Ray

"Ray" is an excellent movie. Jamie Foxx did a great job in the film and earned the Oscar for Best Actor--and he was excellent in the title role. The film also showed many of the warts in Ray Charles' life--such as affairs and drug abuse. However, as a history teacher, I should also point out that the film ignores just how dark and nasty a person Ray Charles was. In the film you hear about one failed marriage and one illegitimate child, but the truth was much darker--with 12 children by 9 different mothers and an additional marriage. I really think talking about this would have improved the film--showing the extreme contrast between a man who could sing songs that delight millions and yet, personally, he was a mess. It also would have been more truthful--a serious problem with most bio-pics. But I should at least admire that the film is not a total white-wash but addresses some of his dark past. Plus, the production values were great and the film was never dull. Excellent and well worth seeing.

By the way, you'll probably notice that my review is pretty short considering how big a hit the film was and what an epic film it was. Well, there are already TONS of reviews for the movie and so I chose just to focus on the historical aspects of the film.

Jamie Foxx leads a brilliant cast in this powerful voyage through the life of the blind, emotionally troubled, African American genius of pop jazz, Mr. Ray Charles. Though the entire cast performs wonderfully, Mr. Foxx earned more than simply an Oscar. If it were possible to nominate an actor in consecutive years, I would consider doing so for Mr. Foxx. Foxx doesn't just play Charles, he re-creates him. CJ Sanders and Sharon Warren also deserve special mention for their portrayal of Ray's mother (the inspiration of his life) and young Ray. These two provided the strongest support in the film.

The dramas of Charles' struggles with guilt, the death of his younger brother and mother, blindness, discrimination, addiction, and success, are neatly woven into the tapestries of his music. The music is beautiful, the script is, as far as I can tell, perfect, and the acting is nothing short of legendary.

The directorial method of the film warrants discussion. Taylor Hackford - a director I am generally ambivalent about - had to choose what aspects of the larger-than-life and complex life story of Mr. Charles would tell his story most honestly, dramatically, and understandably. Though some disagree (seemingly wanting a documentary instead of a dramatized biopic) I believe he selected his themes admirably. A big part of the success of this film is its consistent focus on a few persistent themes in Charles' life - his profound love and respect for his mother, his need to be loved and accepted, his addiction and guilt complex, his musical genius, and his deep-seated fear of responsibility for others. Charles is depicted as a man struggling valiantly against an army of personal demons. I learned more than I could have imagined about one of the men I used to listen to on my old turntable with my dad in his livingroom on Sunday nights while football games were on the TV. And nothing was sugar-coated in "Ray." The themes are carried forward with power and human dignity. These themes create a unifying drama which span the length of his long and illuminated life. The power of these themes, the strong script and directing, the music, and the acting make this one of the most enjoyable and evocative biographical films I have seen.

Recommended for everyone.

Let's get the flaw out of the way right off the top - the movie should have been much longer. Ray Charles was a brilliant, fascinating man who lead a complex, challenging life. There was simply no way to fit it all - or even touch on it all - in a standard length movie. Given that, the makers of this film did an admirable (and I'm sure quite agonizing) job of putting together a film that could not tell the whole story yet managed to set forth a representative sampling of the man and his music. Ray Charles' strengths were evident throughout the film and his weaknesses were neither amplified nor sugar-coated. We could have wished for another hour chronicling his life after 1980, but I suppose that would have tended to turn the film into an homage and, while it would have also allowed for the resolution of several things that were left hanging at the end, on balance I guess it was better as presented.

Now for the big question: what are the criteria for an Oscar? The wife and I have seen untold numbers of films in our years, but we immediately agreed that we have never seen a performance the equal of Jamie Foxx's. The line between actor and character was not blurred - but rather it disappeared completely. We had heard much of the hype before seeing the movie, but this was uncanny. Foxx WAS Ray Charles. You didn't watch the movie with the feeling that you were watching Foxx do an outstanding job of portraying Ray Charles - you watched it somehow believing or understanding that you were watching Ray Charles himself. I don't know how else to put it. We were completely blown away. I'll admit that we haven't seen all of the other performances up for an Oscar this year, but that really doesn't matter. Foxx took this to a whole nuther level, one which we've never witnessed before and doubt that we may ever see again. I can think of no other movie I've ever seen in which a person playing a part so completely and convincingly became the person portrayed. We salute you, Mr. Foxx. We understand that the awarding of an Oscar has to do with much more than the performance, but whether or not you win, we want you to know that you have done something that is in a class absolutely by itself and you should take enormous pride in your unparalleled achievement.

P.S. The music was naturally great. I remarked to the wife that if there is one moment in the history of music to which I wish I could have been witness, it would have been the genesis (in Kansas City, wasn't it?) of What'd I Say? The film did a wonderful job with it - just wish I could've been there!

... and the crafters of this film got that. Ray Charles was a flawed human being. Actually the words "flawed" and "human" are redundant, so don't think I'm judging him. But his life was very complex. He had a drug problem. He had twelve children by ten women over a period of 35 years. He had repressed guilt over the accidental death of his baby brother. And he was one of the great musical geniuses of the 20th century. He started out crafting and performing great tunes in the early 50s before rock and roll arrived and managed to be relevant into the 1970s. When the likes of Bloodrock and DOA edged him out of the pop charts. No, seriously. But history has proven that his music has lasting appeal.

So this film stars Jamie Fox in the title role and manages to blend all aspects of the artist's life into a cohesive whole - his impoverished childhood, his life as a musician and artist, his private life at home, and his private life on the road. And Ray's delusional belief that he can keep all these different parts of his life from having a head on collision. It runs back and forth between all of these phases of Ray Charles' life and kept me very engaged. And the music will give you a soul attack.

Jamie Foxx disappears into the role of Charles and reflects the complexity of the man while still leaving him enough of an enigma to keep you intrigued. Kerry Washington plays Bea, the long suffering wife of Charles. When it comes to Charles' life on the road she doesn't know and she doesn't want to know. And yet she knows. Margie and Mary Ann are the two women who represent all of the other women in Charles' life. If you had the actual number of women involved with Charles in this bio pic, the traffic direction would become so complex that you wouldn't see the forest for the trees.

Special kudos to Curtis Armstrong as Ahmet Ertegun, Atlantic record producer and friend of Ray. If not for this film I would only remember him from the 80s TV show Moonlighting where he was the (at least initially) unwilling object of oddball Agnes Depesto's affection.

This film has great acting, obviously a great soundtrack, is a shining example of expert editing, and has a screenplay that I just don't get bored of even though the story of Ray is pretty well known. Great for repeat viewing. Highly recommended.

If someone had nudged me about 15 minutes into 'Ray' and asked what I thought of Jamie Foxx in the title role, it would have been time for a blank stare. After all, what is this (fictitious) person talking' about? That wasn't Jamie Foxx up on the big screen. That was Ray Charles. This is one of the best performances by anybody in recent years. Like the soundtrack, Jamie as Ray is flat-out brilliant.

The blind Genius of Soul (who took a revolutionary step of mixing gospel with R&B) died during production. The movie about his troubled life is good, not great. Taylor Hackford's direction and James L. White's script follow the well-worn biopic outline. Super-talented youngster battles adversity, achieves greatness while also self-destructing, then picks himself up out of the gutter for a happy ending. The film shows Charles' flaws (heroin abuse, chronic womanizing, persistent bastard-fathering) even as it sucks you in with his beautiful music.

Kerry Washington and Regina King play the main women in Ray's life, one his long-suffering wife and the other his longtime mistress. Both actresses match Foxx stride for stride. What takes him to a different level, though, is his deep understanding and uncanny impersonation of the great musician. The entire cast is effective, especially Sharon Warren as his headstrong mother and Curtis Armstrong as a music exec. Hackford's stars are likely to be rewarded with trophies and---better yet---more starring roles.

I was not a Ray Charles aficionado before 'Ray'. Apparently, the film has left out a lot (as do all biopics), but this picture functions as both an old-fashioned crowd pleaser AND a dark investigation of a brilliant/troubled man. For those who whine that Foxx doesn't actually sing (as if that somehow diminishes his performance), take a hike. No mere actor can sing like Mr. Charles anyway. You can't have everything. What the talented star does in this picture is about as close to "everything" as we'll probably see for a while.