Dianne Venora (HEAT etc...) :Chan Parker
*
*
Something sad, something happy, and long but never boring, it's one of the more honest tributes to a musician in film
Author: MisterWhiplash from United States
15 January 2005
Clint Eastwood's direction was very suitable for the material in this film, dealing with subjects he cares much about (music, loners, risking on the edge), and his handle on Bird, for my money, was wonderful. It's not an easy film to take, and it asks a lot from one in the viewing (it's a big film, with a plot complex, but not confusing, but is rewarding for those with a good interest Charlie Parker and the days of 40's-50's jazz. It's arguable whether there might be flaws in some of the uses of symbolism or bits of dialog in Joel Oliansky's script.
But it's strong points - Forest Whitaker's major breakthrough in the title role; the bountiful and superb collection of Parker songs on the soundtrack (with a fine score by Lennie Neuhaus); a keen eye for getting the atmosphere and lighting right by Eastwood - are worth the viewing. Like most films about musicians with demons in the back of their heads (i.e. Ray, The Doors, even Amadeus), there is a level of possible melodrama that has to be crossed. With Bird, Parker is an interesting subject with this, and is ultimately shown well to be redeemed by the music. Likely to become more appealing, or at least easier to take on a second viewing, Bird is a solid, inspiring movie, with a kind of feeling to it that is unique. A+
Author: Dr Jacques COULARDEAU from Olliergues, France
28 March 2010
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
The life of Charlie Parker is Christ-like, to the point of dying at the age of 34. Clint Eastwood does not insist on his youth and origins. He concentrates on the mature musician from the moment he gets into the profession (with a cabaret card) to the moment when he dies and gets out of it, still with his cabaret card, at least in his dying heart. Charlie Parker represents a very typical case. The musician is stepping out of real life with his music. He steps into another world where the weight of the body and the ethics of the mind do not exist any more, and that's why his music is luminous and so entrancing.
We are literally swallowed up by that swinging force because it is from an out world that is beyond pure comprehension and that is only to be enjoyed. But to produce that joy, that beauty and that light the musician has to burn his own life slowly but surely till death ensues. Alcohol, tobacco, drugs, wild living and no regularity at all, insanity too of the psychotic type quite often are the companions and the tools of this musician and even the few friends he meets along the way, both other musicians, or women and men who just love him are not enough to stop the fire that consumes him, especially because without that consumption that burns him inside out he would not be able to play music, to compose music, to create music.
Clint Eastwood really renders that psychotic world with a force and a power that makes the film too short even if it were two hours longer. We would like to just drown in that music and in that soul that feeds us that music as if it were the honey of paradise and the blood of life. But every single drop he gives us is a drop he loses in his veins. Till they are dry and the heart empty. A musician is always in a way committing a self-sacrifice of his life on the altar of our pleasure.Dr Jacques COULARDEAU, University Paris 1 Pantheon Sorbonne, University Paris 8 Saint Denis, University Paris 12 Créteil, CEGID
This is an incredible movie and one of the best music biopics ever. I was already a fan of Charlie Parkers music and I think that helps when it comes to appreciating this film. But, Forrest Whitaker's performance is incredible as are all of the others who so accurately portray the real life musicians of the film. If there is one detractor in the movie, it is the fact that there are a lot of flash backs and flash forwards and at times it can be a little hard to follow. I didn't get everything until I saw it the second or third time. Highly recommended. If you liked Coal Miners Daughter, Ray or Walk the Line or if you are a fan of jazz music, you will love Bird.
Way before of his outstanding and recent biographical works like "Invictus", "Changelling" and "J.Edgar", this was the first serious film directed by Clint Eastwood, at that time famous for his westerns and action films. And Mr. Eastwood directs this cine biography of Charlie Parker with an impressive artistic style that pays a great tribute to one of the most important jazz figures.Landing on his first leading role, the amazing Forest Whitaker plays Parker, known as "Bird", from his first gigs as musician way before of becoming famous as a regular on the Birdland to all his problems with drug addiction, his troubled life and ultimately to his death at age 34.
Here's the artist in all his forms fighting against countless demons; surviving with his art, a true master with the saxophone, an true legend that couldn't decide between staying strong for his work and for his family or to succumb to all of his problems, someone who couldn't bear the tragedy of losing a child, and seeing how the music changed around him and around his other musician mates, most of them joining rock groups, trading their styles.Clint recreates the 1930-1950's period with a great visual sense, the right colors, all dark, an endless night that can be noticed as a reflection on Bird's life, a great darkness with few but powerful lights shining through. This movie always reminds of "'Round Midnight" (1986), another great jazz film.
What can be viewed as a negative point is the fact the film focus mostly on Charlie Parker downer moments rather than displaying his musical geniality, his performances (at least, the ones we're allowed to see are highly credible thanks to Whitaker's effort in the acting). It's a tough film to watch, very depressive. I don't find Joel Olianski's script a perfect work but it is a great achievement indeed. Since the story is presented through flashbacks (that weren't so well developed) most viewers will not find "Bird" an easy experience to watch. A more linear approach would fit better, it would make the film move with more quality, with efficiency and a certain appeal to audiences.
Those who know about Bird will enjoy the film, I think, even though there's a certain lack of good facts about him, his partnership with Miles Davis, etc (And where's his memorable performance of "A Night in Tunisia" (composed by Dizzy Gillespie by the way)?But there's time to cover his marriage with Chan (Diane Venora), an loyal woman who managed to stay with the man regardless of anything; and his trip down the deep south with his black band and the only white member of it, Rodney (Michael Zelniker) was forced to play as a singer because of the place rules. Detail: the guy couldn't sing! A light and funny moment in the picture.
Jazz fans or not, at least watch it to see how great Clint is in directing this and see how a talent is born in front of cameras and I'm talking about Forest Whitaker, at that time known for his supporting roles in "Fast Times in Ridgemont High" and "Good Morning, Vietnam", and here he has the role of a lifetime as Parker. Whitaker plays the character with conviction, not just the music and using the saxophone but the man's pain, his inner conflicts, his lovable side, to the point of of making a serenade to Chan while standing on a white horse. It is his most complete performance.Ladies and gentlemen, please enjoy the finest jazz brought by Mr. Eastwood in one of the most interesting films of 1988. 10/10
There are certain movies that leave you dazed when you walk out of the theater. For me, "Bird" was such a movie.On a nice evening in 1988 I decided to take in a movie on the spur of the moment. I walked to the nearest theater (Fine Arts, Downtown Chicago) and looked to see what was playing. I had never heard of Charlie Parker nor his music, but I was developing a love of jazz and the movie being directed by Clint Eastwood didn't hurt.I went in, found a seat and had no way of knowing that, in a couple of hours, my life would be different.
The music penetrated my soul in ways I could never express. I was in awe and filled with emotion as the music carried me away while the visions of Charlie Parker's life flashed in front of my face. When the final credits scrolled up the screen, I could not move. I was frozen to my seat, dazed, overwhelmed, completely awed. I couldn't get the music out of my head, songs were playing back as if I'd listened to them a thousand times. My mind felt as if it were orbiting the sun.. spinning round and round, bathed in this warmth of beauty.
I didn't walk out of the the theater so much as stagger. I walked around for miles just playing over and over in my mind what I'd seen and heard and finally, hours after the movie ended I found myself in front of an all night music store where I bought the soundtrack and raced home to listen to it. No matter that I had to get up in the morning for work... no matter that the movie had ended before 10pm but I didn't find my way home until after 2am. No matter that I was dead tired from walking dazed miles in a haze of thought.
I played that CD until I fell asleep then took it to work and played it all day... I played it constantly for weeks and then I started to buy other Charlie Parker CDs and reading everything I could about him. Charlie Parker is my favorite musician of all time, to this day, nearly 20 years later... and it began with this movie.
Author: ianlouisiana from United Kingdom
25 March 2007
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Thus read the headline in the "Melody Maker" in England in 1955.I read the front page article on the top deck of the trolley bus going to school and determined to play the rare "Dial" 78 s my best friend had loaned me to wean me away from Louis Armstrong that had been languishing under the All - Stars' double sided "Basin St Blues" for some time. Shortly after that I heard the Massey Hall LP with Dizzy and Bud Powell and moved Bird right alongside Louis in my pantheon of musical gods where he remains over half a century later. I am a great admirer of Mr Clint Eastwood both as a director and an actor and am grateful to him for putting his money where his mouth was and making "Bird".
Charlie Parker had the avid mind of the poorly - educated intelligence,he read widely,had eclectic musical tastes,improvised some of the most profoundly moving music of the second half of the 20th century but most of his adult life was ruled by a heroin habit. He stole,lied,cheated and pimped to satisfy it,alienated many who loved him and,of course,ultimately it killed him.The story of his life was never going to be the typical Hollywood biopic,rags to riches but still basically the nice guy/girl of childhood sort of stuff. Bird came from a world alien to most Americans of the 50s,harsh,violent divided along race lines,awash with alcohol and drugs,it would have been surprising indeed if he had passed through it unscathed.
"Bird" is disturbing to watch,wonderful to listen to and required viewing for anyone wanting to know about the life of the second most influential jazz musician in history. Stan Kenton alumnus Mr Lennie Neihaus masterminded the soundtrack and isolated the Parker solos from their original background,re - recording them with contemporary musicians,arguably not particularly ethical perhaps,but the muddy 50 year old records still have some joyous saxophone playing mixed with pristine state of the art resources. Mr Eastwood doesn't bowdlerise Bird's life,he presents an uncompromising picture of an improvising genius unable to take control of his own life and unwilling to let others control it for him.
Author: typonaut-2 from PA
21 November 2000
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
Anyone who really knows Bird's life understands it was, ultimately, a tragedy. I have read several books about Charlie Parker and listened to more than a dozen of his albums. The portrait Clint Eastwood creates matches exactly what I know of Bird's life. And the most wonderful thing is that, I believe, it conveys an appreciation of his music in a way that recordings, alone, cannot.(Possible spoiler ahead.) Bird was not destroyed by the first glimmerings of rock and roll any more than he was destroyed by the popularity of country and western. Classical is another matter.
The key symbolism to understanding the tragedy is that, with his discovery of classical music, Bird began to realize how much more there was to understand and experience in the world. But he had lived for the intensity of the moment, over-indulging in booze and drugs. With just a little more time he would have beaten these demons with his enormous will power. But he did not have the time.There is a lesson there, based on a very real life that, until Eastwood's movie, had been virtually forgotten by most of the Black community and the world. See it! This is a great movie!
Author: writers_reign from London, England
17 January 2010
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
It's been claimed that this is the Best film about Jazz ever made and whilst the glib response may be yeah, maybe, but how MANY films about Jazz have been made, the tendency is to agree. What is undeniable is the fact that director Eastwood - a well-known jazz buff - has not been content with the four-bar taste of the music then cutting away from the band to a dialogue scene approach which is what fans usually get fobbed off with, here we actually are allowed to savour (assuming, of course, the music is our prime reason for watching the film) not only the genius of Parker but also the music scene as it existed roughly between 1945-55 and though he isn't named aficionados will know it was Jo Jones who threw the cymbal at Parker to register disgust. 52nd St - known as Swing Street - has also been lovingly recreated so already we have accumulated a host of positives, throw in the remarkable lead performance from Forest Whitaker and we are talking great movie.
"Bird" will probably be most appreciated by jazz fans who come to it already familiar with Charlie Parker and his incalculable contributions to jazz and influence on generations of musicians that continues to this day. The script contains many shorthand references that might be lost on the average moviegoer -- e.g., Parker calls Dizzy Gillespie "Birks," which was his middle name, but many people probably don't know that.
But there is the music, and tons of it. There are extraordinary performances by Forest Whitaker as Parker, and Diane Venora as his common law wife, Chan. In many ways the film seems more a love story than the standard musical biopic. Chan was unfailingly supportive of Bird, despite his self-destructive drug use, alcoholism and chronic infidelity. He loved her in his own way, and I think she realized that she was in love with a genius who would forever be plagued by demons, and that she couldn't have one without the other.
Clint Eastwood's love of jazz is well-known, and in "Bird" he provides a wealth of wonderful music, beautifully performed. The actual playing of Charlie Parker is augmented by accompaniment from contemporary musicians, and Parker has never sounded better. Eastwood also provides an unflinching portrayal of the complicated lives of jazz musicians, and the addictions to which so many succumb.
Despite the mess that Bird made of his life, he remains a charming and sympathetic figure. And his music, years ahead of its time, and so complex that countless fledging saxophone players have attempted to copy his recordings note for note, will forever live on.
Biographies are a hard genre to capture on film. Books can give layers upon layers of detail into someone's life, based on multiple perspectives. And even documentaries have more of an opportunity through interviews and archive footage to establish a person's background and contributions to their art form. But how do you honorably condense a person's life down to the standards of conventional cinema, especially if that person was as unconventional as Jazz icon Charlie Parker? Clint Eastwood's "Bird" opens with a quote from F. Scott Fitzgerald, "There are no second acts in American lives." After a brief scene with no dialogue depicting Parker's childhood in Kansas City, the film flashes forward to a suicide attempt about six months before his actual death in 1955.
This opening sequence establishes the tone of the film, depicting the complicated relationship between Parker and his common law wife, his drug addiction, and the music that he gave to the world. It is from this point that the film takes an interesting approach, telling most of its story in episodic flashbacks, floating around through different time periods, and even the occasional flashback within another flashback, further playing with the idea of time and memory. It is through this nonlinear approach that the film most resembles the art form that it is representing.
"Bird" mostly depicts Parker's life with his common law wife Chan Parker and his relationship to musicians Dizzy Gillespie and Red Rodney, all of whom gave their input during the production process. Chan, whose unpublished memoirs heavily influenced the screenplay, provided Eastwood with rare live recordings of Parker for the film. One of the movie's greatest accomplishments is its detail to the time period. In one of the film's most remarkable moments, the camera in one long take follows a club doorman up and down 52nd Street, making you feel like you are in the 1940s world of Bebop. You practically get lost in the darkly lit nightclub scenes with the air full of smoke and music.
The two lead performances are extremely captivating. Forest Whitaker balances several different moods in his portrayal as Bird, conveying how charming and interesting he was to the outside world while also showcasing the pitfalls of drug addiction, and how it eventually made him an unreliable performer. He also does a convincing job at mimicking Parker's stage presence, especially his ability to improvise on the saxophone. Equal praise must go to Diane Verona as Parker's companion later in the life, establishing a cool persona in the early days of their relationship, and an overbearing sadness during its final months. The scene depicting their last phone conversation, with Verona trying so hard to mask her awareness of what's happening and eventually breaking down is heartbreaking.
Still, with its Jazz-like approach to the narrative, "Bird" comes off as slightly overlong. It is still filled with nice moments and wonderful scenes. When touring in L.A., Bird stops outside the house of Igor Stravinsky, where the two geniuses stare at each other from a distance. This is juxtaposed nicely with an early scene of Parker and Chan's courtship, dancing in a fancy club with white Jazz musicians who stop playing because they recognize the legend in front of them, perhaps embarrassed by the second rate compositions they're playing. What might be the film's best scene comes near the end with Gillespie and Parker on a beach at night. The former tells the latter that while he's trying to be a progressive, Parker is too busy trying to be a martyr. "People always seem to remember the martyr more," Gillespie laments. Oh how right he was!
