Movie Review: Bolden

PLOT:

Bolden imagines the compelling, powerful and tragic journey of Buddy Bolden, the unsung American hero who invented Jazz. With little biographical information and no found recordings of his music, the film’s narrative composes fragmented memories of his past, against the political and social context in which his revolutionary music was conceived. The birth of jazz was the birth of American popular culture influencing everything that followed in its wake – from Louis Armstrong to Jimi Hendrix, The Rolling Stones, The Fugees and Dr. Dre, Bolden is where it all began

REVIEW:

What did I like?

Did you hear Buddy Bolden play? One of favorite places to go in New Orleans is Armstrong Park, a place dedicated to the memory of the great Louis Armstrong. Along with the giant statue of Louis is a 3 headed sculpture of Buddy Bolden, representing his schizophrenia. I have studied many of the great trumpet players during my day, but Bolden is mostly a footnote, or rather a name that needs to be known. Not much is known about Bolden and the lone recording has yet to be found, as the film shows. Seeing a jazz icon, albeit one that not many know about, come alive once more on film is a grand treat.

Satchmo. While we don’t know much about Buddy Bolden, he was a larger than life figure in jazz history, especially for those who were coming up at the time, particularly a young boy who would go on to become the greatest jazz musician of all time, Louis Armstrong! The film uses a radio broadcast of Armstrong that Bolden was listening to in the asylum to frame the plot/flashbacks. Reno Wilson does a surprisingly accurate job of portraying the great jazz master and nailing down his mannerisms. For the most part, he gets the voice down, but he slips out now and then. I understand that he learned how to play trumpet for a little more accuracy. Kudos, Reno, kudos!

Descent into madness. Gary Carr was tasked with the unenviable job of not only portraying Buddy Bolden and his cornet playing, but also his downward spiral. The drugs, alcohol, women, and finally the schizophrenia that was his ultimate end. Carr isn’t known for much, but if he keeps up with roles like this, he’s sure to be a household name soon

What didn’t I like?

Punch-out. A side plot of sorts involves Bolden’s manager and his side hustle of managing African American boxers. No doubt this is a practice that was going on at the time, a practice carried over from the slavery days, but it doesn’t seem to gel with the rest of the film. There is no payoff for it. We see Bolden in the crowd, but he doesn’t do anything. Something happens to his manger following the last fight, I won’t spoil what, but in all honestly, that is something that could have been told in a line of dialogue. I don’t know, I just didn’t see the reason to include the boxing, I guess.

Wife and kid(s).In the early parts of the film, we see Bolden courting his wife and attempting to convince her mother he’s a good man. Not long after she moves in with him (and his mother), she has his child (on her own, with no help….rather bloody scene). Someone mentions that this may not be Buddy’s only child. Fast forward to near the end of the film and we have yet to see said child(ren) and his wife only appears in one more scene, sitting out in the rain waiting on Buddy to come home so she can swiftly kick him out. For all of that, she might as well have been given as much time as his one night stands (mad props to the casting director for casting some thick, attractive ladies, btw). I understand, being his wife, she deserves more time, but there is an air of disappointment with the finished product.

Stale. This was an ambitious project, to be sure, but I cannot say in good conscious that it delivered on the goods. Everything is here for a good film…acting, music, story, but the ingredients need something a bit more. I read somewhere that perhaps this would have worked better with a different director. Daniel Pritzker being a musician, not to mention a billionaire, helped get this film into production, but I do wonder what more capable hands would have been able to accomplish with this material. Maybe i wouldn’t feel as if I just ate leftovers from the back of the fridge.

FINAL VERDICT:

What did I think of Bolden? It is a film that divides me, that’s for sure. The trumpet player in me was eating up the history, glad to learn things about the great Buddy Bolden, as well as take in the atmosphere of turn of the century New Orleans. The part of me that reviews movies…well, I wish I had kind words, but this film didn’t light any fires in me. If not for my interest in the subject matter, I am almost 100% sure I would have fallen asleep. Would I have missed anything? I can’t say that I would. So, do I recommend this? No, unless you are interested in the myth of Buddy Bolden. Otherwise, best to skip this one.

3 out of 5 stars

Movie Review: The Mambo Kings

PLOT:

Musician brothers Cesar and Nestor leave Cuba for America in the 1950s, hoping to hit the top of the Latin music scene. Cesar is the older brother, the business manager, and the ladies’ man. Nestor is the brooding songwriter, who cannot forget the woman in Cuba who broke his heart.

REVIEW:

What did I like?

In the name of the mambo, the rhumba, and the cha-cha-cha. In college, a friend called me an :”honorary Mexican” due to my love of all things Latin. I have a deep love and affection for the music, of which there is no shortage in this film. As great as the music is on its own, though, it should be noted that the filmmaker succeeds in portraying the 1950s aesthetic and the interest people had in the music back then.

Home of the nice splice. About halfway through the film, our leads meet Desi Arnaz (portrayed by his actual son, Desi Arnaz, Jr.), who invites them out to Hollywood to appear on I Love Lucy. Seeing Armand Assante, Antonio Banderas, and Arnaz, Jr. appear on the same screen as Lucille Ball was impressive, especially at the time this was made. What is remarkable though, and fans of the show will notice this, is the episode in which Assante and Banderas’ characters are appearing in an actual episode that features two Cuban musicians…same lines, movements, and everything. Wow…just wow!

Welcome to America. I cannot imagine what it was like to be an immigrant coming to America in the 50s. These guys had  a couple of family members living in New York but, other  than that, they came with just their music and dreams. Kudos to the filmmaker for not only making us feel that sense of awe, but also how much opportunity there was to be had in the US, at least back in those days. Watch Banderas’ portrayal of Nestor reading his Rockefeller book and you will see everything you need to see when it comes to the sense of awe these guys, as well as others coming to this country, felt.

What didn’t I like?

Mob tactics. At the beginning of the film, we are in Cuba and see Caesar, played by Armand Assante, defending his brother against a mobster who has obviously threatened the love of his life, Maria, if she isn’t with him. There is a struggle of some sort, which results in Assante getting injured with a knife and coming out to tell him to take Nestor out of Cuba. Not a bad setup, right? I am left to wonder, though, what it is that put Maria in the crosshairs of this gangster, besides being beautiful. I understand that Cuban people are very passionate, but to slit a man’s throat for defending his brother? This is based on a novel, so perhaps I need to read the book to get some more backstory.

Covet thy brother’s wife. It seems to be implied that Caesar has feelings for Nestor’s new wife, Dolores. From the moment they meet at the club and he dances with her, to all the gifts he gives her, and even in the final scene after Banderas’ death, there is a look they share that is quite uncomfortable. The theme of the film is Nestor’s love for Maria, so I don’t think there would have been a big blow up if Caesar “stole” Dolores from him. I would feel bad for Cathy Moriarty’s character, though. Still, these looks cannot be ignored as it is painfully clear that there is a mutual attraction between the two, yet the film just teases us with…well, nothing but some glances. Such a waste!

Maria. For a character that is so central to the plot, Maria is almost a figment of Nestor’s imagination. Had it not been for the opening scene, audiences would surely be wondering if he was ever with her. All that said, I have to mention the gorgeous song “Beautiful Maria of My Soul”. If you are not familiar with it, go look it up on Youtube. It was up for an Oscar the year this was released, but lost to a small ditty called “A Whole New World”. That is beside the point, though. My issue is this song is in this film more than a few times, and almost each time we listen to the entire 4 minutes of it. I’m a lover of good music as much as the next guy, and the song is integral to the plot, but isn’t this a bit of overkill?

Final verdict:

What did I think of The Mambo Kings? My first introduction to this film was when I heard the Boston Pops perform “Beautiful Maria…” on television when I was a freshman in high school. I seem to recall seeing an ad for the movie on pay-per-view (and trying to watch it through the scrambled picture) that same evening. I became reacquainted with the film in college, due to one of our marching band shows being the music from this picture. Notice how everything is about the music of this film? If you take the music out of this film, there isn’t much left. Sure there are good performances and that I Love Lucy scene is a nice touch, but it isn’t enough to make this film memorable and that is perhaps why when/if you mention this film outside of certain circles, no one has ever heard of it. If it is known for anything else, it is that it is one of the first English speaking roles (I won’t mention his fake trumpet playing…this time) for Antonio Banderas. Do I recommend it? Yes and no. The music and setting are worth a viewing, but the story leaves much to be desired.

3 3/4 out of 5 stars

 

Movie Review: Whiplash

PLOT:

A young and talented drummer attending a prestigious music academy finds himself under the wing of the most respected professor at the school; one who does not hold back on abuse towards his students. The two form an odd relationship as the student wants to achieve greatness, and the professor pushes him.

REVIEW:

What did I like?

Jazz is life. Full disclosure, not only am I an avid jazz fan, I also perform here and there when I get the chance on one of my other lives. With that said, I may have a slight bias toward the subject matter of this film, but it should be noted that the number of films that deal with jazz, at least in this authentic way, are few and far between these days (they were a bit more commonplace between the late 40s and 60s). Seeing a film that deals with jazz education in a loving, reverent way, as well as giving audiences a soundtrack that will get their toes tapping and fingers snapping is a true feat, not to mention throwing in some jazz history in the dialogue (listen to Fletcher speak on Charlie Parker).

Practice pain. Whether you played an instrument or not, at some point, everyone wants to play drums because it is the “cool” instrument. At least it is until you get to high school and see the extra fees, time, etc that come with being a good percussionist, rather than just a drummer. It takes lots of practice to be good, even more to be great. As a freshman drummer at a prestigious music school, one can imagine the pressure to stay on top. Add to that an instructor who is hard as nails and pushes his players to their very limits and it is no wonder Andrew, played by Miles Teller, was practicing so much his hands were bleeding. I can’t say that I have known any drummers that have practiced that hard, but I never went to a music school where your whole life revolves around performing, either. The pain of watching Andrew make sacrifices to be the best, especially at his young age is real, and the audience can sympathize.

Fletcher. Think for a minute about J.K. Simmons. What do you best know him from? For me, it’s his perfect casting as J. Jonah Jameson in the Toby Maguire Spider-Man movies (and the quick cameo at the end of Spider-Man: Far from Home). As good as he is in that role, no one would ever call him Oscar worthy. That is until he takes on the role of Terrence Fletcher. Fletcher gives Simmons the chance to really flex his acting chops, relish in being a complete asshole of a person, and is quite the memorable character. I had a few jazz instructors in my day, none of which were anything like this guy. They were more nurturing and understanding. However, I can’t help but wonder had they been more like this how different things would have turned out with my continuing jazz education.

What didn’t I like?

Make it look real. The general public won’t notice this because most are not musicians and/or have not picked up a horn since they quit middle school band to take art, but in almost all of the band scenes, it is more than obvious they are not playing. For me, this was most obvious in a scene where the band is performing the title track “Whiplash” and the trumpet section is supposed to be muted, but not a single one of them has a mute. There aren’t even any on stage! Granted, as a trumpet player, that sticks out to me more than it would anyone else. I will give Miles Teller credit, though. His drum skills looked real. From my understanding, he actually did play drums at one time, so it was easier for him to learn some more advanced techniques (or how to make it look like he knows some advanced techniques) than it would be for a non-drummer. Please don’t get me started on how some of the tracks sound more like a midi device, rather than an actual band. That is a topic for another day.

Death by rushing. I find it rather funny that a film where one of the most quotable lines is “are you rushing or are you dragging” happens to do both. The ending is rushed. In the last 30 minutes, something happens between Fletcher and Andrew that causes a rift, spurred on by the one time we actually see some emotion from the former that isn’t pure rage and anger. It would have been nice to get a little bit more about that situation and the fallout from it, rather than just a quick mention, then something happens, and then the next thing we know everything is hunky-dory. As far as the dragging part goes, well, any scene that doesn’t involve music in some way drags this film down. For instance, there are some scenes where Andrew watches movies with his dad and these just seem to grind the film to a halt, especially since his dad isn’t really much of a character in the film.

Supergirl. I love Melissa Benoist as Supergirl and have recently been watching her time on Glee. She is that attainable level of cuteness that leads you to believe she is approachable, even if you’re a hideously deformed “chud”. Jennifer Garner has a similar vibe. Benoist is also a really capable actress, but that isn’t shown in her scenes. Had this been a romantic comedy, her character would more than likely have been integral to the plot, but as it is, she is the token crush that is sure to be spurned for a sexier model. In this case, said model is Andrew’s desire to become great. As someone who dumped a good girl like this in college for a similar reason, this really hit me hard. Benoist’s character isn’t into music, especially jazz, but for some reason I can see her being totally supportive, maybe even pushing Andrew to even greater feats and heights, but alas, the poor girl is dumped and save for a couple of phone calls, we don’t see her again.

Final verdict:

What did I think of Whiplash? Again, I have a slight bias because of my relationship with the subject matter, but I can say that this was a highly enjoyable films. Fletcher is a quote machine. Teller’s work as Miles is worthy of recognition. The music is top notch, totally fitting the ensemble we are watching as far as level of difficulty. This is a drama, but not a heavy, slit your wrists and spiral into depression drama. For all the accolades this film received, after watching I feel as if it actually could have won more. Kudos to director Damien Chazelle, a man who has a real affection for jazz (as seen with this film and La La Land) for bringing his love and experiences with the genre to the public. I wish more would take their passion for certain subject matter and purvey that into their work. We would surely have better, more entertaining films, rather standard studio poisoned flicks. Anyway, do I recommend this? Yes, very highly! Whether you’re a fan of jazz or not, you’re sure to get a kick out of how well this film is made, as well as enjoy Simmons throwing chairs, stands, screaming obscenities, and other antics that no instructor would be able to get away (legally) today.

5 out of 5 stars

Movie Review: Midway

PLOT: 

On Dec. 7, 1941, Japanese forces launch a devastating attack on Pearl Harbor, the U.S. naval base in Hawaii. Six months later, the Battle of Midway commences on June 4, 1942, as the Japanese navy once again plans a strike against American ships in the Pacific. For the next three days, the U.S. Navy and a squad of brave fighter pilots engage the enemy in one of the most important and decisive battles of World War II.

REVIEW:

What did I like?

In the air. Being an Air Force brat, I grew up amongst airplanes. To this day whenever an aircraft flies overhead, I find myself looking up in awe. In this film, a good chunk of screen time is devoted not only to the planes in battle, but also to the pilots issues with said planes (oxygen, fuel, etc). That said, the real highlight is on the dogfights in the air. Great care was taken to ensure these battles looked real and authentic, rather than something out of a sci-fi film.

Tactics. How many war movies actually take the time to show the tactics being laid out in the war room? I can think of a couple, such as The Alamo (which also starred Patrick Wilson and Dennis Quaid), but even in that film, the strategy scenes were short, few, and far between. With this film, no we don’t get a full on tactic session depicting Sun Tzu The Art of War, but we are privy to how the US and Japanese forces played a bit of a chess game(or maybe Battleship would be the better analogy) with each other in an attempt to get the upperhand in the war.

Simplicity. Sometimes simple is better. Director Roland Emmerich, who is known for his grand explosions and flair for the dramatic manages to reel himself in for this film. Rather than depending on special effects to drive the narrative, he lets the story and actors tell the tale, with the effects and explosions placed in the correct place. Some have said this feels more like a film from the old days of Hollywood because of his restraint. I won’t go that far, but I do see where they are coming from.

What didn’t I like?

Cram session. There are a lot of characters in the film, perhaps too many. Understanding that Emmerich was attempting to give all the pertinent players from this point in history their due time to shine, soe of them could have been left out so that the focus could be places squarely on the primary story. For instance,the Dolittle raid is mentioned and he even shows up for a couple of scenes. However, this small cameo was not needed. Hell, we learned all about that mission in Pearl Harbor. It is obvious the focus of the film was meant to be split between Ed Skrein’s Lt. Best and his flying and Patrick Wilson’s Lt. Layton as he does his best to avoid another disaster like Pearl Harbor. Everything else could have been left out or, at the very least, briefly mentioned.

Effects. When I first saw the trailer for this, I noticed some of the comments mentioned how huge the cast was and that all the money must have been spent on them, rather than effects. I figured this was just how they looked in the trailer and the film would make things look more polished. Turns out I was mistaken. The effects in this film aren’t great, but they also aren’t what you would expect for a film that was released in theaters, but rather something you would see on television back about 10 or so years ago. Maybe if they made some of those cuts i mentioned earlier, they could have used that money for better effects.

Missing history. As the title suggests, this is about the Battle of Midway. However, we skip the rest of the war. We get the attack on Pearl Harbor, Roosevelt’s “Day that will live in infamy” speech, and the aforementioned Doolittle raid, but that’s all. No mention of why the US has hasn’t been in the war, no mention of the Japanese and the Axis of evil, no mention of the Nazis, none of that. Again, I’m not saying we needed to cram any of this into the film, but there should have at least been some mention of it, otherwise these flyboys are just out there shooting down Japanese and vice-versa.

Final verdict.

A while back, I had the chance to watch an old John Wayne (non-western) film, In Harm’s Way. I have found this to still be one of the best war films I have watched to date (one of these days I will get around to watching Saving Private Ryan). Midway has its moments that are fun to watch, great acting (Ed Skrein comes off like he watched a bunch of early Sinatra movies), and some realistic circumstances that you wouldn’t think you would see in a PG-13 film *GASP* smoking *GASP* That said, when there isn’t a battle going on, the film does tend to drag and that is where this film has its ultimate downfall. Do I recommend this? Yes, if you’re a fan of huge fan of WWII like myself. This should especially be seen on the big screen, but chances are when it hits the home market, we’ll have forgotten what this was.

3 out of 5 stars

Movie Review: Once Upon a Time in Hollywood

PLOT:

Quentin Tarantino’s Once Upon a Time… in Hollywood visits 1969 Los Angeles, where everything is changing, as TV star Rick Dalton (Leonardo DiCaprio) and his longtime stunt double Cliff Booth (Brad Pitt) make their way around an industry they hardly recognize anymore. The ninth film from the writer-director features a large ensemble cast and multiple storylines in a tribute to the final moments of Hollywood’s golden age.

REVIEW:

What did I like?

BFFs. Brad Pitt and Leonardo DiCaprio were long seen as sex symbols and heartthrobs. To my knowledge, this is the first time they have starred in a film together. All those girls who had their posters on their walls and lockers in the 90s and early 2000s must have been in heaven when they heard these guys were going to be in this together. From my point of view, not being a female who was obsessed with these guy back in the day, I appreciated the acting. I was able to believe that these were two best friends, despite one being a stunt double and the other being a big, albeing fading, star. The whole film, if not a big chunk of it, relies on their camaraderie and the audience being invested in it, which they did a pretty job of, in my opinion.

Bruce Lee. There has been some controversy over the portrayal of Bruce Lee. Obviously, director Quentin Tarantino has respect from Lee. If there is any question, look at Uma Thurman’s outfit in the Kill Bill movies and compare it to Bruce Lee’s in Game of Death and notice the homage. All that aside, this portrayal of Lee is over the top…maybe a bit too much…but fun to watch. The idea that Lee was this cocky and arrogant is the total opposite of who the man was, which makes this such a delight, not to mention the fight choreography he has with Pitt’s character. I only wish we could have seen more.

Aesthetic. Every decade has a certain look and feel. From the music and fashion to the cars and the way people speak, you can tell when you’re watching a film set in, say the ’50s as opposed to the ’80s. Tarantino has captured the aesthetic of the ’70s in such a way that it almost feels like we’re watching a flick from that era. This really should come as no surprise, though. Almost all of his films have a this touch. He just decided to use the technique for a whole film this go ’round.

What didn’t I like?

Tate-r tot. From the minute this film was announced, there seemed to be a big deal made about the inclusion of Sharon Tate and the Manson family. Not to spoil anything, but she is more of a side character than part of the main cast. When I realized this, I thought to myself, was all that hype to get people to watch? Did she have a bigger role initially and it was cut down? Did Tarantino and Margot Robbie have creative differences that led to such a small part? Maybe we’ll find out when the 50th anniversary DVD is released. Until then, all we can do is speculate.

A violent end. In the film’s climax, Tarantino chooses to change history. I won’t spoil what he does, but I will say that the scene in which he does this seems to come from out of nowhere. That is to say, the rest of the film has had a few punches here and there, but nothing that seems like it out of a John Wick film. Yet, this is what we get in this last scene as Pitt”s character (and his dog) defend the homestead, for lack of a better term, while DiCaprio’s new wife sleeps. Not for nothing, DiCaprio gets the best of one of the female intruders. Still, this whole sequence seems more in line with Inglorious Basterds or Reservoir Dogs.

Feet. Quentin Tarantino has a foot fetish. Watch any of his films, with a couple of exceptions and you will fins barefoot women (and men). To each their own, I suppose. I’m not judging the man as I can appreciate a woman in some sexy heels or sandals, myself. However, Tarantino doesn’t seem to be hiding his affinity for feet in this film. Robbie’s Sharon Tate is seen in a movie theater with her boots off and her (surprisingly dirty) bare feet on the back of the seat. One of the very first scenes we see is a beautiful blonde laying in the bed, her golden skin glowing in the sun. Does Tarantino focus on her beauty? No, he instead lingers on her toes before finally moving the camera up. Again, to each their own, but these are just a couple of the examples in this film where he just goes all in on showing his love for feet…dirty feet at that!

Final verdict.

When it all comes down to it, Once Upon a Time in Hollywood is a love letter to the Hollywood that Tarantino grew up with. There actually is a good story and great acting here, but I can’t help but feel this is not one his strongest films. That said, this is one of the more entertaining pictures for its runtime and doesn’t feel as if the characters are rambling off just to hear themselves talk. Do I recommend it? Yes, but you can probably wait until it comes to video or streaming, rather than rushing to see it in theaters.

4 out of 5 stars

Movie Review: Born to Be Blue

PLOT: Set largely in 1966, Baker (portrayed by Ethan Hawke) is hired to play himself in a movie about his earlier years when he first tried heroin. He romances actress Jane Azuka (a fictional character, a composite of several of Baker’s women in real life, portrayed here by Carmen Ejogo) but on their first date, Baker is attacked by thugs and his front teeth smashed. As Baker recovers from his injury, his embouchure is ruined and he is unable to play trumpet any better than a novice. Meanwhile, he must answer to a probation officer, and ensure he is employed, while sticking to his regime of methadone treatment.

REVIEW:

What did I like?

The man, the myth, the legend. When one thinks of the legends of jazz, the names that come to mind are Louis Armstrong, Duke Ellington, Count Basie, Ella Fitzgerald, Glenn Miller, Billie Holiday, Miles Davis, etc. Further on down that list is Chet Baker, an underrated trumpeter and vocalist whose drug addiction kept him from achieving greater things (a recurring theme amongst jazz musicians, it seems). The film, while giving us a look into who Chet Baker was, mostly focuses on his addiction and the struggle to comeback after he had his jaw broken (circumstances related to his drug addiction). Most biopics would have stayed away from the topic or just touched on it, opting to give us more of a history lesson, but with this film we are made well aware of the damage the drugs did to Baker’s personal life and career, but not before we get to know and like him as a person.

Music. You can’t have a film about a musician and not showcase his music. While I would have liked for the film to give us more than what amounts to a monologue about Baker’s early career, as it progressed we got more and more of his music, culminating with his iconic rendition of “My Funny Valentine”. The entire score has a 60s jazz feel that fits with the tone of the film; a nice compilation by the film’s composer David Braid.

Stakes. I mentioned earlier how this film focused on Baker’s comeback from addiction and having his jaw broken. What I didn’t mention was how that even though we know the final outcome, the audience is still on the edge of their seat in anticipation waiting to see what will happen. Will Chet get back on the stuff? Will he get a steady job? Will he get back to playing like he was before the beating? Will Jane leave him?

What didn’t I like?

Flashbacks. Throughout the picture, we get these flashbacks or visions that Chet has. I’m not sure if they are brought on because of the heroin, are done for the audience’s benefit, or exist just to make the film seem more artsy, but it would have been nice to have some context with them, rather than just taking us out of the story. Things are made worse because the actress that plays his current girlfriend also plays his wife, so you can’t tell who is who.

Dizzy and Miles. On the Mt. Rushmore of jazz trumpet players sit 4 genuine legends. Maynard Ferguson, Dizzy Gillespie, Miles Davis, and the immortal Louis Armstrong. Dizzy and Miles are portrayed in this film by actors who favor them in the face, but that’s it. The cat that plays Dizzy reminded more of one of the guys from Boyz II Men. The actor doing Miles is a much closer resemblance than Don Cheadle in Miles Ahead, but I felt he just wanted to capture the angry black man spirit that Miles took on during this period. Basically, I was glad to see these guys included, but disappointed that they weren’t portrayed better.

Trumpet. As a trumpet player, whenever I see an actor pick up a horn in film, I cannot help but scrutinize their “playing”. To this day, the best at this is Antonio Banderas in The Mambo Kings. Ethan Hawke isn’t too far behind him, though. There are times when he actually does seem like he is playing! Speaking of playing, after Baker’s accident he is supposed to be re-learning how to play. That’s fine and dandy, but what we hear from him on screen, other than in the bathtub and a couple of early scenes, doesn’t sound much different that what we heard when the film opens and what we hear in the final scene at Birdland (a major jazz club in New York at the time). Again, as a trumpet player, I may hear things that a normal person wouldn’t when it comes to the horn.

Final verdict: Believe it or not, I was avoiding this film thinking it was going to be some depressing, melodramatic,artsy-fartsy flick. To a point, it was, but I was also entertained and impressed by the attention to detail and passion Ethan Hawke brought to this project. I’m glad they didn’t dwell on the interracial relationship between he and Jane, but  it was mentioned twice and you can rest assured they heard all sorts of things, especially during the period in which this is set. When push comes to shove, though, is this a film for the general movie goer? No, it isn’t. This is a picture for fans of Chet Baker, jazz, trumpet, Ethan Hawke, and maybe Carmen Ejogo. That doesn’t mean it can’t be enjoyed, but the audience for this is a little more niche than say that for Fast & Furious. I won’t be rushing to purchase this, but if someone were to give it to me for a present, I catch it on TV, or it comes back to Netflix (it will be leaving shortly after I finish typing this), then I will gladly watch it again.

4 out of 5 stars

Movie Review: The Founder

PLOT:

The story of Ray Kroc, a salesman who turned two brothers’ innovative fast food eatery, McDonald’s, into the biggest restaurant business in the world, with a combination of ambition, persistence, and ruthlessness.

REVIEW:

What did I like?

History lesson. Whether you want to admit it or not, we all loved McDonald’s growing up. I was a treat when our parents would get us a Happy Meal. Back in my day, they would occasionally deviate from the boxes and use other containers that us kids could play with, such as a pail for Halloween or boats to play with in the tub. As an adult, my love for the fast food giant has waned, but I still enjoy a Quarter Pounder every now and then. With this in mind, learning how the place came to be was really interesting to me. How many of us actually have given thought to the humble beginning on Mickey D’s?

Ray of light. The last few years have seen Michael Keaton emerge as one of the best actors of our generation; a far cry from his days as a stand-up comic. He seems to do his best work as the slimy, villainous type, as seen in Spider-Man: Homecoming and the upcoming live-action version of Dumbo. From all that I have read of this guy Ray Kroc, he was an extremely underhanded and duplicitous individual who underhandedly swept the McDonald’s business out from under the naive brothers (as seen in the film). Keaton brings all of this to the screen, but with a charm that gets the audience behind him for a good portion of the film.

On-erman. Nick Offerman is best known to me as Ron Swanson from the TV series, Parks and Recreation; a role in which he stole the show in many episodes with very few lines. As one of the original founders/owners of McDonald’s, again he has few lines, but what he does say has weight. It is through his dialogue that we the audience really learn what is going on with how Keaton’s Kroc was slowly taking their business away and how he was fighting to keep that from happening. It really is an underrated performance and one that is integral to the success of this film.

What didn’t I like?

Ad space. I hate to say this, but one cannot help but feel this film is nothing more than a giant advertisement for McDonald’s. From the poster that features the patented golden arches, the mention of various iconic menu items, to the fact that this is a film about McDonald’s, it cannot be ignored that the restaurant received some free press anytime someone watches this film. Hell, I ran out to my local Mickey D’s before I started typing this review!

Life gets in the way. The life and times of Ray Kroc are sort of necessary to developing his character and letting the audience know why he was capable of doing what he did. However, I feel like some aspects of his life we could have done without. For instance, seeing his early days as a milkshake machine salesman led to his coming across McDonald’s in the first place. This was a necessary part of his life. On the flipside, the film alludes to some marital troubles, but never goes any further than that until the final scenes where we see he has a new wife. One can’t help but think that this is something they could have left out if the filmmakers weren’t going to go into it some more. Laura Dern’s character was nothing more than a harpy, so not seeing her would not have been a loss.

What could have been. Everytime I go to McDonald’s, the service is…shall we say, less than pleasant. Funny thing is, everything that we criticize Mickey D’s for these days, Offerman’s character mentions in one of his first scenes. Slow service, quality control, soggy fries, an ice cream machine that doesn’t work, etc. Yes, Ray Kroc brought McDonald’s to national prominence, but imagine what it would have been like with the original owners’ plan. If you’ve ever been to local burger joints and/or diners, you’ll notice that they may be slower than fast food places, but the food tastes better and the order is more accurate. This is what we could/should be getting from McDonald’s!!!

Final verdict: The Founder was a more entertaining and educational film that I was expecting. Most pictures based on real people/events end up being extremely boring, but this one kept my attention, mostly because of the subject material, but also because of the outstanding cast. With that said, I won’t be going to buy this on DVD or Blu-ray, but should I catch it on TV or streaming, I’ll stop and watch it again.

4 out of 5 stars