Forest Whitaker Won Best Actor In 2007, But I Think He Should Have Won It Decades Earlier For This Clint Eastwood Gem

You know, looking back at Forest Whitaker’s amazing career, you’d be hard pressed to find an actor with a more versatile list of performances. Sure, he won Best Actor in 2007 for his portrayal of the horrifying Ida Amin in The Last King of Scotland. But, this is a guy who also played an introspective hitman in Ghost Dog: Way of the Samurai (which is legitimately one of my favorite movies), a White House servant in Lee Daniel’s The Butler, and even an alien in Battlefield Earth.

However, I think one of his finest roles was actually his first leading one in which he played the troubled saxophonist, Charlie Parker. He portrayed him in Clint Eastwood’s 1988 biographical musical drama, Bird, and I think Whitaker should have won an Academy Award for his performance. Here’s why.

Whitaker Convincingly Transforms Into Charlie “Bird” Parker

You know what’s interesting about Clint Eastwood? You’ll watch some of his westerns like Unforgiven, or The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly, and you might get the impression that he’s some country music loving cowboy. However, Eastwood is actually a jazz enthusiast. Yeah! You can definitely tell when you watch 1988’s Bird, as Eastwood gets deep into the jazz culture, and Whitaker is definitely game for the ride.

We see Whitaker portray Charlie “Yardbird” Parker as a true jazz icon throughout his career. For example, we get him early on when Buster Smith (Played by Keith David) laughed him off the stage and a cymbal was thrown at Parker. That said, we also see Whitaker portray Parker as a veteran on the sax, working with the likes of Dizzy Gillespie (Samuel E. Wright) as they try (and fail) to bring bebop to the mainstream in America.

Another major aspect of this movie is Parker’s relationship with his common law wife, Chan Parker (Diane Venora) who was also deep into the jazz scene. In fact, a lot of this movie is Parker trying to reconcile his role as a notable musician, a father, and as a suitable partner (and his struggles as an addict, but I’ll get to that later). And, Whitaker flits through this world seamlessly.

There are a lot of great music movies out there, but Bird is one of the best because it’s so authentic to its particular era, and Whitaker is phenomenal in it.

That Said, Whitaker Also Nails The Troubled, Drug-Abusing Side Of The Man

Charlie Parker was a genius. I think anybody with the proper ear could listen to his explosive improvisation and ascertain that. However, he was also a deeply troubled alcoholic and heroin abuser, and Whitaker probably plays this part of Parker even better than the musical side.

Even though we didn’t include this movie on our list of thoughtful movies about depression, Bird is definitely one of those. As I mentioned earlier, the movie bounces around a lot, and early on, we see Parker attempt suicide by drinking iodine because he’s depressed over the death of his daughter. Chan has him committed in an asylum, and the doctors recommend giving Parker shock treatment, only for Chan to reconsider since she’s worried that it will sap Parker of his creativity.

However, the film then jumps to earlier in his life, and how he’s depressed even before his daughter’s death. He casually abuses heroin, and he even worries about going to other states to perform since it might be difficult for him to score drugs there. Throughout his life, he watches his success falter as producers stop wanting to work with him because his addiction is too much of a risk. He’s also a philanderer, and Whitaker does an excellent job of making Parker charming enough that we see why women considered him a lothario.

The best part though is that a lot of this acting is so subtle. You can see the hurt and pain in his eyes, and so can Chan, but he always has a smile on his face to mask his deep depression. So, while I know Whitaker’s bombastic performance in The Last King of Scotland is the more expressive one, I think his work in Bird is more impressive since I find it to be a more complex, quieter role. It’s the one where he “speaks” the loudest with an instrument at his lips, which I’ll get into next.

Whitaker Also Does A Convincing Job Of Making The Viewer Believe That He Can Play The Sax

People are always amazed when they see prominent actors play musicians, especially when those actors actually sing or play instruments. Jamie Foxx won an Academy Award for his portrayal of Ray Charles, and Joaquin Phoenix received plaudits for his performance as Johnny Cash. Well, while Whitaker is not actually playing the saxophone in the movie (they used Parker’s original recordings), you damn well believe that’s Whitaker really blasting out that sound.

A lot of it is Whitaker’s face when he’s blowing into the sax, as well as his convincing finger work, and the way he moves. At no point do you believe that he’s not playing the sax, and I’m sure many people have done a quick Google search to see whether he’s actually using the instrument, because he’s just so convincing.

Which is another reason why I think Whitaker should have won Best Actor for this performance. Unlike other actors playing famous musicians, like Rami Malek as Freddy Mercury where you’re listening for that familiar voice, with Whitaker, unless you’re familiar with Parker’s recordings, you’re likely hearing him for the first time, and in that way, Whitaker IS Charlie Parker when he’s on that stage.

It’s really magical, too, as Whitaker goes from his soft-spoken self away from the sax, to a madman blasting into orbit when he’s on the sax. The contrast is quite startling, which is another reason why he’s so damn good in this film.

Overall, Bird Is Just A Masterful Movie, And Whitaker Truly Makes It Sing

I love that Whitaker is one of the few Black actors who has won an Academy Award for acting, but I wish he had won two, since I think that this was a worthy performance. Now, Bird actually did very poorly at the box office, and it’s one of Clint Eastwood’s lesser known movies. But, I don’t think that should prohibit people from watching it, because it’s a truly masterful film that has a fantastic performance at the center of it.

And, much like the Brian Wilson movie, Love & Mercy, I think Bird does an excellent job of showing that there are actually people (sometimes struggling people) behind the music that we love.

But, look, I know. You might not even like jazz. In fact, as somebody who only casually enjoys the art form, I, too, felt a little separated from the musical portions since I’m so unfamiliar with the sounds. Be that as it may, Eastwood’s passion for the medium is so strong that you can’t help but get invested in it, too.

It’s for that reason why I think you should check out this movie, even if you don’t like jazz. If anything, at least you’ll still witness a fantastic performance from one of Hollywood’s greats.