User reviews

After catching snippets of the lackluster reviews (two-stars in the Globe and Mail) I was dis-heartened. It's been a few months since I'd been moved by the trailer. However, the film never came out. I thought it might have been shelved.

I was glad to see it was indeed playing. In spite of the reviews, I persevered on the strength of the trailer. It seemed to me there was too much talent and pedigree involved for it to actually suck. And you know what? it's a terrific film with a poignant story. Perhaps lower expectations propped up my perceptions of it, however, it still stands as time well spent.

The film is based on a true story involving a top columnist at the LA Times, Steve Lopez, played with grace by Robert Downey Jr., who becomes invested in one of his more colourful subjects, Nathaniel Ayers, an accomplished musician overcome by mental illness, now living on the streets of LA portrayed by Jamie Foxx, who rambles his way to a convincing performance.

The film is a satisfying adult drama that doesn't lose it's direction. It doesn't pander to it's audience. There is no random violence, no guns, but indeed simply good story telling with great characterizations. It's a decent film that deserves better treatment in the press. It has a noble heart that succeeds in telling a great human story.

It resonates and strikes a chord.

What makes this film watchable is that it is based on a true story. A caring Los Angeles reporter named Steve Lopez (Robert Downey, Jr.) tries to help a homeless man named Nathaniel Anthony Ayers (Jamie Foxx).

Ayers suffers from paranoid schizophrenia. But he once attended Julliard, and he still lives and breathes the music of Beethoven. Ayers, with his shopping cart of possessions, walks the streets, playing his violin amid the noise of the freeway. He's content, in his own world.

That unusual behavior grabs the attention of Lopez, no doubt as a human interest story for his own column. But as Lopez gradually becomes more genuinely concerned about Ayers, their relationship encounters frustration, anger, and emotional pain.

It's a poignant, gritty story, full of realism. The film manages to be compassionate without being patronizing. The film does a terrific job in portraying the harsh, depressing reality of the boarders who live at a large shelter where Ayers goes, at the insistence of Lopez.

Technical elements of the film are good. The visuals are thematically impressive. Production design and costumes are detailed and realistic. Acting is credible. Robert Downey, Jr. gives a fine performance.

The main problem is the plot. Too much time is spent on Lopez and his trivialities. Somehow, the compelling Ayers story morphs into a weighty examination of Lopez and his distress in dealing with Ayers. The script is to blame here. I think if the main character had been Ayers, instead of Lopez, the film could have been quite inspiring.

Even so, the film clearly calls attention to the plight of the urban homeless. As such, the film deserves viewer support.

With an interesting subject matter, two talented actors starring, Beethoven (one of my favourite composers) featuring heavily in the soundtrack and an impressive trailer, 'The Soloist' had enough to make me want to see it.

Joe Wright is somewhat hit and miss for me. 'Atonement' and 'Hanna' especially of his films are great, also liked 'Pride and Prejudice' and 'Darkest Hour'. 'Anna Karenina' didn't do it for me though and 'Pan' was a big misfire. 'The Soloist's' mixed reception admittedly created some uncertainty on my part, but the interest points mentioned in the first paragraph were enough to check it out anyway. Seeing it, 'The Soloist' is somewhere in the middle of Wright's films in ranking.

Not one of his best, not one of his worst either. Better than reputed, but considering the potential a better film was in there somewhere that didn't quite materialise.

'The Soloist's' biggest strength is the two leads. Robert Downey Jnr. especially is riveting in a performance full of vigour and heart. Jamie Foxx had the more challenging role, and while not as subtle as Downey his acting is incredibly emotionally committed and touching. Catherine Keener also fares well.

It's a good looking film too, polished, gritty and elegant. The music is magnificent as one would hope. 'The Soloist' does have its fair share of powerful, poignant and uplifting moments, the chemistry between the two leads strikes all the right notes and the scenes and portrayal of the homeless have a lot of power. The portrayal of schizophrenia, a very complex condition that has been prone to a lot of misconceptions and misinterpretations, is not too inaccurate.

However, Wright's direction is fairly unimaginative and sometimes chaotic. While there is nothing amateurish about his images (apart from some over-eager/clever editing) not all of them serve much of a purpose. The script does tend to ramble, even in Foxx's dialogue which is at times slightly annoying, and be too ham-fisted.

Similarly, the story is somewhat too thin and tries to cover too many themes and ideas without exploring some of them enough. Consequently, some of the film gets unfocused and over-crowded with a tendency to get melodramatic and be erratically paced. The rest of the acting barely registers, which is a shame because the two leads are so good.

Overall, not a bad film but could have been more. 6/10 Bethany Cox

I am a musician and live in France, where the release date of this movie is scheduled for Sept. 2 2009. I obviously cannot write a review at the present time but have nevertheless read the book.

What no one mentions in all of the above comments is that Nathaniel Ayers was originally a Double Bass student at Julliard and NOT a cellist. That instrument-- along with the violin, trumpet, and piano, all came about later on. Put any instrument into his hands and he'll do his best to master it.

Having attended Yale university, I did not know him personally, even though we studied with one of the greatest bass teachers in the New York area at that time: Homer Mensch. Recently our paths did finally cross thanks to one of our mutual acquaintances, bassist and composer Joe Russo. Nathan likes to write down the names of his long lost good friends on walls, or any writing surface, and Joe's name is always there, scribbled amongst his favorites. This was where Steve noticed Joe's name and Googled him to look up his website. A new and close friendship resulted between them, and the many anecdotes that Joe pulled out of Nathan's past were worth their weight in gold to Steve, enough to devote the entire chapter 8 of the book to Joe!

To me, reading this book made me come to the conclusion that every man has his hour in life, and Nathan's time had come now. The chances of 2 men, one homeless and one not, being pulled together through the sound of a violin in a rush hour tunnel, were undoubtedly written in the stars. Through articles, a book and now a film on Nathan, Steve helped uplift a poor and abandoned part of society to a rank that it never imagined nor asked for, but morally deserved. We all know that the Internet is indeed capable of connecting and reconnecting people in the present, but only music can magically, throughout time, open the doors that connect all of us to one another.

In Los Angeles, the reporter of the LA Times Steve Lopez (Robert Downey Jr.) writes the successful column Points West. After an accident with his bicycle, Steve wanders on the streets and hears a classic music being played by a homeless violinist with an out of commission violin. Steve starts a conversation with the musician fan of Beethoven Nathaniel Anthony Ayers Jr. (Jamie Foxx) and when the man tells him that he had studied cello in Juilliard, Steve researches his life and writes a series of articles in his column about the talented but mentally ill musician. He befriends the schizophrenic Nathaniel and brings him to the Lamp Community in Los Angeles. The work of Steve Lopez is awarded and he attempts to help the musician, but in his insanity, Nathaniel does not want to change his lifestyle.

"The Soloist" is apparently based on a true story of a relationship of a journalist and a schizophrenic musician and discloses the other side of the American Dream in Los Angeles with 90,000 homeless people. In this regard, this film uses a different approach of Wim Wenders' "Land of Plenty" to slightly show the reality of homeless people in Los Angeles. The problem is that apparently the columnist wrote articles and was awarded, and wrote a book that became a movie, probably making lots of money, while Nathaniel Ayers Jr. is still on the streets and sleeping in a shelter. Please excuse me if I am unfair, but the film does not show a great effort from Steve Lopez to hire a psychologist to help Nathaniel to improve his life. Further, the screenplay is cold despite the choice of two excellent actors in the lead roles. The music score with Beethoven and Bach is a plus in this deceptive film. My vote is six.

Title (Brazil): "O Solista" ("The Soloist")

The trailer might give you the impression that you are going to watch just another drama. But luckily it ain't so. This movie is gritty and does not deliver any easy answers. It has some pretty gross scenes (though they seem in tune with the situation the city is going through and depict therefor a very real situation), but all that is shown is in tune with the rest of the movie.

Robert Downey again delivers. And to think that he almost completely went off the (acting/movie) radar ... Luckily he didn't and luckily for us, Jon Favreau got him back to the big game with Iron Man. A movie which allows him, to go do movies like the Solist and earn them some PR. With Jamie Foxx he creates a relationship that feels more than real (considering their characters and their "flaws"). Watch this, but don't expect anything "Hollywood" about it

Since Ingmar Bergman's 1962 film, "Through a Glass, Darkly", the 2009 film "The Soloist" is one of the two most accurate portrayals of schizophrenia, from the point of view of the mentally ill person and of people who want to interact with the ill person. I speak from experience. David Cronenberg's film, "Spider", is the other.

I was disappointed in my two favourite critics, James Berardinelli and Roger Ebert, each of who gave "The Soloist" only 62½%.

Berardinelli says, "The Soloist is afflicted with a lack of passion. The story lacks a strong trajectory; it meanders, seemingly unsure of precisely what it wants to do and say and where it wants to go." Actually, that is the reality of schizophrenia. One never knows what is going to happen next. There are many setbacks. He also says, "The soundtrack supplies multiple, overlapping voices. The objective is to invite the viewer to participate in the unhinging of Nathaniel's mind, a first-person perspective of schizophrenia. Unfortunately, it feels artificial and contrived." I have taught seven NAMI* courses on mental illness. One episode in one of the classes involves requiring class members to perform certain simple tasks while being bombarded by random voices from behind. Many class members find that to be the most unnerving, and illuminating, of all the activities in the course.

Ebert misses the point when he says, "Yes, mental illness can be like that, but can successful drama? There comes a point when Lopez has had enough, and so, in sympathy, have we." Dealing with a mentally ill person can be devastatingly frustrating. Must we always be entertained? There is a place for grim reality in drama. Otherwise, how can we learn?

"The Soloist" is as accurate a representation of schizophrenia as you could experience without becoming mentally ill yourself. If you keep that in mind then the film will be rewarding; if, however, you are looking for a film that makes sense easily and progresses from point to point in a logical manner, then look for a different film.

If you choose to watch the film and absorb the reality of mental illness, then you will learn much. You never know when that knowledge will be of great value to you. Then again, you may be spared, and never need it.

The film introduces a very important idea: mentally ill people do better if there is someone, whom they trust, who takes an abiding interest in them.

It also poses one very important question: should mentally ill persons be forced to take medication to stabilize themselves? Different states, provinces and countries have different laws concerning this. Some feel that mentally ill persons should be forced to take medication if and only if they are likely to harm themselves or others. Mentally ill persons are often unaware that they are mentally ill, and cannot be convinced otherwise. Would they have more freedom to decide correctly for themselves if they were first medicated until they become sane? The film addresses this question but does not attempt to give a definitive answer. You will have to think out that question yourself, keeping in mind that different people have different reactions to the same medication. There is no universal answer, but for each individual, there is probably a best answer but not necessarily a good one.

The film captivated me from the beginning to the end. I did not miss the common devices that some movies use to make them exciting. There was excitement enough for me in the growth of the principal characters and in the learning that I did, and in the thinking that I was forced to do.

*NAMI is The National Alliance on Mental Illness.

P.S. Schizophrenia has absolutely nothing to do with having multiple personalities, or of dichotomies (apparent contradictions). The split in the expression "split personality" is the split between the personality and reality. Unfortunately, the word is misused far more often that it is used correctly.

Steve Lopez is a journalist for the LA Times. He is on the lookout for new story ideas when he stumbles across Nathaniel Ayers, a homeless man with extraordinary musical talents. Lopez is eager to improve Ayers's situation, while writing a story on him, but the biggest problem may be Ayers himself.

Good but not great. Emotional journey, but somehow something is lacking. I just didn't feel as engaged as I normally would for a story like this. Maybe it was that it seemed to drift in the middle section or that it ultimately didn't have a point, or, at least, it's point was wasn't strongly put.

Can't fault the acting - Robert Downey Jr, Jamie Foxx and Catherine Keener are excellent.

I can't give this a low, low score because it is a technically proficient movie - good camera, good lighting, and realistic environments and dialog.

Unfortunately, the script was utterly boring.

It's clear the writer and director were trying to make a connection with the audience, and cause them to well up with tears for our poor, afflicted main character (Jaime Foxx). But, when the cresendo came and the climax passed, I was just playing mental gymnastics wondering "When will I start caring?" It's yet another example of a great movie affected by an un-remarkable and un-moving script. Too bad, I really wanted to like this one...

Take care, ... Christopher

Both Jamie Foxx and Robert Downey Jr. have done nothing but star in big budget box office blockbusters lately. Obviously, the both of them felt that it was time for for something smaller, so that everyone could really see their acting talents, rather than the special effects or comedy that normally swirl around them. Hopefully with this true tale of a homeless man with a gifted talent could bring that about for both of them. The first thing that i must talk about is the acting.......because both Robert Downey and Jamie Foxx brought their "A" game to the table. Especially Jamie Foxx, because since his Oscar winning performance in "Ray", i really haven't seen too much from him.......but this movie certainly showed that he still has it. He should easily be nominated for best supporting actor. Now onto the rest of the film. Well.....it was a really good story, and in a way it was just as well........however, there were sequences that just dragged on, and scenes that were just plain boring. I think the reason was that they didn't really delve into the character development of Robert Downey Jr's role. I didn't really feel why he wanted to help this man so much, and they didn't fully explain the struggles that he himself was going through. To best sum it up, the movie is much like "A Beautiful Mind", but not told as passionately. I mean you could sense the struggle that Jamie Foxx's character was going through......but it just didn't "GET" you like you wanted it to. Bottom Line, the movie was good......but at times it just seemed to drag on waaayyyy too much. I think they should have left some scenes out, or maybe replace them with something that was a little more in-depth with its storytelling. It was good, but you couldn't help but notice that it did have potential to be something better.

Made watchable through it's rich performances (especially Robert Downey Jr.) and it's beautiful music, but the film feels like it's trying to hard to cover too much ground while at the same time beating you over the head with humanitarian elements that really have no place or room.

A friendship is formed between a divorced writer and a homeless, schizophrenic musician when they have a chance meeting. What could have been a great story about friendship went heavy handed and up it's own ass in little messages that by the end of the film I, in a way, felt cheated. I felt like they were teasing me with a good story and actors but instead decided to give me pointless intersections throughout (don't even get me started on Nathaniel Ayers' "flashbacks" and "thoughts").

The film would have been better if they had concentrated on the point of view of Robert Downey, Jr.'s character and not try to dive into Ayers' psyche. That made it seem hokey and with the addition of what Downey's character said near the end made it that much more insulting. There was just so much stuff the filmmakers tried to cover and didn't elaborate very much on.

The performances, though, were brilliant. Foxx gets a little over-the-top with his ability to scene-chew, but Downey gives a down to earth, realistic performance. Even though they were all really good, I just kept feeling like Foxx was just trying to out-act Downey. With that said, he was still wonderful.

I don't know. Maybe I'm reading too much into it and maybe I'm just ragging on it because I didn't like it, but, oh well. I am a critic, right?

Steve Lopez is a Los Angeles Times columnist in need of a decent story.One day he encounters,by chance, Nathaniel Ayers, a homeless schizophrenic street musician with an abundance of talent.Lopez writes a series of articles about Nathaniel and tries to help him, to improve his conditions of living and gives him a chance to showcase his talent however Nathaniel's disease has created demons that he can't ignore and Lopez sees most of his efforts frustrated...To be honest I was expecting a way better movie, I saw the trailer months ago and it got me excited, the movie seemed to have all the ingredients to be a success,plus two amazing actors, Robert Downey Jr as Lopez and Jammie Foxx as Nathaniel.However, I felt disappointed.Lopez struggle to reach to Nathaniel and his constant efforts to help him were interesting to watch but that is pretty much everything that happens in the movie.In the end almost everything looks the same as in the beginning and not much has happened.Sure, Lopez had a small yet positive impact on Nathaniel's life and he,himself, might have gained a little something from that relationship too but I was expecting a wider range of events so to speak...I'm not saying that he should have been cured by the end of the film, as much as Hollywood loves happy endings that would be unrealistic but I did expect something to happen...some kind of development that would make this story worth telling.It never came. Maybe this story(based on real events) just doesn't translate very well to the big screen.I think the film aspired to be great but felt short.On a more positive note, Jamie Foxx's performance was great and felt very authentic.

6/10

For the most part this was an enjoyable film. However, I felt there were missing segments. I know this was based on a true story. I understand that Steve Lopez and Nathaniel Ayers , became unlikely friends and formed an unlikely bond , that inspired one another. I get all this , but again , the film was just a miss. The film featured fantastic acting performances , but the lackluster gaps in this film, through no fault of the actors , I might add, kept this film from being spectacular. Nathaniel Ayers a musician, a brilliant one at that, never realized his dream due to mental illness. Being a homeless person, Steve Lopez, journalist from the L.A. Times smelled a story. Rather than being just another cold story to fill a column quota, Mr. Lopez, gradually became attached to Ayers, thus a human bond developed with true, friendship bonds and no ulterior motives for Lopez. Do not get me wrong this was a nice story and particularly the later part of the movie brought this film from being just an average film to a pretty good film. There were some heartwarming moments and tears but I never really felt a kinship toward the characters, as I usually do in some 'select' moving films. This is definitely worth a watch , for the acting performances alone. Jamie Foxx was equally as good in this film as he was in 'Ray' and of course, we know that Downey Jr. shines in , whatever he does.

As I walked in and sat in a seat at my nearby movie theater waiting to watch The Soloist, I was hoping to get what the trailers seemed promise: a strong, character-driven story led by two talented actors ultimately amounting to a solid film. What I got was half of this. The Soloist does well with some of the material it has, but there are too many missteps throughout the film (especially in the first act) to make it anything above decent.

The film's plot is fairly basic. Robert Downey Jr. plays a writer for the Los Angeles Times (Steve Lopez) who comes across a homeless violin/ex-cello player (Nathaniel Ayers) with Jamie Foxx filling in the character's shoes. Lopez sees potential for Ayers to make a "comeback" so to speak and begins writing a column for him in the newspaper. Of course not everything works out so well and several debacles take place throughout the course of the film. All of this unfolds with some fairly haphazard approaches and mixed results.

What really hurts the film is many of the choices made to progress the plot and emphasize the characters. The scenes which show the viewer what happened to Nathaniel before he became homeless come of as either perfectly adequate or inconsistent. Many of the film's scenes involve multiple voices saying/repeating lines/words over and over which, quite frankly, do get annoying before long. It also feels rather odd having a good few dialogue exchanges occur with both or all of the characters talking at once. Whether this was intentional or not doesn't detract from it feeling unnecessary and taking the viewer out of the unfolding plot.

What does work in the film is the performances by the two lead actors. Downey Jr. does a great job playing a conflicted newspaper writer and he also takes part in a couple...nasty scenes that make for good, brief comedic moments. As for Foxx, he manages to do an equally, if not superior job fitting into his role and, unlike the film itself, barely has any hiccups during his performance. While both put on great performances, don't expect them to be in the running for the Oscars since they come just a slight nudge below excellence in their screen time. Part of this (mostly in Foxx's case) can be attributed to the questionable style of development as mentioned above. For the first half of the film it's tough to really care much about what happens but the second half does help even things out with stronger scenes. In regards to the supporting cast, most of them are negligible and, other than those who have more frequently occurrences (which granted aren't that many), barely stand out.

The Soloist is a film that had plenty of potential to be a precursor to the film releases over the summer. Unfortunately, the film lacks a proper sense of pacing and direction to make it realize this potential. Foxx and Downey Jr. put on two great performances and during some of their key scenes, it's far easier to get immersed in the film. However, the film itself doesn't fare nearly as well and misses the mark just too much to be worthy of a full recommendation.

My first thoughts when this movie started were of the movie "Resurrecting the Champ" with Josh Hartnett and Samuel L. Jackson. That was an excellent movie about a Denver reporter who thought he stumbled upon a former heavyweight champ who was now homeless. That was also based upon a true story.

In "The Soloist" Steven Lopez (Robert Downey Jr.) is a reporter for the L. A. Times who stumbles upon a former Julliard School cellist. Lopez decides to write a human interest piece about this now homeless man named Nathaniel Ayers (Jamie Foxx). The article, which ran serially, garnered Lopez and Ayers a lot of attention. Lopez, in a very demanding way, wanted to turn Ayers' life around for the better as though it was something he had to do and something Ayers had to accept. But Ayers wasn't homeless because he simply had bad breaks or a drug addiction.

Ayers had serious psychological problems, and dealing with a person with mental and psychological problems is not easy as Lopez found out the hard way.

"The Soloist" takes a harder look at homelessness than any movie I've ever seen. This is a problem that hits very close to home for me as I live near San Francisco which is probably now the homeless capital of the country. Ayers was just one type of homeless case--a very gifted individual with a psychological handicap keeping him from a normal life.

This movie is very depressing though it is realistic. You want Ayers to find that something to make him whole, make him right, and make him no longer homeless, but how can someone find what they're not looking for, especially when he doesn't trust those trying to guide him to it? It's a conundrum. "The Soloist" doesn't promise a happy ending, but it promises a real ending.

Arrestingly-filmed yet oddly distanced dramatization of LA Times columnist Steve Lopez's (Robert Downey, Jr) series of articles regarding his befriending and increased sponsoring of a failed classical musician, Nathaniel Ayers (Jamie Foxx), now begging for change near several of the city's musical landmarks and during his investigations becoming forced to explore his own societal and interpersonal biases & fears. Lopez appeared to accept from reader reaction that Ayers--swerving between trilled spouting of information and history and self-dangerous descents into violent rage--came through the reportage more believably and immediate when the two went into action together--touring old haunts, enduring rehab, abandoned family members like Ayers' sister Jennifer (Lisagay Hamilton) reintroduced to him yet the encounters brim with recrimination. Yet through the patient and increasing level of support not just from the uncertain Lopez (almost driven to drink or career distraction without the knowing, cheeky support of his ex-wife and editor (Catherine Keener) but from an unexpectedly diverse range of contributors in LA and around the US who register their remembrance of Ayers or admiration of Lopez' remarkable patience and dedicated journalism, the film winds everything through a completely overburdened halfway house in the second half where Ayers himself will make the film's climactic decision on whether to embrace the help of esteemed classical musicians and a stable household or destroy himself in the immense miasma of the LA slums. THE SOLOIST refuses to either take sides or provide easy answers, and to a degree director Joe Wright (ATONEMENT) looks like he could pull the film version's ethically unovert conditions off successfully. Downey and Foxx throughout the film compete with Wright's excessively willful, almost smothering stylization--very hard key lighting and light source spillage, minimalist background staging, profile close-ups and crowded two shots whipped away by breathtaking location zoom lensing, all topped off with a breathtaking hi-fidelity sound mix (the orchestra scenes sound like the mikes were placed right into the bowstrings), alternating with reassuringly traditional lighting and designing of scenes of Ayers' childhood and early education at Julliard. Downey is particularly impressive, seeming to get steadily greyer and more anxious as he guides and controls Ayers' naive remembrances and stocky musical technique into repicking up his beloved cello permanently. As Ayers, Foxx packs a generally believable punch playing a street urchin who was capable of much more, and as the relationship developed I noticed Susannah Grant's screenplay devoting an inordinate--some might say unbalanced--amount of time to both Ayers and the wonky lot of the city's environs, creating understandably large amounts of audience empathy yet tottering a little too trustworthily into the comfort zone of a $60 million dollar big-star vehicle lecturing America about the poor. The result is that Foxx's zombied character conception (the fault may be more Grant's than his, though) lacks either the leavening humor, sociopolitical complexity, and symbolic gravitas (the film version cannot decide if its supposed to be a docudrama or a riveting psychological examination) to humanize him against Lopez and make them a representational force of both their adoptive city or their career frustrations. THE SOLOIST in the end does make for a occasionally striking and formatively well-acted drama but its arch technique and lack of severe social reverberation fails to take detailed advantage of two very fine actors and only partly captures the playful yet deeply haunting contact of an American journalist to a specimen/victim of America's obstinate focus on success and what an 'artist' should be.

First off, I should say that I am personally familiar with this story, having worked in downtown L.A. for the last 19 years and seeing Mr Ayers and his cello many a time around 3rd and Hill Sts. I've also read Lopez's columns in the Times for years and followed this one with interest and satisfaction. Making a film about a tale like this restores my belief in Hollywood beyond the mindless bunk it churns out year after year.

Downey Jr and Foxx play a newspaper columnist and homeless man who come together in a most unusual way. Downey is a newspaper columnist looking for something original and interesting to write about. He finds it when he sees Foxx beautifully playing battered stringed instruments along 3rd street in downtown L.A. Foxx has been there for years but on this day grabs the eye of the columnist because the columnist himself is experiencing hardship and doubt related to his own position. He begins to write about this talented but troubled man who fills the stinky air around him with harmony. They become friends but keep in mind this is not fiction. The friendship hits many bumps that continue to this day. Nathaniel Ayers (Foxx's character) may be a brilliant, educated musician, but he suffers from bouts of schizophrenia that manifest at any time. Downey's character accepts this as it adds more intrigue to his columns. Then he accepts it on a personal level. Their friendship ultimately becomes real and meaningful. You sense that Downey's character needs the friendship even more than Foxx's homeless man does. In the end, Downey's Lopez can see the positive effect his work has brought to the plight of the homeless, yet he wonders personally how much better he has made Nathaniel...? His reflections make us think also.

Downey Jr and Foxx play their characters to near perfection and the film masterfully takes its time in developing the relationship between the two. Great to see director Joe Wright telling a contemporary tale just as effectively as he has in previous works. The film makes us wonder how many other Nathaniel Ayers are lurking out there on the streets? Life being what it is, of course we will never know. The beauty of the film is that is shows what can happen when just one Nathaniel Ayers is found after being lost for so many years. There's no sugarcoating; Ayers doesn't magically get better and rejoin mainstream society. Instead, the mainstream accepts him for what he is and what he offers and begins integrating him as best it can. This film will certainly pop up at award time next year.

Within a one-week period, I saw my second screening of this powerful movie today. I am mystified by some of the "bilious-type" reviews found here, seemingly driven by an anti-Joe Wright campaign. I found no cheap sentiments in the story line and I was awed by the high-octane performances of Jamie Foxx and Robert Downey, Jr. Nothing being perfect in an imperfect world, as "adult" entertainment, "The Soloist" did not once insult my intelligence. I marveled at the complexity of the screenplay and the realization of it by its gifted director and the camera-work of Seamus McGarvey. The gifted Dario Marianelli is credited as the film's composer, anecdotally, in the gigantic shadow of Ludwig van Beethoven. Mental illness, genius, homelessness, journalism and music has rarely been so well presented as an "entertainment." Yes, Mr. Ayers is depicted as experiencing a "light show" when attending a rehearsal of the L. A. Philharmonic. At least we didn't see pink hippopotamus in tutus or dinosaurs on a rampage in a prehistoric setting. Being so accustomed to televised concerts, I expected the camera to focus on the instruments themselves in this sequence. And, "clapping pigeons." Great idea that works. A brave film directed at a "non-art house" audience. I also want to cite the wonderful work of Nelsan Ellis who plays David at LAMP. So much compassion comes off the screen with his presence. There is no way we can make "light" of the tragedy of the homeless, so many with mental illness. Thank you Mr. Steve Lopez for introducing me to Mr. Nathaniel Anthony Ayers. My life is richer for the experience. LisaGay Hamilton, as Jennifer Ayers, Nathaniel's sister, deserves recognition in a small, but pivotal role that brings dignity and catharsis to a heart-wrenching experience.

It's 2005. Los Angeles Times columnist Steve Lopez (Robert Downey Jr.) is looking for his next subject to write about. He discovers mentally ill Nathaniel Ayers (Jamie Foxx) playing his broken violin. He befriends the homeless musician and begins to write about him as well as the homeless of LA. Nathaniel showed some skills as a child and concentrated on music and nothing else. He got as far as Juilliard but dropped out in his second year.

There are two good performances from two great actors. It's too bad there isn't something more compelling or that the story isn't told better. I wonder if Nathaniel's life story told straight up wouldn't be better. This is based on the real newspaper columns. Maybe there is too much Steve Lopez. The movie is more about him than Nathaniel. There is way too much about coyote urine which is marginally amusing at best. The story just needs to find that compelling flow.

The best part of the movie are the LA skid row scenes. The mass of mentally disturbed is quite shocking and seems like an unreal creation. That's something different at least.

Yes, you can trust Joe Wright with your life, without bound for two hours.

Some parts of this are simply ordinary. There's the original sequence of stories which exploited the simple tension of discarded talent in a city that both worships talent and discards people wholesale. These were simple structures, headlines and patronizing prose.

There's the screenplay by a hack, with simple shape and essentially no movement. In other words, forget what people usually think a movie is about: the people and the story. Those parts are missing. There is no happy ending. There is no redemption.

But this has three things: madness, music and the marriage of madness and music.

I saw this right after "State of Play," a traditional newspaper movie, with archetypal writer and editor. This is a modern version with two of our most folded actors: Downey and Keener. Their job is simple: define an edge between internal and external. The coupled acting here is not between Downey and Foxx, but between Downey and Keener playing a recently divorced couple. There's a quiet tension these two build around the absent son, whose place Foxx's character fills.

Foxx makes not a character but an phenomenon, an experience, this experience of madness in music. He is helped by being placed amid folks who we are told are "real disturbed people." What Wright has is a fairly vacuous notion of madness, but a sublime talent in expressing it cinematically. Some of his tricks are trivial when considered independently: a cutout of Ayers getting smaller and "disappearing into" the music; a cheesy light show to Beethoven; an attempt to conflate voices in the head to music in the head. This latter is very real but the expression is cheap.

While they seem trite individually, none are used heavily or relied on. And the effect when combined with more masterly things produces a symphony of excess. Downey's character remarks on the sheer depth, the love the penetration in describing just this very thing we see. It works. Music, indeed all real paths through passion are madness. Every adventure into commitment is a step outside safety of self.

Wright knows this. He feels it. He can show it. I can trust him with my life. Its madness to do so, but I recommend it to you.

Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.