Idlewild Gangsters Club

It is a highly stylized slice of life. As usual, reading through the comments left here, I'm finding that many just can't leave their pretense at the door. It would seem that any film with an all African-American cast set in the American south is required to beat us over the head with an idea we are all (I would hope) aware of. ie; Jim Crow sucked. Instead, this film simply portrays people with hopes and dreams, faults and virtues, capable of love and hate, good and evil. in other words, people. Not "black people". That was refreshing. (and, IMHO, a far stronger statement than one could ever make through heavy-handed symbolism) Is the film perfect? Far from it. The plot is in many ways pedestrian. The film telegraphs plot twists rather than foreshadowing them. However, are there flashes of brilliance? Good Lord yes. These are two astonishingly talented men (Andre and Big Boi) and simply as a showcase for that talent, this film succeeds. If you just sit down and let the film wash over you, you will enjoy. If you over-think, and ask it to be something it isn't, you won't. It's that simple.

I had been excited about seeing this movie for months since seeing the trailer. I love musicals and this looked to be really promising. In some ways, it completely lived up to its expectations and in others, it failed miserably. If you are interested in the musical aspect of it, it's brilliant. The dancing is good, the characters incorporate the songs with their personal lives and these scenes are a lot of fun to watch. One of the best production numbers is at the very end. The special effects are fun to watch and the cinematography is very well done. The show gets off to a fun start and the characters look promising. Yet, as they age, something gets lost. The story line between Percival and Angel was the only one I found natural and plausible. Rooster has little interaction with his wife which makes that storyline hard to believe and Trumpy's character comes out of no where and tries, unsuccessfully, to run the show. It was interesting to see the members of Outkast in such different roles, especial Percival. The movie was entertaining and I would sit through the boring parts again any time to see how brilliant the dancing and music was.

I am guilty of elitism. I miss the days when Outkast's music was an obscurity. When their music was my music and not everybody's. When I finally did meet someone who knew the hook to "Elevators", we were instant best friends. But alas, Outkast gave up their dark, celestial style for ubiquitous jubilation.

While I'm willing to give up smoking for another ATliens or Aquemini,I can still appreciate the festivity that now ensues when they pop up on the radio. I'm sure Andre 3000 and Big Boi, err... Andre Benjamin and Antwan A. Patton, appreciate it even more. After all, the new vaudeville-bass quirks that they adopted have transformed them into one of the most adored groups today. It also garnered them this opulent production with HBO films.

Andre is Percival, a wholesome son of a mortician with dreams of making the Harlem music scene. Until then he plays piano before a ruthless crowd in Church. Church is hardly that, it is a Speakeasy with wild music and chichi showgirls.

Percival's best friend since childhood is Rooster (Antwan), a suave player from a family of gangsters. When his uncle is gunned down by the shifty eyed Terrence Howard, he inherits Church and it's debt with bootleggers. To get out of the red, he relies on his star performer Angel Davenport, played by the stunning Paula Patton. Angel and Percival develop the love jones.

There are tons of other catalyst characters. So many that it takes the humble narrator (Percival) ten minutes to introduce them all.

The town Idlewild is a place where Caucasians and subtlety do not exist. The only practicing minimalist is Percival and he is viewed as a recluse. He doesn't get talkative until he is alone with a cadaver.

Idlewild is visually titillating and toe-tapping fun, but a very simple story with elaborate storytelling. A period piece with CGI dance numbers, singing cuckoo clocks, and a talking flask. The music doesn't so much forward the story as tease it. When Rooster raps in Church, he paves the way for a Soul Train spectacle.

Bryan Barber acquired the director's chair through a strong relationship with Outkast. He is the man behind their most popular music videos. While he has an eye for pageantry, his script is too thin and unconstrained. For example, the narrator tells us that Rooster and Percival are best friends, but once we transcend their childhood prologue and reach adulthood, there are three instances of interaction. Once in the middle and twice at the end. I got the sense of two separate stories interconnected through habitat instead of plot points.

In so many ways this film is a metaphor for the current state of Outkast's career. While a movie based on the "old" Outkast would probably be a ghetto story in outer space, this one borders on nostalgia and women. Like their solo careers, Andre's character is always artistic and progressive. Big Boi's character arch is so small you could hop over it.

In the last two years there have been intermittent rumors of Outkast's breakup. Since they did not collaborate on their last album, nor the soundtrack to this film, they are together only in plastic packaging. Idlewild does nothing to squash these rumors.

Either way, there's not much I can do but throw my hands up in hey-ya, and rejoice in their gaiety like the rest of the world.

Idlewild's greatest fault is that it is really uneven in tone. There were parts of it I really loved – the prologue scenes, and some of the musical numbers, and then parts that just seemed to go splat on the screen. The tone of the beginning, very witty and hell-bent-for-leather, was great and seemed to be a great frame for a story about two hustlers - it seemed reminiscent of the winking, headlong tone of "The Sting" - and if the movie could have maintained that tone it might have been a tour de force. But other parts of the film were morose and uninteresting. Which leads us, unfortunately, to Andre 3000.

I understand making 3000 the Luke Skywalker and Big Boi the Han Solo, but Boi's character of Rooster was so much more interesting a character that whenever he wasn't on the screen the movie just went flat. It just seems to be a bad idea to have a main character who seemingly has no desire to attain his dreams – he's kind of an anti-Joseph-Campbell hero – and the other characters have to shove Percival toward his dreams like corralling a steer to slaughter. His mortician father is supposed to be his obstacle to the life Percival is meant to live, but it seems apathy is a more likely stumbling block; Percival looks more uncomfortable on stage than he does dressing bodies in the funeral home, instead of coming alive when he performs, which seems to be what the character requires.

I liked the music for the most part, but 3000 is the major failing here as well. His persona (it's hard to say that either he or Boi are acting since their characters hew so closely to the personas they have created for OutKast) is such the brooding artist that when the movie needs a shot of "I've finally made it!" razz ma tazz, he's not up to the task and the ending comes away like a lead balloon. I thought that for the most part they did a rather clever job blending the 30's music with the OutKast brand of the hippity hop, and my only complaint here is that Barber directed the music scenes like music videos and so the actors are obviously lip-synching, where a live performance captured for the film might have been exhilarating, here it comes off with the rote polished quality of any hip hop video with the actors seeming to walk through their performances rather than actually performing. The anachronistic quality of the songs isn't as jarring as I thought it might be, it's just the presentation of the music that takes you out of the time and place.

Otherwise, it's shot really well. There are some innovative visual effects that help guide the story, and the dances are staged with such vigor and bawdy realism that they have the gutbucket charm of the early "race" musicals.

The period look of the film is gorgeous; there's a whole lot of production value here - the sets and costumes notorious clotheshorses 3000 and Boi sport made me drool a little, and the ensemble cast is fantastic. It's Depression-Era Black South, but this particular vision seems to be a time and place little explored in cinema. With the exception of a touching scene late in the film in which Rooster, wayward after his long-suffering wife finally leaves him, encounters a religious woman literally at the end of the road, gives her some money and receives a Bible in return, the majority of the movie takes place among the black bourgeoisie and race or class is never an issue. Unfortunately, that touching scene is just an excuse to set up an unbelievably cliché and predictable scene later on when the Bible does what most cinematic Holy Books end up doing).

Overall, the plot is cliché at times and predictable more often than that, and gives the sense of a first-time writer/director finding his way, and there are some scenes that just don't make sense – without spoilering, there's a glaring flaw that happens in the crucial first act that's both sloppy and stylistically cliché storytelling.

The biggest travesty, though is something that didn't hit me until I was on the way home. Ben Vereen is cast as 3000's mortician father, the supposed restraining influence. Toward the end of the movie they have a confrontation, which eventually leads to a reconciliation – I can't possibly be giving anything away by saying that, or you've never seen a movie before. But on the way home it struck me - how do you have Ben Vereen in this movie and not write it into the script to have Ben Vereen DANCING?!? He's BEN VEREEN for crying out loud! Anyone who directs a musical and doesn't see the necessity of having the most talented cast member perform should have their DGA card revoked. All right, I got a little polemical there, but it seems a grievous oversight to overlook one of the film's greatest resources especially when you're supposed to be honoring the past, and this oversight is somehow indicative of the whole project (and now that I look at it, Patti LaBelle never sang in her cameo as the real Angel Davenport, either. Crispity Crunchity! All right, call the DGA, I'm serious, now.).

Idlewild is a movie that attempts some rather ambitious things; it's just a shame it achieved so few.

There is a very good reason that films in general are getting significantly worse in every quality. Why? Because in our time, when a film is made that is intelligent or creative in some significant way, it is usually ripped to pieces by critics and the general audience, teaching 'Hollywood' a lesson that they take to heart all too well.

Idlewild is a first rate musical, and feast for the eyes. Like 'Running Scared (2006)', the director believes that there is no reason a movie made in the 21st century should not benefit from all the options modern film technology offers (and no, I don't mean the visual rubbish that assaults the eyes in recent Tony Scott efforts). However, the state-of-the-art methods are used strictly in the service of 'old fashioned' film entertainment values, and this seemingly 'insults' the 'too cool for school' types, for whom enjoyment seems to be the last reason to pay to see a movie.

The actors are great, the acting is fine, and the production values are top notch. The story is a little clichéd, and as a result, the writer does seem to have cut-n-pasted from various familiar sources. However, this is a very minor criticism in a film that uses music as much as the spoken word to tell a story.

While the music is (mostly) contemporary, it was written with the aim of slotting into a (fantasy) period drama, and does so beautifully. While many of the performers may seem to have a 'rap' background, if this puts you off seeing Idlewild you are seriously misjudging the creativity and range of their talent.

Some may claim the film is a little 'tame', but a much better description is 'inclusive'. In other words, Idlewild really wants to reach and impress a wide audience, and it is a great pity that this doesn't seem to have happened yet.

Idlewild is a sexy sophisticated 'feelgood' musical- a vanity project for OutKast no doubt, but also a wonderful treat for those that value todays's rarest treasure, a new movie worth making the effort to see.

By the way Idlewild is NOT 'one long music video' (and I'm hard placed to see such comments as 'innocent' given the power of this lie to put people off seeing the movie). So forget any fear of 'opera' (like Evita where everything is sung) or MTV masquerading as a film. This is a HBO production, like Deadwood or the Sopranos, and that means quality first, especially the quality of the dramatic presentation. However, although Idlewild is an 'adult' film (thank heaven- the PG13 sludge is killing me), it lacks the extreme and explicit content of many of HBO's TV productions, so may be safely viewed by more 'sensitive' types.

If you watch a lot of films, and have no greater pleasure than finding an unexpected gem, give Idlewild a go. It really is 'the one that got away'.