Bird

"There are no second acts in American lives."

6.8
19882h 41m

Saxophone player Charlie ‘Bird’ Parker comes to New York in 1940 and is quickly noticed for his remarkable way of playing. He becomes a drug addict but his loving wife Chan tries to help him.

Production

Logo for Warner Bros. Pictures
Logo for Malpaso Productions

Trailers & Videos

Thumbnail for video: Theatrical Trailer

Theatrical Trailer

Thumbnail for video: Michael Schlesinger on BIRD

Michael Schlesinger on BIRD

Thumbnail for video: Bird Wins Best Sound: 1989 Oscars

Bird Wins Best Sound: 1989 Oscars

Cast

Photo of Forest Whitaker

Forest Whitaker

Charlie 'Bird' Parker

Photo of Diane Venora

Diane Venora

Chan Parker

Photo of Samuel E. Wright

Samuel E. Wright

Dizzy Gillespie

Photo of Keith David

Keith David

Buster Franklin

Photo of Damon Whitaker

Damon Whitaker

Young Bird

Photo of Sam Robards

Sam Robards

Moscowitz

Photo of George Orrison

George Orrison

Patient with Checkers

Photo of Bill Cobbs

Bill Cobbs

Dr. Caulfield

Photo of Hamilton Camp

Hamilton Camp

Mayor of 52nd Street

Photo of Jo De Winter

Jo De Winter

Mildred Berg

Photo of Al Pugliese

Al Pugliese

Owner - Three Deuces

More Like This

Reviews

R

r96sk

5/10

I personally found 'Bird' - 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.

You've reached the end.