter Pan-type beings who flutter around. Give me a break!!!!
The only redeeming value of all this nonsense and New Age propaganda is some pretty photography. That's all the film offers, unless you are total moron and still believe in the Tooth Fairy and Santa Claus, too. If this was billed as a fantasy, I would have enjoyed it, but to tell me this is truth is ludicrous.
Yeah, I do!
The main drawback, however, even more than the absurdity of the story, is that it is simply boring. "Fairy Tale: A Boring Story" would have been truthful, not labeling it a "true story." To repeat: the headline on this film is an out-and-out LIE.
This is a supposed "true story" about two little girls in England who see and communicate with fairies - little Peter Pan-type beings who flutter around. Give me a break!!!!
The only redeeming value of all this nonsense and New Age propaganda is some pretty photography. That's all the film offers, unless you are total moron and still believe in the Tooth Fairy and Santa Claus, too. If this was billed as a fantasy, I would have enjoyed it, but to tell me this is truth is ludicrous.
- ccthemovieman-1
- 18 sept. 2007
- Permalien
Based on a famous "Cottingley fairies" hoax perpetrated by two English girls during World War I in 1917, "FairyTale: A True Story" presents alternate views of reality to suggest that, like the view of Aborigines, dreams are as real as conscious reality. If you take the special effects fairies too literally in this film, you will miss the point. The film plays a trick on you, just as the original incident played a trick on Sir Arthur Conan Doyle in 1917. Houdini, as played by Harvey Keitel, gets the point. Although he's one to debunk mystics who defraud the gullible, he too trades on people's need to believe in magic. The girls' deception is also a sort of benign fraud. As any magician, they should never reveal their "secret." The film invites comparisons to the famous French classic, "Forbidden Games" in which children construct an elaborate fantasy world as a way of coping with the reality of war. Here too, the girls use fairies to fill the void in their lives left by their father, who has gone "missing" on the front in France. "I know what they mean by 'missing,'" says one of the sisters, conscious of reality but hoping to "believe" in the unlikely event of his return. This is not a kiddie film, but a langorous period piece on the nature of belief and faith in the face of empirical skepticism. The film reinforces its theme with beautiful details, as at the end when the father says he smells the perfume which isn't there, or in the ghostly intrusion of a dead brother that changes the mind of a skeptical reporter. Even the final sequence, involving fairies, is so charming it steers clear of cynical manipulation. Although there are moments when the plot seems to become arbitrary or plodding, it's all tied up neatly and beautifully in a magical finale. I'd hesitate to call this a classic, but it is a worthwhile "sleeper." Just bring an open mind and heart.
Do fairies,ghosts and extra-terrestrial beings really exist? Some people reply in the positive and why? Because they have seen them. Others have recorded them on photographic film...or have they? Is it a trick of the light or an unexplained blur on the exposed film? Imagination in hand with wishful thinking can work miracles. In this film two little girls living in the beautiful English countryside claim that they not only saw fairies, but actually captured them on film. The rest of the movie records the reaction of the media and notable figures of World War 1 England. Houdini the great escapologist claims he never gives away the secret of his famous escapes (and do people really want to know and thus destroy the magic of the moment?) He believes that the children do hold a secret and he tells them never to reveal it. On the other hand Conan Doyle accepts the photographs as the truth (or says he does) and thus gains notoriety himself by publishing articles about the phenomenon. The story as it is related leaves us in a bit of a quandary - to believe or not to believe. Not a great film by any means despite the presence of top stars such as Harvey Keitel and Peter O'Toole, but the film is definitely worth seeing solely for the scenes in which the fairies appear. Shaped like slender dragon-flies with gauzy wings that flutter at lightning speed, they dart about in the most convincing manner. And they are not cartoon characters either, but real actors with their names listed in the credits. See the film just to be enchanted by these wonderful creatures and then ask yourself "If only........"
- raymond-15
- 30 avr. 2000
- Permalien
This venture was beautiful, whimsical, and inspired. This work felt as though it were real, although that is only partially true. I really don't care. The (movie) magick to be found here is awe inspiring and will have you watching your bird feeder much more closely.
Backed up by big names, beautiful photography, a solid screenplay, and natural dialog, this production is almost timeless. As it was a "period" piece (1917), it bears the virtue of not showing its wear. It was filmed as "old" when it was new.
The two girls' performances were nothing short of exemplary. They came off as being honest and true to their roles. That having been said, there was not a single poor performance to be found.
While there are some slow spots, as character development and the story are set up for the duration of the work, they are few and do not interrupt the flow of the production enough to break the wonderful spell.
It rates an 8.8/10 from...
the Fiend :.
Backed up by big names, beautiful photography, a solid screenplay, and natural dialog, this production is almost timeless. As it was a "period" piece (1917), it bears the virtue of not showing its wear. It was filmed as "old" when it was new.
The two girls' performances were nothing short of exemplary. They came off as being honest and true to their roles. That having been said, there was not a single poor performance to be found.
While there are some slow spots, as character development and the story are set up for the duration of the work, they are few and do not interrupt the flow of the production enough to break the wonderful spell.
It rates an 8.8/10 from...
the Fiend :.
- FiendishDramaturgy
- 12 janv. 2005
- Permalien
- The-Sarkologist
- 26 janv. 2012
- Permalien
When I first saw the title and the packaging, I thought this film would be for younger viewers and that I'd probably be bored by it. I was totally wrong!!! What a completely enchanting film this turned out to be!!!! The story was wonderful and I wasn't bored for a minute. The two little girls who played the main characters were perfect for their parts. Part of the plot suggests that the girls' fairy photographs were a hoax, but then there are a few twists and turns that leave you thinking, maybe they do exist? Some visual effects were not overly done at all and they helped by enhancing the atmosphere and mood of the film. I could feel the fairy dust coming through the screen!! I *loved* this film and would watch it again and again!! A truly heartwarming, magical film!!
- bellspirit
- 23 août 2004
- Permalien
Style of the piece is flat, that is does not cause the viewer to become emotionally invested in the events. Even worse virtually everything in the story is fiction using the real events as a scaffold. Don't like distortions of real life events. Did not last to the end.
..."I see only joy here." No truer words can be evoked to describe the purpose and effect of this beautiful film.
Charles Sturridge ('Brideshead Revisited' and 'A Handful of Dust') has assembled a cast that would be the envy of many other top flight producers and directors embarking upon a "serious" film. That is not to say this isn't a serious film, it is. It is marketed for children, naturally, but it has deeper levels that challenge the adult mind far beyond what one normally encounters in films directed towards adult audiences.
The quality of this script attracted such great actors as Peter O'Toole (Sir Arthur Conan Doyle), Harvey Keitel (Harry Houdini), Bill Nighy, Phoebe Nicholls, Paul McGann and a slew of other well-known British actors. You might also take note of Mel Gibson in an uncredited cameo at the very end.
Sturridge and his team of writers has come up with something beguilingly profound, flowing quietly beneath the simple story of two little girls who have managed to photograph fairies at the bottom of the garden. This is based on the famous "scandal" of the early 20th century when a similar event took place, only in the film the photographs are pronounce authentic whereas in the actual event in England the "experts" proved the photographs to be false. But the film does not pretend to represent the actual events but moves beyond them to a more fundamental issue of out times.
There is nothing "twee" about this movie either and it could have easily become mawkish and sugar-sweet in less committed hands.
I am left, after viewing this film, with Shakespeare's words ringing in my head... "there is far more in heaven and earth than meets [our] little philosophy."
In this blighted age of science and money-worship it is good to be reminded that we limit ourselves through our cynical prejudices and need to have everything proved scientifically, usually for profit.
When the condition of our lives and society has got you all blocked up, watch this little gem and weep for everything that has been lost to us. You will feel better afterward.
I will stop this commentary abruptly now by recommending 'Fairy Tale' to one and all. And get out the Kleenex box before you begin.
Charles Sturridge ('Brideshead Revisited' and 'A Handful of Dust') has assembled a cast that would be the envy of many other top flight producers and directors embarking upon a "serious" film. That is not to say this isn't a serious film, it is. It is marketed for children, naturally, but it has deeper levels that challenge the adult mind far beyond what one normally encounters in films directed towards adult audiences.
The quality of this script attracted such great actors as Peter O'Toole (Sir Arthur Conan Doyle), Harvey Keitel (Harry Houdini), Bill Nighy, Phoebe Nicholls, Paul McGann and a slew of other well-known British actors. You might also take note of Mel Gibson in an uncredited cameo at the very end.
Sturridge and his team of writers has come up with something beguilingly profound, flowing quietly beneath the simple story of two little girls who have managed to photograph fairies at the bottom of the garden. This is based on the famous "scandal" of the early 20th century when a similar event took place, only in the film the photographs are pronounce authentic whereas in the actual event in England the "experts" proved the photographs to be false. But the film does not pretend to represent the actual events but moves beyond them to a more fundamental issue of out times.
There is nothing "twee" about this movie either and it could have easily become mawkish and sugar-sweet in less committed hands.
I am left, after viewing this film, with Shakespeare's words ringing in my head... "there is far more in heaven and earth than meets [our] little philosophy."
In this blighted age of science and money-worship it is good to be reminded that we limit ourselves through our cynical prejudices and need to have everything proved scientifically, usually for profit.
When the condition of our lives and society has got you all blocked up, watch this little gem and weep for everything that has been lost to us. You will feel better afterward.
I will stop this commentary abruptly now by recommending 'Fairy Tale' to one and all. And get out the Kleenex box before you begin.
- super-joey
- 2 sept. 2019
- Permalien
Maybe I wouldn't have rated this so low if I hadn't seen a far superior rendering of this story. Despite some great actors (Peter O'Toole), and pretty scenery, FairyTale: A True Story is syrupy, lame, full of banal dialogue, and just plain boring. Movie sticks in plot points (someone died) to try and flesh out characters, but that's just how it feels - a plot point stuck in with no development.
Watch instead, "Photographing Fairies". A movie that achieves a tone both of mystery, and the sadness and grief that propels some to want to believe in "something more" , and others who feel their bitterness and cynicism is justified.
Problem is, I can't find "Photographing Fairies" anywhere to watch.
Watch instead, "Photographing Fairies". A movie that achieves a tone both of mystery, and the sadness and grief that propels some to want to believe in "something more" , and others who feel their bitterness and cynicism is justified.
Problem is, I can't find "Photographing Fairies" anywhere to watch.
Few films affect me as immediately as Fairy Tale: A True Story. It is visually stunning, excellently acted with star turns by Peter O'Toole and Harvey Keitel. The story is engrossing and you can decide for yourself whether it is about a hoax or not, but that is not important here. It captures the period of the early 1900s magnificently. Special effects are unbelievably realistic. Apparently Academy members never saw this film or it would have gathered a handful of Oscars. The cinematography should have garnered an Oscar as should the moving and glorious music score. I plan to purchase the CD. Despite the title, this film is more for adults and older children. It would not hold the attention of the younger ones.
After watching this film I realize that it is not so much about whether it "was really" true or untrue...the essence of the film, made amply clear is the Belief of the two girls in fairies that made them see them in the first place. On a metaphysical level the film says that if you really believe in something, however odd or outlandish, it will come true or be true. There's no sense in being contentious about the basis of this film because that is very much valid as I have pointed out above. To do so, as I see some people have done over here, is to not only misunderstand the message of the film but to downplay its other qualities.
The acting of Florence Hoath as Elsie and Elizabeth Earl as Frances is really impressive. Both have done complete justice to their characters. The rest of the cast, Paul McGann as Elsie's father, Peter O'Toole as Arthur Conan Doyle and Harvey Keitel as Houdini are also really good. I also absolutely agree with most of the reviewers here that the early 20th century has been evoked very well. But of course, the best thing about the film is the cinematography. It's gorgeous! The woods where the girls encounter the fairies are evoked beautifully, they're appropriately dreamy and realistic. Praise must definitely be due to the set decorators who have done a brilliant job with the house that the Wrights live in and especially the room which Elsie and Frances share. It's a dream garret room! The music is also quite good. I thoroughly recommend this film, certainly for those who believe in Believing things and also for those who like to watch a really well made period film.
The acting of Florence Hoath as Elsie and Elizabeth Earl as Frances is really impressive. Both have done complete justice to their characters. The rest of the cast, Paul McGann as Elsie's father, Peter O'Toole as Arthur Conan Doyle and Harvey Keitel as Houdini are also really good. I also absolutely agree with most of the reviewers here that the early 20th century has been evoked very well. But of course, the best thing about the film is the cinematography. It's gorgeous! The woods where the girls encounter the fairies are evoked beautifully, they're appropriately dreamy and realistic. Praise must definitely be due to the set decorators who have done a brilliant job with the house that the Wrights live in and especially the room which Elsie and Frances share. It's a dream garret room! The music is also quite good. I thoroughly recommend this film, certainly for those who believe in Believing things and also for those who like to watch a really well made period film.