Bird

I personally found <em>'Bird'</em> - directed by Clint Eastwood - to be an absolute slog to sit through. It's an interesting story no doubt, but it's told in the most mundane and boring way possibl... I personally found <em>'Bird'</em> - directed by Clint Eastwood - to be an absolute slog to sit through. It's an interesting story no doubt, but it's told in the most mundane and boring way possible. I didn't know anything about Charlie Parker beforehand, which is what kept that aforementioned interest there. I'm no jazz fan either, but I am always happy to listen to it when it comes up though. Despite that, I just couldn't get into the film itself. It just felt like it was 160 minutes (!) worth of the following on repeat: performance, drunk and/or depressed, performance, drunk and/or depressed etc. I didn't feel like I was learning anything about Parker and his life. I literally gave an internal cheer when the credits finally rolled around. I do enjoy Forest Whitaker as an actor and he is probably the reason I'm not rating this lower. As for the rest, I don't even recall any of them - though I'm putting that down to what I've already noted, as opposed to the cast themselves who I'm sure tried their upmost. Way too long, in short. As I said it's an intriguing person to make a film about, an around 100 minute production would've been perfect in my opinion. A shame, all in all.