RAY
Directed by Taylor Hackford
In theatres
(***)
Subscribe to Hollywood North Magazine
Written By: John H. Foote
He was a musical pioneer, combining elements of blues, country, gospel, jazz and rock to create one of the most distinctive sounds of the last century. His story is one of enormous triumph over adversity, overcoming extraordinary odds to become what and who he was.

He of course is Ray Charles.

Born into abject poverty, devastated by witnessing his brother’s death at a very young age, stricken with blindness before he was eight years old, and discriminated against because he was black, Charles used music as a weapon to beat away prejudice and would become one of the great musicians of the last century. Images of him, smiling, and the dark glasses in place, swaying and pounding on his beloved piano are locked into the minds of anyone who grew up in the sixties and seventies, when he was regular guest on the many variety shows that populated television at that time. His smiling demeanor masked a tormented man; Charles dealt with a lifelong guilt over the death of his brother, an addiction to heroin that lasted twenty years, and was a known womanizer when on the road, constantly cheating on his long suffering wife.

Jamie Foxx does not so much give a performance as Ray Charles as channel the soul of the late musician through his body so that the spirit and essence of Ray Charles spills onto the screen. This is a major piece of acting that should line Foxx up for Oscar consideration and perhaps the award itself. He is mesmerizing throughout the film, giving one of the most astonishing

performances of the last five years and easily makes the leap to the top of the Hollywood heap. He dominates the film, moving through the picture with the knowledge that the weight of the film is firmly on his shoulders. Not once does he falter, delivering the kind of performance great actors aspire to give. Quite simply he is miraculous.

The film however is not quite as good as Foxx.

I call it the Gandhi-syndrome. You have a filmmaker obsessed with making a movie about their hero, as Attenborough was with Gandhi and as Hackford was with Charles. They do, but perhaps they are too close to the subject matter because the films play like greatest hits of the subject’s life as opposed to an in-depth biography such as Malcolm X (1992) or Nixon (1995). What made Ray Charles tick? After seeing the film I still do not know. The same was true of Gandhi (1982) which was bolstered immensely by the performance of Ben Kingsley, who elevated the film every time he was on screen. Now several years later Gandhi (1982) looks like an old fashioned Hollywood biography in which anything controversial about the character is left out. While Hackford has the courage to deal with Charles addictions and womanizing, we still do not go deep enough into the mind of this man. The scenes involving his getting clean involve far too many tricks and flashbacks; we get it, he was distraught!!!!!

That said the performance of Foxx is worth seeing the film because again, he inhabits the very soul of Ray Charles. There were times I forgot I was watching an actor and believed that Ray Charles was onscreen front of me, his life unfolding before my eyes.

In a superb supporting performance Kerry Washington is quite excellent as Della Bea, his devoted wife who stood by him through everything even when knowing about the many women on the road because her love for him was pure and true.

Taylor Hackford is not a great filmmaker; he never has been and never will be. Likely his finest film until this was An Officer and a Gentleman (1982) or The Idolmaker (1980). He is not subtle, nor does he possess particular gifts with actors. Here he does his finest work, and while he is not the perfect filmmaker for the job, his love of Charles shines through as bright as Foxx’s smile.

Watch for Foxx come Oscar night.
© Copyright 2004 Hollywood North Magazine Inc.