Ray (2004)

The greatest movie ever made..!

Overrated

The biggest problem with this movie is it’s a little better than you think it might be, which somehow makes it worse. As in, it takes itself a bit too seriously, which makes most of the movie feel kind of dull.

The joyful confection is coated in a sparkly gloss, bright enough to gleam from the darkest, most cynical corners.

Ray is a biographical movie and focusing parts of Ray Charles' private life and music career. Ray Charles is a legendary musician, as many people know. He tried to integrate different kinds of music and helped to social change in American culture. He was lost his sight when he was a kid because of a disease, and he had to learn to live without seeing when his childhood. The movie built two main images. One of them is his little brother and other is his mother. His brother symbolized his fears because he died when he was a child and Ray couldn't save him and blame himself because of his death. And the mother image is symbolized his strong parts, cause his mother was the one of the supporter and teacher about the new life without seeing. Actually, I don't want to give too much specific information about the movie, I want to talk about being a black blind person in 1950's USA. It is important because racism had strong effects on all over the country those years. People were not equal and the black people were discriminated because of their skin colors. So, Ray Charles was the black and blind people in such an environment. Also, the regulations for disabled people were not developed properly, and there was not enough consciousness about being disabled. Therefore, he had to rely on only his remained senses to continue his life. It should be really hard to get used a life without seeing, especially if you know the better option.

Ray Charles defines soul and country. He was at times a harsh man, a man desiring perfection. His discography is massive and the quality of his performances are stunning. All this after growing up blind. Instrumentally, he drove the train. For Jamie Foxx to take on this man as a dramatic character calls for real courage. Not only does he capture the physical presence of the man, he captures his movements, his idiosyncrasies, his voice. What criticism there is of this performance seems to bank on there being no reason to have a bio-pic because to treat a contemporary subject is always lacking--the person is still too fresh in our minds. This may be true with Oliver Stone because he not only presents a character, but he gets in his own political agenda. Here, the movie is a way of doing honor to a great performer. There are also criticisms of Charles holding back on supporting civil rights. Well, nobody said he didn't have his failings; it's all the more reasons put forth an accurate portrayal of the man. Foxx is superb.

The story of Ray Charles, music legend. Told in his adult live with flashbacks to his youth we see his humble origins in Florida, his turbulent childhood which included losing his brother and then his sight, his rise as pianist in a touring band, his writing his own songs and running his own band and then stardom. We also see his addiction to drugs and its affect on his working life and family life.Great biopic. Tells the Ray Charles story well and demonstrates his influence on musical history. Also shows his demons and how he overcame them.Quite emotional too: we see how, once he had lost his sight, his mother forced him to be self-reliant and how this paid off for him in later life.Superb performance by Jamie Foxx in the lead role. The movie could easily have been a standard blow-by-blow account of the Ray Charles story but Foxx inhabits his character and captures his mannerisms and personality very well. Even more impressive in that he is a sighted man, playing a blind man. Foxx deserved his Best Actor Oscar.

The story of the life and career of the legendary rhythm and blues musician Ray Charles, from his humble beginnings in the South, where he went blind at age seven, to his meteoric rise to stardom during the 1950s and 1960s.Early on, we run into Quincy Jones, who I would not have guessed had any connection to Ray Charles. Of course, not really knowing much about either of them, that is not surprising.I love the conflict of Gospel music and a more upbeat sound, that somehow changing the music to the words makes it "devil music". How realistic this was as a criticism is not known to me. It seems silly, but then again, the 1950s were a silly time.And who knew Charles was a junkie? Maybe not as bad as some, but it is crazy to think that heroin was just as much a part of the music scene then as it was in other times (such as 1990s Seattle). I had assumed it was more obscure, with folks like William S. Burroughs being the primary users.