The more music you have in the world, the fuller it is.

Continuing my trip up The Guardian's Top 50 Movies of 2020...

#13 : Ma Rainey's Black Bottom

This film was the late Chadwick Boseman’s final performance, as an ambitious trumpeter in the backing band for blues singer Ma Rainey (Viola Davies), in an adaptation of August Wilson’s hit stage play.

So, we move from a worthy, well-acted, black-centric film featuring Chadwick Boseman to something completely - oh, hold on.  I'm fully expecting this to fall into the "admirable rather than enjoyable" category for me, but let's see...

So, it's the story of a 1929 recording session and the various interactions that happen as a result.  And, errr - well, that's it.  Ma Rainey (Viola Davis) is used to getting her own her way, most people work with and around her because she's the star but Levee (Chadwick Boseman) has bigger plans and is less than happy to go along with her.  And they all spend a lot of time pontificating and arguing (in an unsurprisingly theatrical style) and not a lot of time doing stuff or driving any plot along.  Yes, it suggests that society wasn't exactly equal at the time but I'm not sure that's going to come as a great surprise to anyone.  

And then, towards the end, it goes somewhere you're really not expecting it to, which felt completely unnecessary to me.  It was as if they decided they had to have something happen and yes, I can see that argument (especially considering my previous comments!) but I really wouldn't have chosen the thing that they chose!  I'd be interested in discussing it with anyone who's seen this film (I'm not expecting many such people to show themselves though!).  The final act of the film is much more in keeping with the general proceedings, but I'm afraid it was all a bit too late for me by then.

Viola Davis looks like she's having a fine old time as Ma Rainey and Chadwick Boseman is also loving his time winding everyone up.  And they're supported well by the rest of the cast who seem to enjoying themselves as well.  So no complaints on the acting front, although it's a little too obvious at times with its cut-aways from the stars to "stunt" doubles for hands-only shots for instrument playing or feet-only shots for dancing.

But, having watched the whole thing, I'm just not entirely sure what the point to it (or the play) was.  There are nice period details, and nice music if you like that sort of thing (which I can't say I overly do) and it's well filmed - but it all feels like an excuse to do some acting rather than having anything particular to say.  

I'm generally not a huge fan of plays turned into films because of the difficulties involved in expanding the limited set onto the big screen (I admit it can be done very well, but often it just feels like a film of the play).  I also think you lose the impressiveness of the actors in a theatre remembering a huge script when you've got all the cuts and multiple takes involved in a film (and yes, again this can be done very well on the big screen and there are definitely some long takes in this film).  I was interested to see when the play was written though - 1982 apparently, which just made me more intrigued as to why it was picked.  

And the reason is that August Wilson and his ten play Pittsburgh Cycle are A BIG THING, chronicling the entire 20th Century African American experience, apparently.  Interestingly the play has had two major runs on Broadway in 1984 and 2003 and Charles S Dutton played the role of Levee in both of them, which must have made for an interesting comparison for those lucky enough to see both.  Apparently Denzel Washington has a deal to make more of his plays into films (having originally started with Fences, which won an Oscar for Viola Davis).  So I can look forward to seeing more of the plays in future "best of" lists and not really understanding the point to them either.

One final comment which is neither praise nor criticism - it uses "the N word" an awful lot and nearly always in black-on-black conversation, which gave the film a surprising "Boyz N The Hood" feel.  It's obviously not a word I would use and I don't feel particularly qualified to comment on others using it, but I was interested as to whether it was historically accurate (whilst assuming it probably was).  Some quick research shows that August Wilson did a lot of research with older black people who lived through the times and that was the way they talked so that's how he wrote it - although we have no way of knowing whether they actually talked that way at the time.  This is a very interesting article I came across which shows that its use continues to be, shall we say, somewhat divisive, both in this play and elsewhere - it's well worth a read imho.

So, I'm guessing my slight lack of blackness may have caused me to somewhat miss the point to the film (and play) - and I'm perfectly happy to accept that's a very plausible scenario.  But, I'm afraid that still leaves me thinking that very little of interest happens in the film - and the main point of interest is unnecessarily jarring.  All of which leaves me generally unsatisfied with the film and unable to recommend it, I'm afraid - which gives us another point where it aligns with the previous film.

And for one final similarity, this is also a Netflix film so that's the only place you're going to be able to watch it, if I haven't managed to put you off!

#14 - Something didn't quite click for me here
#12 - What?  No Chadwick Boseman?