Too much of everything

The greatest movie ever made..!

Really Surprised!

Let's be realistic.

This was an excellent production, well done, well acted and well produced with some creative cine-shots. But it is disturbingly dark. Lady Sings The Blues was similar but it didn't have the dark undercurrent of this piece. I never knew much about Chet Baker so I can't comment on its accuracy.(Judging from other reviews here, it is much more fiction than fact.) There is very effective intercutting of black and white (the past) and colour (the present.) The F-word is over used and the sex scenes are a bit too graphic, too long and too frequent. I was interested in the Canadian credits and to find out here much was shot in Sudbury and Espanola Ontario, hardly Hollywood North. Overall, it's a worthwhile watch. But expect a downer

It is really difficult to do something new about a jazz musician with a frenzied personal life be it women, alcohol, drugs or all three because it seems that all great jazz musicians had the same issues.Born to be Blue is a lower scale film but thematically not too different from Bird directed by Clint Eastwood back in 1988.Chet Baker was known for his west coast jazz sound. He also had problems with drug addiction and going in and out of prison. When he has his teeth smashed and has to wear dentures, Baker has to learn how to play the jazz trumpet again as well as stay clean when those around him are doubtful.Ethan Hawke gives a gut wrenching performance as Baker trying to start all over again as a musician when previously it had been all so easy. Now no one wants to give him another chance as he has let down so many people down in the past. The film though is low wattage and offers little new though.

Great photography, good direction and decent acting gave substance to this movie, which unluckily suffered from a poor script. The plot is too diffuse and the characters appear to be poorly structured. While the idea of showing Chet Baker during his struggle to regain ability to play the trumpet is okay, the film focuses too much on the role of his relationship with Jane in his comeback. To the viewer it is never really clear why this relationship started and on what it is based on. Chet is presented from one direction, he doesn't really change during the movie and he is never really introduced, this leaves a gap that makes it harder to follow the character in his struggling.

1) Hawke sings like garbage, Chet sang brilliantly. 2) Why didn't they use the original Chet recordings, why re-record everything thus cheapening the music? 3) Why did the film makers and Ethan Hawke etc. not ask / get permission from The Chet Baker estate to make this film? Chet's son / family is trying to sue them now! as they should. I hope that they are successful. 4) Last and MOST IMPORTANTLY: read Artt Frank's book "Chet Baker The Missing Years" to get the TRUE story about Mr. Baker's life during this time period. When I watched this movie, after studying the music and life of Chet Baker since 1989, I considered the film's story line to be about 75% historically wrong. Now that I've just read Artt Frank's book, I assure you - it's at least 95% wrong. Completely wrong! This to me is a huge insult to one of Jazz music's all time greatest geniuses - Chet Baker. - Piano Man Larry Hunt, 10/25/16