I just saw it, and it was pretty good.

Jaimie Foxx gives an unbelievable performance in evoking the character of the late Ray Charles, getting his mannerisms and "look" totally down pat.

In addition, the film has some excellent period detail for the time span of 1949-1965, the period during which it took place, and some excellent music, which was performed by Charles before he died, although I thought there could have been more.

However.....

Had the film been a fictional biography, loosely based on Ray Charles life, with, say, Will Smith playing the title role and not attempting an outright imitation of Charles, it probably would have been nothing special.

But it's absolutely worth seeing for Foxx's perormance alone.

This is good to hear. I saw Collateral and was amazed to see such a good performance by Foxx. Now I'm really excitied. Thank's Plaw!

Doc

Plaw, I agree completely. The film was amazing, as was Foxx's performance.

When I was getting ready to see it, I feared it would be similar to "Ali", which was a bad movie with one great performance. But I was wrong about "Ray". Not only was the lead performance by Foxx incredible, but the movie itself was excellent. It did what few biographies do: it not only shows Ray Charles the musician, but Ray Charles.
I had no idea how diverse he was, going from jazz to country and beyond. But I also didn't know about his heroin addiction or his brother's death.

All in all, an amazing movie that should not be missed. With all the biographies coming out this year, it will be hard for them to top "Ray".

I wouldn't say ALI was bad, but I was "meh" about it, despite some good acting work by Smith and Jamie BOOTY CALL Foxx(which that nickname I might have to retire soon it seems).

Anyway, ya RAY is a decent good flick, though what will stay is Foxx's acting work which for sure will get him an Oscar nomination(not to mention he might get a nom for Best Supporting Actor for COLLATERAL, but who knows. I mean Al Pacino had this happen in 1992 with his acting work nominated for both SCENT OF A WOMAN and GLENGARRY GLEN ROSS).

Yeah, you're right. "Ali" wasn't bad, but it was ultimately missable.

That's an interesting comparison with Al Pacino's career, but I beg to differ.
I consider it more like Sean Penn's double feature last year. Penn had his mainstream hit "Mystic River", and showed us another great performance in "21 Grams". Both were excellent leading performances. But he was only nominated for one performance, and he won it.
I think the same could be said for Foxx this year. "Ray" is his Oscar worthy performance. Both were leading performances, and both were excellent, but the Academy will, unfairly, only recognize one, and I feel they will recognize his performance in "Ray", which I think was better anyway.

I would like to see Foxx win the Oscar, and it would be interesting to see if Tom gets a Best Actor nomination for "Collateral", and the two go head to head. While I thought it was Cruise's best performance to date, I still feel he won't get a nomination.

I agree that the Sean Penn comparison is more apt, but I was stuck with the Pacino situation since I was empty on any other comparisons at the time.

Thing is, who else is "supposed" to be the Best Actor "heavyweights" of this year? I mean Foxx's buzz for RAY was big before it even came out, and with the majority of reviews I've read, both positive, so-so, and slightly disapointingly negative, that early pre-release buzz has been met, so he'll be nominated for sure.

As for Cruise, I think he'll be nominated. I mean finally he plays the "villain" and with the 11th hour Oscar-ballot pushing by Dreamworks and Paramount, its guaranteed.

Now you forget about one important advantage to past single/multi Oscar-nominated actors, which I call the "We're Sorry, Here you Go Advantage". I mean "Denzel" got his Oscar for TRAINING DAY after being passed up for his work in stuff like MALCOLM X or THE HURRICANE or HE GOT GAME or DEVIL IN A BLUE DRESS. Other classic examples include Paul Newman and Al Pacino who finally win their Oscars for films that compared to their work in previous movies they got passed over(like SCARFACE and the GODFATHER films for Pacino or COOL HAND LUKE and THE HUSTLER for Newman), they are weak.

Sorry for the long tirade, but if Cruise and Foxx went head to head, and reading the correlation of how the pricky Oscar voters are....Cruise will win if because of his 3 previous Oscar nominations that went nowhere, whatever we agree or not.

There is no way Foxx would be nominated for best supporting actor for Collateral because he was main character in the movie. He is practically in every scene throughout the movie.

He will be nominated for Ray though and is the clear-cut winner so far, but we still have two months of movies to come out. I really enjoyed this movie overall but doubt it will be nominated as best picture because we keep seeing true life stories about real people all the time and it may be getting a little old.

I will agree with you on Pacino, but I have to disagre with Denzel. He gave his best performance in Training Day and that is why he finally won it for that. He's another guy you could mention for this year as well for another job well done in The Manchurian Candidate. The problem is that it was a summer flick and may be forgotten by the time it comes to nominate.

I'm not so sure. Someone on IMDb said that "Collateral" is Cruise's "Training Day" (meaning he will win the Oscar but not deserve it). But I think he does deserve it, and in that case, he WON'T win.
That might sound confusing, but the Academy works in strange ways. Oscar season is my favorite time of year. I love making predictions, even if I am usually wrong.

But anyway, another actor getting a lot of Oscar buzz is Johnny Depp for "Finding Neverland". He might win because the Academy might pull their 'We're Sorry, Here you Go' technique for all the nominations that he was overlooked for.

I liked Washington in TRAINING DAY, but the grumblings I heard from many people after he won is why I noted as such an example.

Thing is, I really can't agree on seeing anyone being Best Actor outside Cruise. As for nominations, I can see Mr. Depp getting nominated(but no chance at winning), and I also see Liam Neeson getting some props and a nomination on the early-buzz/great reviews-filled movie that is KINSEY(and the same director, who previously had helmed GODS & MONSTERS, got the lead Ian McKellen a nomination so mark one for Darkman).

While I think the Oscars have f*cked up many many a time, its still fun to watch and predict the results. Hopefully I'll do better in March than I did last tuesday

I haven't seen this movie, but a co-worker did and he thought it was excellent. He too said Jaimie Foxx did a wonderful job.

Tell me though. I never did know how Ray Charles became blind. I know he was not born blind, but that's all I know.


TIS

Umm, Johnny Depp has been nominated only once and that was last year for Pirates of the Caribbean.

I believe he went blind at the age of 7 from glaucoma.

Indeed Busta. However, Depp had done several great performances that were unfortunately ignored. From DON JUAN DEMARCO to ED WOOD to EDWARD SCISSORHANDS of course what in my opinion I feel is his career best.........FEAR & LOATHING IN LAS VEGAS.

Did I say he had been nominated more than once? No. What I said was that he was overlooked for multiple nominations that he SHOULD HAVE recieved. I echo QTN when I say that his most overlooked performance was "Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas", followed by "Ed Wood".

Yeah, I saw this last night, too. Great film, but I think it could have been better. I haven't thought through yet what it's lacking, so I can't pinpoint it. But in general, it was very, very good.

I don't know, Omar... I'm really looking forward to "Beyond the Sea." I hope it lives up to my expectations. It'd be easy to mess that one up, so I hope they don't.

Who is beyond The Sea about?

You haven't heard that song? It's my second favorite song ever. It's Bobby Darin. Kevin Spacey (who I've always thought was the spitting image!) is playing him, and I think directing it, too. Should be pretty good.

Thanks! I'll check it out.

They showed a trailer for it before "Ray".

Spacey looked much too old.

Ya Spacey has been trying to make his Bobby Darin-bio movie for years.....from the trailer I saw, he looks Ten years TOO late. Sad really since a decade-younger Spacey probably would have looked much better. Tsk Tsk!

I am also looking forward to that, but I saw the trailer for "The Aviator", and it looks rather disappointing.

I too want to see Beyond the Sea. I've seen only brief previews, and thought Spacey looked a lot like Darin. BTW, PLaw, you say he's too old. How old is Spacey??? I believe Bobby Darin died in his late thirties no???


TIS

Spacey is 46. Bobby Darin died at age 37.

The trailer showed scenes of Darin in his 20's, with Spacey made up with some extra hair.

He looked kinda silly.

From what footage I've seen of Bobby Darin's shows, especially the later ones, I always thought he looked like Kevin Spacey... I agree Spacey's a little old for the part, but I think he can make it work. What I'm excited to see is Peter Cincotti's acting debut. He's one of the best jazz pianists around right now (although you couldn't tell from his new album :rolleyes: ), and he's a little closer to the right age (he's 21). He'll be playing Dick Behrke, who was Darin's... best friend? Something like that. Wow, that will be quite an age gap... 21 and 46. But anyway, I hope his acting is as good as his piano playing. (Doubtful, usually, right? )