The most amazing thing about the James Brown biopic “Get on Up” is that it tells the story of a unique and energetic musical innovator in such a common and rudimentary way that it feels like studying a wild animal’s natural habits while the animal is doped on Thorazine. Sure, you can study the animal’s physical features and biology safely, but you really wouldn’t know what this animal is like in its natural state. While safe is a good thing, it’s not the style to choose in depicting the life of the man dubbed ‘Soul Brother Number One’ or ‘The Godfather of Funk.’ To take all of the danger and energy out of soul and funk leaves you with just a lifeless and drooling wild animal that is a pale imitation of what it truly is.
While I’m not comparing James Brown to a wild animal, I think there’s more in common between James Brown and a lion than there would be to Brown and a house cat- maybe because Brown’s hair had a mane-like quality. And let’s face it: when you’re given a title, others have deemed you a force to be reckoned with- so my equating “The Hardest Working Man in Show Business” to the “King of the Jungle” isn’t that far of a stretch. What “Get on Up” manages to do in examining the life of James Brown feels like watching a lion in a cage and trying to imagine how a lion stalks its prey while a zookeeper throws a ball of ground chuck toward the lion’s mouth.
The opening scenes of “Get on Up” does show promise of what this movie could and should have been. We see a jumpsuit-clad James Brown entering a room in one of his owned businesses brandishing a shotgun and demanding to know from a handful of people assembled there who had defecated in one of his office bathrooms. Who had shown him such disrespect? After Brown accidently discharges the weapon into an overhead ceiling tile, a scared woman confesses to Brown that she had used the bathroom. Brown gently pats her head and smiles, trying to put the woman at ease by saying that he knows about having ‘to do your business.’
Had “Get on Up” continued with this tone of dangerous mood swings coupled with pathos and understanding, I think the movie would have been something. However, the film quickly reverts to the tried-and-true biopic clichés of overcoming tragic or downtrodden beginnings to reach the heights of fame and stardom through innovation and perseverance without giving its audience the deeper character development that allows them to invest or identify with the people on the screen. As a child abused by his father and abandoned by his mother (Viola Davis) in a shack in the woods of the Deep South, Brown is left in the care of the madam of a local brothel (Octavia Spencer) while his father joins the Army to earn money. The madam cares for Brown in exchange for him earning his room-and-board by bringing a fresh supply of servicemen to fund her illicit business. This arrangement works out fine until Brown is arrested for theft. After his release, watching Little Richard perform, Brown takes the stage himself and, voila, a (potential) star is born.
So impressed with Brown is Little Richard that he imparts his own advice to Brown on how to go about becoming a recording star, giving him the name of the person to cut a recording with and names of the radio stations that should receive the record. The rest of Brown’s story, achieving success and fame as a musical artist, is history. This scene between Brown and Little Richard is well-acted and well-written, but it’s only one of the very few highlights the film offers and lasts only a few minutes out of the 138 minutes this movie contains.
While this scene is a bright spot, another bright spot that I can’t discount is Chadwick Boseman’s performance as James Brown- he does a great job. Boseman, who did another admirable job portraying Jackie Robinson in “42,” lip-synchs James Brown’s songs well and is spot-on in performing the dance moves that Brown innovated (even Mick Jagger, one of this film’s producers, admits to stealing these dance moves himself). Boseman mimics Brown’s speech and mannerisms perfectly. Unfortunately, Boseman’s solid acting is given no support and falls through a paper-thin, play-it-safe screenplay whose plot points are drawn with the straightest of lines. Even Boseman’s adding color to the line doesn’t make it any less straight, simple or dull.
As “Get on Up” was directed by Tate Taylor who also made 2011’s “The Help,” it’s no surprise to see Oscar-nominee Davis and Oscar-winner Spencer appear in (very) short supporting roles, but even they can’t support their former director through their efforts. Taylor creates scenes in “Get on Up” with such a clean look that it just feels wrong- shouldn’t the essence of soul and funk be dirty? Taylor also badly uses manipulative film techniques like ‘breaking the fourth wall” (by having Brown address the audience by looking into the camera) in such an inconsistent and haphazard way that it almost feels like he’s trying to find the style he wants for the film by throwing everything to the wall and seeing what sticks. The script by Jez and John-Henry Butterworth (“Edge of Tomorrow,” another clichéd script) is so innocuous that I found my eyes drifting toward the bottom-right corner of the movie screen expecting the Lifetime logo to appear. While borrowing its title from a James Brown song lyric, “Get on Up” would seem to imply that while seeing the movie you’ll feel compelled to rise to your feet and dance. While you may not ‘get on up’ and walk out of the theater, the words may serve as a warning to brace yourself for the overall feeling of being let down.
In some cases, being serviceable works. In telling the life story of James Brown through film, serviceable is a disservice.