I've been looking forward to this movie for a year. It's a true story - with a compelling movie trailer... I was hooked when I saw the trailer about a year ago. I won't spoil an ending here (it's not really a movie you can do that with.) Okay, so here's my two cents... and really the only reason I'm commenting on this is because I'm a little bugged at this movie.
It felt like it was sloppily put together... just a meandering plot that was, at times, dull (not because there weren't explosions, just because I felt myself feeling like it was all a bit rehearsed and a little boring.) SUCH a bummer since I had really high hopes.
The song from the trailer (Bach's Suite for solo cello no. 1 in G Major: Prelude 1) was barely used in the movie. I really thought they would use it better; place it beautifully in the context of an emotional wrinkle that fit the moment hand in glove. But I almost missed it cuz it was thrown in at an awkward time, during a cello lesson that had little to do with the plot of the movie and didn't connect the song on an emotional level at all; a total miss.
Okay -so two more things and I'm done - You'll be glad for these ones cuz they're RETARDED!
1. Jamie Foxx's character (Nathaniel Ayers) was a guy who never made it through Julliard School of Music, but started there as a promising young cellist. He enrolled at Julliard in 1970. The movie is set in 2005. Okay, so I start doing the math in my head and things are not adding up. I'm thinking well, maybe this guy was a child prodigy and started college when he was six or seven. Nope - he was 19. Okay, so that means Jamie Foxx is playing a FIFTY-FOUR year old in this movie!!! Even with his ugly hair and moled up face, he could not pass for someone who was born in NINETEEN FIFTY ONE! C'mon people. They could've used Samuel Jackson... they could've used Morgan Freeman. They could've used Denzel... or even Sidney Portier. But NOT someone who looks 35.
2. I know this is going to sound stupid and petty, but if you've seen it, you know exactly what I'm talking about. Robert Downey Jr.'s eyebrows switched back and forth from gray to black about 64 times during the movie. In several scenes they were gray, and then switched to black before the scene was done. I noticed this early on and decided to let it go so I wouldn't spoil things for myself, and I did let it go... for about 30 minutes. Then I couldn't take it anymore and actually had a couple turn around and look at me when I'd finally had enough and said, "C'mon with the eyebrows already!"
So there's my two cents. I won't say DON'T see it. And anyway, I'm a firm believer that when someone talks a movie down, it is more enjoyable because your hopes aren't unrealistically high. That's what I think anyway.
They were a couple really great moments though, honestly. And seriously, the story, is a beautiful one. I hear there's a book out, written by Robert Downey Jr.'s character (Steven Lopez) who writes for the LA Times. I'm sure that would be better than the movie.
Peace out!
PS - if you are anything like me, you'll be interested to know that if you watch the trailer, you will see the eyebrows thing. And I'm betting that without my explanation of this theatrical travesty, you would've probably thought, by watching the trailer, that this film spanned a 20 year period of time SIMPLY BECAUSE OF HIS EYEBROWS! Think I'm crazy? Give it a try and see. LOVE to know your thoughts if you've already seen The Soloist, that may as well have starred Gary Coleman. "Whatchoo talking about Jamie Foxx?"
