Walk the Line, aka, Ray
 

Well. I'm not going to hold you in suspense, I didn't like it much. It wasn't bad, and I'm sure lots of people were entertained by it. I'm glad. Most people are easily entertained, and that makes them dissapointed far less often than me.

/steps off high horse.

Review to follow:

The Man in Black movie = 4/10, tops.

I'd seen "Ray" and enjoyed it more. I hadn't expected to see "Ray - with a white guy who does country," when I paid for Walk the Line."

Ray had what's called "character development." It had "depth."
Walk the Line had "look, the director shot the whole movie as a non-steady-cam'd "reality" shot, RIGHT UP in all the actor's faces---tight" style that got on my damn nerves.

The whole movie is full frame face shots. That can be okay, I suppose. For me, it was a bit much. If you've given me almost no reason to care the main character is tormented, I won't be impressed you've got the camera in his face all day. Then there were occasional forays into waaaaaaay to much time of J. Cash on stage playing. But, see, when you have no little plot or backstory, you have to kill time somehow. You throw the fans a bone about the man, now and again, then play a song.

The moral was, as JUST LIKE in Ray: you will lose a sibling to some accident. This will traumatise you as you screw groupies silly while ignoring your family. In your drug addled fuge, you become a moron, who then is saved by "the one person who cared." At some point, you may or may not finally confront the "ghost of the sibling" that's been haunting you.

Unlike "Ray" WTL, did this by having 10 minutes of "killing the sibling" followed by just enough actual dialog to get JC on stage, where he does drugs and groupies. The actual events are not delved into too much, as you might notice detail, and we're trying reeealy hard to avoid that in this movie.

The fans that were in the theater were getting thier kicks, and seemed to enjoy it.

I didn't learn hardly anything about Mr. Cash that I didn't know, and I knew almost nothing.

I did learn he lost his brother, and his dad wished it was him. I learned he did drugs and groupies. In scenes almost stolen right from Ray, is how I learned these things.

I learned he fell in love with "the tour woman," and treated his wife and family to not enough of his time. However, unlike Ray, I got little actual depth in either of these relationships. Just small 3 to 7 minute skits where the audiance is made to know "the wife is a bitch" "Cash is tormented" and "the other woman won't marry him."

Rent it at best.

Better yet, find an A&E biography on Cash, and watch it.

Generally, I have to agree. It wasn't a horrible movie, but I really didn't like it that much. It was very bland; absolutely nothing struck me as extraordinary.

The title is exactly why I've not had any desire to watch this movie. I saw Ray, and that's enough for me. Even from the previews, they don't look just like the same genre, they look like the same movie.

If these were two fictional movies, i could understand your beef, but these are biopics, and can you fault the writers/directors if these two men lead similar lives?

Being such a big fan of Johnny Cash I was really looking fwd to this movie and hoping for something great. But it wasn't, it was a good movie, I didn't hate the 2 hrs I spent watching it, but it was just OK. "Ray" was a great movie.

Like Derwood said, Cash and Ray Charles did lead similar lives, and you really can't blame the filmmakers for the biopics from having similarities.