Michael Ledo I am a fan of the music, but never knew much of his life which is told as a flashback which divided itself into two parts: the missing years and a flashback to when he was on top of his game. We see his fall due his marriage emulating that of Ike and Tina Turner. Miles was a big boxing fan with a hip disease and love of cocaine. The flashbacks were easy to follow, we have the later " "fro" period preceded by a more clean cut period. The viewer needs to catch on fast because it flashes back and forth at irregular intervals, sometimes just a matter of seconds as we watch him attempt to steal his music back for much of the film.The film was less of a biopic and one designed to capture the essence of Davis, his hectic unorganized life juxtaposed by his overly organized music. That it did, although I wish they had more of his music.Guide: F-word, sex, and nudity.

SJA123 Dreadful movie with a very thin plot.Miles Davis is deserving of a more full and compelling biopic of his life rather than a movie stretched out from a fairly uneventful period of his public life, plus a bit of artistic license including the reporter character.Don Cheadle pulls off a reasonable portrayal of Miles, whereas Ewan McGregor doesn't really add anything to the movie. The one saving grace is Emayatzy Corinealdi with a touching performance as Frances Taylor, and... of course... Miles' music.Wish I'd put on one of his albums instead and read a book!

commander_zero Making a jazz film is hard: the most sincere efforts, such as Clint Eastwood's Bird and Bertrand Tavernier's Round Midnight, tend to recast the music as a synonym for tragedy and victimhood, the exact opposite truth of an art that was crafted to constantly countermand and undermine tragedy and victimhood. Miles Ahead has been criticized for its crazy sub-plot, that culminates in fistfights and gunplay at a boxing match, where Miles Davis reclaims a Macguffin-like master tape that Columbia Records will evidently do anything to get. Of course, this is completely fiction, but it is worth bearing in mind that co-star Ewan MacGregor has called the film "less a Miles biopic than an attempt to cast Miles in a caper flick that he might like to have been part of." In this light, one might regard such excesses a good way of expanding on the "badass" image, that Miles so liked to project. Historically flawed as it might be, the film makes clear that badassness was in fact a useful survival tactic for Davis, in a music industry full of unctuous guys in suits calling him "Mr. Davis," stressing how honoured they were to meet him, and then exploiting him at every turn. The film bounces around chronologically from the late 1950s to the 1980s. The constant flashbacks are somewhat off-putting, but sometimes they do a very good job. At their centre is Davis' relationship with dancer Frances Taylor; years after she has walked out on him – or rather, run out, fearing for her life – Miles is still obsessed with her. There is a scene where, over the phone, he convinces her to leave the London production of West Side Story to be with him. Just as we start to feel sorry for the lovelorn Miles, Cheadle cuts to the drug-fuelled orgy with two young fans that Davis has interrupted in order to take Taylor's call. Another scene takes us back to the 1959 Sketches of Spain sessions; for a jazz fan, it is a delicious pleasure to see and hear these being recreated, although Cheadle gives the impression that arranger Gil Evans was a sort of conductor for the session who was there to follow Davis' instructions. Early in the film, Davis stops an interviewer from calling his music "jazz." What he plays, Davis insists, is social music. In the midst of current recastings and redefinitions of what "jazz" might be, this is a more important message than one expects to hear in a Hollywood biopic. In reading the many criticisms of Cheadle's film, it might be useful to remember that Davis' music from the '70s and '80s was also fiercely criticized at the time it was made, but as the years go by, and we rethink what the artist was doing, it seems increasingly to be right on. The way this film is regarded might also very well change for the better in the years to come.

David Jenkins As a big Miles Davis fan i was looking forward to this Movie.Miles was a complex character with an amazing history. Not just the music, but the incredible personal struggle with Racism, Drugs, the personal turbulent relationships. all make for a truly troubled interesting Story.And then there's his interaction with his band members,some of the greatest musicians of all time. All going on to make the music evolve, and all inspired by his presence. None of the above was dealt with in this picture.The Direction was uninspired, trying to be to slick. like a first grade film school exercise.I,m not sure what the intention of the Director was? only that the Director was the star of the film, so a loss of focus on the main character, Miles, became lets be clever with showing my face as Miles in as many different ways that i can.The story was very strange, it felt like money was being spent on Slickness and not on the script. Which should never be secondary.I have read that this was a labour of Love for Don Cheadle, the love of Miles Davis I'm not sure. The Love of Himself probably Yes. Sorry for the negative review, i just didn't like it in any way. I'm not sure why this movie has been made in this way.