Ray (2004)
Even a blind man could see that
the biopic "Ray" is lacking. Oh, not so much in the
performance of Jaime Foxx as Ray Charles but lacking
in script and direction. This is the most exceptional
of stories turned into the most mundane and mainstream
of films by writer/director Taylor Hackford. To be
sure, it would be foolish to expect little else from
the filmmaker known for "Against All Odds" and "An
Officer and a Gentleman."
Hackford has a chronological approach
to telling Charles' story but uses flashbacks within
his through-line to takes us into some of the more
dark edges of the events of the musician's life. While
this construct does help keep the film dramatically
charged, it also often seems contrived and obvious.
A supposedly poetic flare by Hackford has the blind,
older Charles becoming suddenly aware of water all
around him. This device only serves to take us back
in time to flashbacks of Charles' childhood until,
eventually, we are shown the climactic event in the
man's past which relates to water. After this event
is exposed to us, the device is dropped. It is artistic
flourishes like these that hopes to elevate "Ray"
at times but it is the same hackneyed treatment of
such flourishes that help to defeat it. There is nothing
particularly new or interesting about the touches.
It must be said, however, that when
the traumatic moment comes, it is handled so realistically
and done so well that we are devastated. The young
man playing Charles' little brother does a fantastic
job here. Sadly, the scenes with the young man playing
the "protagonist" himself is not so laudable.
As the adult Charles, Foxx is indeed
incredible most of the time but the touting of his
performance recently by critics as "Oscar worthy"
doesn't really show how great his work is here as
much as it highlights how few interesting and compelling
roles there have been for males this year. (Women
have fared much better this year in meaty, demanding,
edgy roles especially in foreign films). Foxx may
very well get an Oscar nod and even win with his competition
this year being so sparse. In any other year, such
a thought would seem a pipe dream for the actor. Certainly
Foxx's inability to make Charles' singing voice seem
as if it is his own voice is quite irritating in the
lip-synced moments.
As a film, "Ray" did accomplish
one astonishing feat that must be recognized. Much
like the exceptional 2000 film "Pollack," "Ray" takes
the work of a contemporary artist and puts it into
context for a younger viewer. As an art lover, I had
seen the work of Jackson Pollack all my life and thought
it somewhat unique and interesting but certainly not
exceptional. It's just a bunch of splattered paint.
The biopic of the artist starring Ed Harris helped
to change my perception on that. Shown in context
and within the framework of what was going on in art
at the time, the film "Pollack" helped me to understand
just how amazing, dramatic and new the painter's work
truly was in its time. After years of seeing Pollack's
paint splattered canvases, I finally understood just
how revolutionary the paintings were in the 1950's.
I was better able to understand them in their chronological
context. Likewise, "Ray" helped me to understand just
how fresh, bold and amazing Ray Charles' work as a
recording artist was in the 1960's and 70's. And for
that reason alone, this film is worth seeing.
Notes:
Also with Regina King, Bokeem Woodbine,
Curtis Armstrong (as Atlantic founder Ahmet Ertegun),
Larenz Tate (as a young Quincy Jones), David Krumholtz,
Warwick Davis, Kurt Fuller,
At one time the film was to be called
"Unchain My Heart: The Ray Charles Story."
Charles dies after filming was completed.
Foxx spent some times studying Charles.
Viewed in Pflugerville in November,
2004, with Johnny Oh!
