But it isn't, not in this movie. Whatever the reviewers thought about the settings, the actors, it will always be a personal opinion, which is fine by me. No matter that almost every adult character phones in his or her part, or that the script is packed with the usual clichés - it's "Oliver" all over again, and Garett Wareing even looks like Mark Lester - if the main ingredient is good we'll sit through the rest.
But it isn't good, not by a long note. It is the music itself. And its part in the movie and with the reviewers. Were there truly "angelic voices" to hear, as one reviewer noted? Did we hear the same "Hallelujah", with the same godawful "additions"? And what about the D-high nonsense, when C-6 is the highest in all (boy) soprano scores?
Never mind the improbable settings; it is truly a miracle that that our boy hero succeeds in learning all the intricate notations and harmonies in a jiffy where most choristers need years of practice. We may forgive August Rush (from the movie of that name) to spring up from street urchin to master composer and conductor in less time than it takes to turn a page in the score or script, but that movie was set up as a fairy tale, so we don't mind that very much. But this movie did try to put in a bit of reality of a chorister-to-be, of a choir school, of childish competition (by the adults), of the art of learning music, of singing. The two best scenes in it are just glimpses of what have could have been. It's at the beginning, when (in an all too brief shot) the boys learn about the intricacies of scales and harmonies in class, and the moment when Hoffman explains the majestic beauty of Tallis' "Spem in alium", literally surrounded by the glory of that music.
But these grace notes are held not long enough to justify the butchering of Händel's Hallelujah, including the "cute" boy solo. What is the matter? Can't we just enjoy music, choral music, on its own? Must we disnify every work of art to make it palatable for the greatest possible range of spectators? Must we go to yet another stale variation of the "from rags to riches" syndrome? Of childish pranks that range every false note on the scale of probability?
The choir school tradition in the US maybe somewhat lacking in tradition (it's hard to come up against a thousand year old history of British cathedral choirs), but not in talent, witnessing the many brilliant choir performances all over the country. But not in this movie. It will be a fine Christmas tearjerker, and Garrett Wareing is stealing almost all the scenes, and justly so. But the film is certainly not the high note we've come to expect from the maker of "The Red Violin" or "Thirty Two Short Films About Glenn Gould".
If you're genuinely interested in the true history of chorister schools, try to get you hand on DVD documentaries over this great tradition - the Salisbury Cathedral Choir and King's College Choir come to mind. If you want a musical tearjerker, try "August Rush", an improbable story but a true glimpse in what music can do to you, or "Shine". If none of all that matters, well go ahead and watch "Boychoir". You've been warned.
But it isn't good, not by a long note. It is the music itself. And its part in the movie and with the reviewers. Were there truly "angelic voices" to hear, as one reviewer noted? Did we hear the same "Hallelujah", with the same godawful "additions"? And what about the D-high nonsense, when C-6 is the highest in all (boy) soprano scores?
Never mind the improbable settings; it is truly a miracle that that our boy hero succeeds in learning all the intricate notations and harmonies in a jiffy where most choristers need years of practice. We may forgive August Rush (from the movie of that name) to spring up from street urchin to master composer and conductor in less time than it takes to turn a page in the score or script, but that movie was set up as a fairy tale, so we don't mind that very much. But this movie did try to put in a bit of reality of a chorister-to-be, of a choir school, of childish competition (by the adults), of the art of learning music, of singing. The two best scenes in it are just glimpses of what have could have been. It's at the beginning, when (in an all too brief shot) the boys learn about the intricacies of scales and harmonies in class, and the moment when Hoffman explains the majestic beauty of Tallis' "Spem in alium", literally surrounded by the glory of that music.
But these grace notes are held not long enough to justify the butchering of Händel's Hallelujah, including the "cute" boy solo. What is the matter? Can't we just enjoy music, choral music, on its own? Must we disnify every work of art to make it palatable for the greatest possible range of spectators? Must we go to yet another stale variation of the "from rags to riches" syndrome? Of childish pranks that range every false note on the scale of probability?
The choir school tradition in the US maybe somewhat lacking in tradition (it's hard to come up against a thousand year old history of British cathedral choirs), but not in talent, witnessing the many brilliant choir performances all over the country. But not in this movie. It will be a fine Christmas tearjerker, and Garrett Wareing is stealing almost all the scenes, and justly so. But the film is certainly not the high note we've come to expect from the maker of "The Red Violin" or "Thirty Two Short Films About Glenn Gould".
If you're genuinely interested in the true history of chorister schools, try to get you hand on DVD documentaries over this great tradition - the Salisbury Cathedral Choir and King's College Choir come to mind. If you want a musical tearjerker, try "August Rush", an improbable story but a true glimpse in what music can do to you, or "Shine". If none of all that matters, well go ahead and watch "Boychoir". You've been warned.