High Flying Bird (2019) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
41 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
This Is Not A Basketball Movie, It's Much More
bennyantlang9 February 2019
There is very little basketball to be seen here - in fact I think there's only one scene where any characters actually play ball. But that lack of on-court action is the very point & purpose of the movie; the plot is driven by an NBA lockout wherein the players are being denied the opportunity to play the sport they love (and get paid for it), all because the "Powers That Be" feel they aren't making enough money from it themselves. This is a very real issue in modern sport, and this film seeks to confront many aspects of it; from the rich insular Establishment of western societies in general, to the very concept of human endeavour becoming a commodity for profit. And as the majority of NBA players are black and the owners white, the movie doesn't shy away from the issue of race either. Comparisons with slavery may seem heavy-handed, but the reality is that these black athletes' livelihoods are completely at the mercy of rich white men; their blood & sweat turned into dollars to fill their owners' pockets. These are big, political issues atypical of your standard sports movie - anyone expecting a "gutsy underdog" story or a heartwarming tale of redemption through hard work & team spirit, will be sorely disappointed. This film is all about social commentary and witty dialogue, and the intentionally-underwhelming ending is clever yet pragmatic. There's no Rudy or Coach Carter to be found here; the central character has lofty ideals, but realistic expectations - he knows he's always playing someone else's game, and the rules are rigged against him. High Flying Bird feels real, modern and urgent, in stark contrast to the feel-good dreamy nostalgia of most sports movies. Soderbergh makes his point well, and always delivers technical excellence in his filmmaking, so your appreciation of this film will depend entirely upon how interested you are in the issues it presents. But it feels like something of a landmark moment in the sports movie genre.
31 out of 43 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
I don't know what it is about
Gordon-119 February 2019
This film just doesn't tell the story well. I don't understand what it is about, and the fact that all the characters talk in a cryptic manner complicates the matter further. The film had good production, but is boring and frustrating because I don't know what it is about.
55 out of 82 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
It's a B-Movie - But In Great Way
BodyDoubleFilms8 February 2019
As Steven Soderbergh made his way back to feature film directing, bringing us the rough round the edges psychological horror Unsane - shot on iPhone 7+ smartphones. By contrast High Flying Bird was not shot on iPhone 7+ phones... actually iPhone 8+...

Soderbergh spoke about a new age of B-Movies. Not in the sense of second rate - but going back to the golden age of cinema, when b-movies were cinema fillers for huge audiences.

They were shot on low budgets. Often with limited lighting and not too many stars or spectacular sequences, with crowds of extras.

Instead, the director had to work around his limited means creatively, often filling a lot of the film with dialogue - as it's much cheaper to shoot: if you can't film all those scenes, you can always have one character tell another character what happened.

Be in no doubt, although a lot of those old B-movies were fillers, some were remarkable pieces of cinema. All the better for being forced into creative use of limited resources.

Indeed, this was how film noir was born. And that is very much what High Flying Bird reminded me of. Those old b-movie sports pictures which couldn't afford the big action scenes so left the sport part in the background while the action focused on the backroom talk.

I loved the cinematography. And it was absolutely refreshing to see old school camera angles instead of the tedium we get now - when every kid with a few hundred dollars to spend sports a DSLR and Bokeh inducing lenses.

Boken is no excuse for cinematography. And this is why the use of smartphones is a breath of fresh air. Without those boring ricks to fall back on (do we really need to see another extreme shallow depth of field close up?), every shot in this movie was thought about. Every shot had a purpose. And how great to have the wide depth of field of smartphones bring the surrounded architecture into play. Not a shot or a building was wasted.

And that's what this is all about. Instead of cinema fillers we have Netflix fillers. Who knows, just like the last time some of them may just turn out to be little gems. Soderbergh knows he'll never win any Oscars for these new b-movies. As did those movie directors of old. But he knows he'll have the freedom to make the films he wants to make and have fun doing it.
24 out of 39 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Small camera, big issues
screenotes9 February 2019
Soderberg's latest experimentation with the iPhone focuses on a struggling idealistic player agent during an NBA "lockout". You may wonder how so small a camera manages to capture or at least replicate the drama of fast-paced sporting action, particularly the pinnacle grandstand moment of that ole rags to riches sports tale. Without spoiling anything, let me tell you it doesn't. Or more to the point, High Flying Bird is less concerned with the sport of basketball itself than it is with "The game on top of the game".

Instead of an arena, the game is played out in offices and instead of action, there is dialogue. Considering the constrained budget and production schedule, it is a testament to the cast and to the screenplay that the film holds together at all. And yet it does. The performances are naturalistic while the story moves along at pace, generally eschewing exposition.

In keeping its focus narrow, centring on a small cast of characters, Tyrell Alvin McCraney's screenplay cuts to the core of issues of race and power in the NBA without a whisper of melodrama. In fact, considering the wider story it is telling High Flying Bird remains upbeat and inherently promotes a message of positivity.

High Flying Bird will not be for everyone, it could be accused of being a little dry. However it is an intriguing experiment in film-making which finds a new way to tell a story which needs telling.
12 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Mordant exploration of racial discrimination in the world of sport.
thomasbouchardperreault8 February 2019
Steven Soderbergh has always been interested in the commercial exploitation of the body (MAGIC MIKE, THE GIRLFRIEND EXPERIENCE) and by the dreamers who attack the system (OCEAN'S ELEVEN, ERIN BROCKOVICH). We can easily see what could have interested him in this mordant exploration of racism in the sports industry. Especially since this film is based on a scenario well documented and astute, written by the coscenarist MOONLIGHT. Far from being a drama on the world of sport, HIGH FLYING BIRD is rather an acidic comedy on its dark side, which takes here sometimes the appearance of modern slavery. The particular parameters of the project (filming in 13 days with $ 2 million and an iPhone 7) have undoubtedly helped to boost the staging of this series of sharp verbal jousting, carried by the energetic André Holland ("The Knick" ), irresistible as an improvised reformer of a rotten system. Lastly, there is the periodic use of interviews with real athletes, which frequently gives credibility to the story.
22 out of 40 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
A movie about basketball, with no basketball.
philipposx-122908 February 2019
There are obviously parts and scenes where you can see Steven Soderberghs technical virtuosity, the stale camera angles, or the slowly moving wide shots. It feels like a very professional movie, ironically shot on an iPhone. The acting itself also is quite convincing.

But I could not get anything out of this movie. It's a movie about basketball, that has no basketball in it. It has an idea but it does not have characters. You don't care about the characters because they simply aren't engaging. They don't have organic character arcs, or come to a satisfying conclusion. The script is fine, but mostly doesn't help the movie become compelling or interesting in any way. It just.. moves along.

There is one main message. Basketball leagues are controlled by white capitalists, although black people are the main players. The idea behind "beating" this game over the game may be interesting in itself. I left this movie with nothing, except the feeling of having seen some clever shots and some politics. But it should have been more of a documentary instead of a 90-minute drama.

Netflix movies are continuing to disappoint.
41 out of 87 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
NBA owners won't like this
zack_gideon8 February 2019
Current events in the NBA are prophetically laid out in this concise film that extracts a lot out of it in a run time of 90 minutes. I won't go into spoiler detail but the construction of the plot is unique in many ways and I can't think of another film like it.

Some viewers will find it boring because there really isn't any basketball being played. I liked it because of that, because the plot doesn't need it. There is much relevancy on how the media landscape is changing and in turn changing the dynamics of the NBA (owner/GM vs players). I'm a big sports fan and I've noticed this from a long way out. That's the real point of this movie in my opinion.

It'll get mixed reviews and probably some 1 votes. That's okay, the message is right on and empowering, and the acting helps convey that. There are some religious plot lines too but it doesn't take away from anything and will add to the story for some viewers. Enjoy!
12 out of 23 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
bluefoxniner9 February 2019
Missed opportunity to create an NBA answer to the under rated " Draft Day".

Boring, tedious and utterly pointless. Decent cast, absolutely horrible to watch. "Literally nothing happens. Don't give up your time watching garbage like this.
21 out of 45 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
If boring was the aim then they hit the bullseye no doubt.
tkaine39 February 2019
4/10 🌠🌠🌠🌠 I love sports, so all of the entity's surrounding the game I usually have a high interest for. This film follows a basketball sports agent navigating one of his rookie clients through a tumultuous time of an NBA lockdown. The cast for this film was a small handful of people but the majority of them were black and I appreciated that. The acting was formidable nothing amazing or any standout stars so why such a low rating... Entertainment value in this film was at an all time low... I even said to myself this film is extremely boring and seconds later the well known actress in the limo said over the phone don't bore me. I actually know a few sports agents personally and one of them retired from pro football and I know a lot about there career is tedious and hard among other things but c'mon this film which takes place during an NBA lockdown could have been so much more interesting and informative even the cut ins from the real pro athletes like D.Mitchell and Karl-Anthony could have added to the film to make it better but instead it swayed the movie to feel more like a documentary. Also the color hue and the terrible camera angles early on gave me a headache. The semi Fisheye wide angle lens did not fit the scenery at all. I have come to realize one recurring theme with Netflix originals they can be Pretty good movies at times but never will they be masterpieces. Whether the storyline falls short or the acting from a small budget or just not being original, something will dramatically fall short and stunt the film from being a great movie... All in all I would say skip this film it just doesn't have enough entertaining value to be a movie if it was a true documentary then maybe it could've worked.
19 out of 41 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
mattmts14 February 2019
Don't bother, I kept waiting for something to happen, it doesn't. I was at least expecting some decent basketball, or a plot or character development - something. But no.
10 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Not really as profound as it pretends to be.
thebricks9 February 2019
Typical Soderbergh movie. The basic gist of the film is, an NBA lockout has been going on for six months, a player who was a number one first round draft pick hasn't gotten a paycheck yet and is struggling to survive off predatory loans until everything is over. His agent, Ray Burke is trying to help him get through this all while fighting off his higher-ups within the sports agency who want to ditch the NBA for the NHL, which would probably cost him his job.

There's a bit more to the plot than this, including how Ray supposedly ends the lockout, how supposedly players are exploited by racist owners and the NBA, which is just a bizarre thing to imply, given that there is a player's union and no shortage of companies ready to endorse players. Everything the movie tries to sell the audience falls apart in the last ten minutes or so, when Soderbergh shows his cards and basically reveals this movie really is about wealthy, privileged African-Americans...fighting against racial injustice? Excuse me, what? I'm supposed to feel sorry for pro athletes who will make as much as $30 million a year or more plus endorsements? Even a bench player on minimum salary makes like $500K a year. The agents make millions. In one scene, Ray triumphantly shows up his boss, tells him he's going to take his job and walks out triumphantly like he just stuck it to the man. The whole scene is just so ridiculous and unbelievable it defies logic. Who would be ridiculous enough to give up the NBA's business because of a lockout to begin with? LOL. Especially one that was coming to an end? I would go into more of the plot, but I won't for the sake of spoilers.

The whole movie just wasn't fun. It had an agenda from the very beginning. Soderbergh, as usual, tries to sell his story with well-shot scenes in fancy restaurants, offices and coffee shops, actors rattling off dialogue so fast it doesn't allow the audience to understand who exactly individual characters are or what they do. The details of the plot are hard to gather and understand until the plot twist is revealed and then from there, it all falls apart and becomes simplistic agenda-based drivel. It's one thing to pretend to be a sophisticated movie, another to break down and reveal your real agenda was about racism, which most viewers of this film are unlikely to take seriously. The real problem with the majority of players is never examined, particularly how little many of them take education seriously. Before anyone tries to dispute anything I've said about this, I've dealt with this firsthand and know what I'm talking about.

Soderbergh is a slightly more likable version of Aaron Sorkin. I enjoy his movies occasionally but I don't trust people in general who think it is a badge of honor to be the smartest one in the room. He seems to have a complex about this that carries over to the characters in his movies; anyone he likes is always the clever one with a trick up their sleeve to outsmart someone. The bad guys are smart but never as smart as the good guys. Everyone else is just some lovable goof who needs other people to hold their hands to get through life. This is basically every movie he makes and it's annoying. Cut out the last scene and maybe this movie would get a lot better.
20 out of 44 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
mifsudm-7574813 February 2019

Writing (Tarell Alvin McCraney) 2/10: I never knew you could make a basketball movie with only dialogue. The entire movie was just conversation to conversation to conversation. Basketball is barely played in this film. The most we see of it is a single shot in a YouTube video. You should be able to write a film, remove all the dialogue, and still have something comprehensible. If you remove all of the dialogue from 'High Flying Bird,' there are only blank pages. There is no action and, most importantly, no heart. It feels like there is no passion and no emotion thrown into this screenplay whatsoever. In every scene, the characters seem as bored as I was watching it. The only glimmer of hope I was holding onto was the mystery of Erick's 'Bible' which stayed in its package since the first scene of the movie. I was disappointed to find that it served no use to the plot and had no semblance of satisfaction when it was revealed. If the point they were going for was that, with all the religious themes thrown around in the movie, he didn't need his Bible to find who he was and live without an agent, then they really missed the mark.

Performances 5/10: The acting in this film is one of the better aspects of it. Andrè Holland does a good job as Ray and Zazie Beetz does a good job as always. It was also nice seeing Kyle MacLachlan and Zachary Quinto who carried their scenes. Melvin Gregg however barely finds the energy he needs. His acting is subpar compared to everyone else, and that says something when everyone in this film looks bored.

Cinematography (Steven Soderbergh) 4/10: Soderbergh needs to understand that this iPhone gimmick is fun and inspiring as a concept, but it isn't practical. There are reasons why uber expensive Red Epics or Arris are used, it's because they make the picture look nice and comfortable to look at. Overexposed backgrounds and terrible color profiles are distracting and ugly. Also, there is barely a stabilizer in iPhones so when an actor hits a table or walks, the camera shakes and it's noticeable. Also, Soderbergh breaks the 180-degree rule a lot for seemingly no reason. During the film, I was trying to figure out why he suddenly flipped sides and I couldn't figure out why. There was no reason for it. The only redeeming factor for the cinematography is that there were some shots that looked cool, especially considering the camera it was shot on, but Soderbergh needs to give up this gimmick.

Editing (Steven Soderbergh) 3/10: To go along with his not good cinematography, Soderbergh combines it with his bad editing. This goes hand-in-hand with his breaking of the 180-degree rule. In addition, during a two-person dialogue (which was 99% of this film) the film stays on a third person not saying anything as if they're having some big reaction to the conversation, but they aren't. Soderbergh just stays on a bored actor. The only reason his editing isn't getting a 1/10 is that the film is still comprehensible.

Enjoyment 2/10: Normally I don't like to think of a film as worse because it's boring. Take 'Roma' as an example. Most of the film is slow and boring, but it still tells a brilliant story through action and subtext. You can remove most dialogue and have it still be interesting. But because 'High Flying Bird' is almost all dialogue with almost no action at all, a lot of it is hard to follow. I would have fallen asleep to this film had I not finished a cup of coffee immediately before watching it. I will say, it could have been worse. It wasn't painful to watch by any means, but I wish there was some shred of excitement in the plot.

Musical Score (David Wilder Savage) 5/10: Score? This film had a SCORE? It did not feel like it. Most scenes needed some kind of music to be more interesting. It needed some ambiance to give it some atmosphere instead of just the sounds of New York City. Although, I did very much enjoy the opening song. It was fun and was a good opener that made me disappointed by the end.

Sound Mixing 4/10: The sound is rough in this film. The transitions from inside to outside are hard to listen to because of how harsh they are. They needed ambiance in the form of music or just something nondiegetic to give it life.

Production Design (Andy Eklund) 8/10: The design of this movie is pretty nice. Each setting is unique in its own way and tells a little bit about the characters they belong to. The gym set was especially nice and fitting.

Overall 4/10: Steven Soderbergh needs to give up the gimmicks and just stick to the stories. I can't say anything bad about him wearing so many hats because it's worked well in the past, but if he focuses less on the iPhone gimmick and goes back to traditional filmmaking, he'd have better films. Also, Tarell Alvin McCraney needs to write better screenplays.
6 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
sports agent with a twist
ferguson-66 February 2019
Greetings again from the darkness. Steven Soderbergh has won an Oscar for Best Director (TRAFFIC, 2002) and is one of the filmmakers who has enjoyed both Box Office success (the "Oceans" franchise) and critical acclaim (SEX, LIES, AND VIDEOTAPE, 1989). He has also been behind some quite creative TV projects ("The Knick", "Godless"), as well as many technical advancements in the industry. This latest is his second consecutive film to be shot entirely with an iPhone (UNSANE, 2018). Bluntly stated, Mr. Soderbergh beats his own drum.

Oscar winner Tarell Alvin McRaney (MOONLIGHT) wrote the script and a talented cast allowed filming to be completed in only 3 weeks ... a remarkably short production time for a feature film that is quite watchable and polished. Andre Holland (also one of the film's producers) plays Ray, a sports agent with a soul. Rarely do films portray sports agents as the smartest guy in the room, much less as one with altruistic motives. But that describes Ray - although we have our doubts at times. The film opens with Ray having a heated discussion over lunch with his newest client - hot shot rookie Erick (played by Melvyn Gregg). The NBA is in the midst of a lockout and young Erick's top pick contract has not yet been executed ... so he's in need of funds, as is Ray and the agency he works for.

Sprinkled throughout, and serving as a framing device, are talking head shots of actual NBA players Reggie Jackson, Karl Anthony Towns and Donovan Mitchell discussing the challenges of being a rookie. Their insight and perspective adds an element of reality to the tone of the film. Zazie Beetz (DEADPOOL 2) co-stars as Sam, Ray's assistant who constantly reminds him, "I don't work for you anymore", despite her exceptionally strategic maneuvering of others. Also appearing are the always interesting Bill Duke as Spencer, who runs a camp for up and coming youth players; Kyle MacLachlan as the owners' lead negotiator; Sonja Sohn as the Players Union Rep; and Zachary Quinto as Ray's boss.

Ray's work behind the scenes is misinterpreted by many, but his focus is on getting the two sides to negotiate so the strike can end. During this process, the film makes an interesting statement about who owns the players' image. Is it the league, the players' association, or the player himself? It's a legal and philosophical question that again crosses the line into real life. There is also a comical bit that takes aim at the business side of the league regarding selling sneakers and inspiring rap lyrics.

Reminiscent of other Soderbergh films, there is an emphasis on heavy dialogue and creative camera work, as well as some life lessons offered up along the way. "You care all the way or you don't care at all" is a philosophy preached by Spence, and clearly leading by example is an important element to the key characters. Toss in the music of Richie Havens, and it's quite obvious this isn't the typical inspirational, feel-good sports movie.
13 out of 27 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Loved it
stevenbyrd9 February 2019
Believe more stories like this need to be told. Netflix is starting to look really smart in the decision to put out quality instead of quantity. This gives a cool insight of what it's like to be a pro in a capitalistic society. Mixed with social media when used in the smart way is leverage for the underdog. Andre Holland was brilliant as a humble & smart sports agent. Being a NBA fan it was a treat to see and bravo to everyone involved. Also Zazie Beetz was amazing, look forward to seeing her in more roles.
10 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
robinbischert13 February 2019
This is one of the worst movies i've ever seen. I want the time back I spent on watching this trash.
6 out of 12 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Could not watch more than 15 minutes
ckmnsnake11 February 2019
I'm european and not much of a basketball fan. I know the game but I understand little about NBA. Still, I don't think that was the main reason I understood maybe 10% of the lines in the first 15 minutes of the movie. I thought the dialogs were too sketchy and full of innuendos that would only be understood by people connected to the basketball business. I gave up by then. This is the second movie in my life I could not bare continue watching.
8 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
A Soderbergh Failure
paul_mcdonald_10010 February 2019
Soderbergh arguably remains one of the most exciting fim-makers working today but this film is a complete failure. Quick-fire duologues, densely packed with opaque lines, shot with static camerawork does not make for an engaging story or film. A general problem is that this is one of those films about American sports that forgets the rest of the world have no idea what you are talking about nor do they care. In these times, this myopic, insular focus on US-centric concerns inadvertently ends up being an expression of 'America First' thinking. Please, no more movies about the business of sports that no one outside the US has the slightest interest in. The world is a bigger place.
10 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
-How do you show a man his humanity?
Ppapaisidorou11 February 2019
-You remind him his mortality!

It's a very smart movie, visually captivating (even though it's shooted by an iPhone 8), with a hilarious take on race and politics in basketball + shows the potential of players/agents to change the balance of power. I HIGHLY recommend it!
5 out of 10 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
A Social Issues Film; Not a "Basketball Movie"
thomasemoran13 February 2019
If you're going into this expecting some cookie-cutter underdog basketball film that telegraphs its plot from the opening scene, you are going to be disappointed. However, if you are going into this looking for a film that actually addresses and comments on society and social issues in a poignant and intelligent way, you will find that. Many reviews are complaining that they "didn't understand" or "don't get it" or didn't understand some of the references. That's kind of the point. If you know about these things, the film is masterful at examining the power dynamic and sparking criticism of the structure in American professional athletics. If you don't know about the content in the film, now you know which questions to ask and where to look for more information to be able to understand them.

But no, it isn't like Above the Rim, Coach Carter, Glory Road, or Hoosiers. It's nothing like that, and it doesn't present itself as such. It isn't a film about playing basketball; it is a film about the inherent flaws in the system in which basketball is played--and why it is designed to be that way.
4 out of 8 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Disappointing at best
izachzzz24 February 2019
Had the potential for a great movie but with no real climax. The "feel" of the movie never hit a peak and you finished the movie waiting for the big moment to hit you.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Weak excuse for a film...wannabe creativity
kevgperry23 February 2019
Weak story....Annoying wide angle on everyshot. Weak attempt at creativity. Now that I know it was shot on an iphone makes it worse. Loved Traffic...not sure what they were going for here and not sure why the favorable reviews but I wasnt impressed in the slightest. If he had a 2 million budget not sure why the use of an iPhone. Its not like a red camera is all that expensive. Visuals were impressive for being an iphone but another example of people paying more attention to the medium than on telling a good story.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
High Flying Bird is a landmark movie in the sports-drama genre
svhot20 February 2019
Warning: Spoilers
I was amazed and very happy after watching this movie titled "High Flying Bird". There are a lot of reasons why I was impressed with this new sports-drama film. I can go on and on about it, but I will try to mention a few main lessons the movie is trying to teach ; and the very real problems in the world of sports that this movie is boldly attempting to highlight.

First of all, I have to mention the fact that this movie belongs totally to the director Steven Soderbergh (of the "Ocean's 11, 12 fame). Mr. Soderbergh has made a very intelligent and realistic movie indeed. "High Flying Bird" shines brightly and brilliantly in terms of its social commentary on the commercialization of sports (in this movie, the sport being dealt with is basketball), racism in sports, and this film has got very powerful, witty dialogues.

All actors have given good performances in their respective roles. Please note, this movie is trying to highlight the real problems faced by professional sports players. If you want to watch a sports-drama flick that showcases a tale of redemption and victory, then watch something else. This movie is an intelligent film that deals with actual problems that exist in sports.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Talk-heavy, fast-paced and an intellectual effort above all else
Movie_Muse_Reviews6 March 2019
Nobody quite knows what Steven Soderbergh is doing, but his projects sure are interesting. "High Flying Bird," shot speedily on an iPhone and released on Netflix, is a dialogue-forward fast-talking business movie set during a pro-basketball lockout. In other words, it's in its own category of "sports movie."

The core of "High Flying Bird" is a verbally sizzling script from Tarell Alvin McCraney, the playwright known best for turning a drama school project into the Oscar-winning screenplay for "Moonlight" in 2016. McCraney's theatre background will help clarify why 90 percent of "High Flying Bird" is conversations in restaurants and office buildings. The film very intentionally deprives its audience of the kinetic pleasures of a sports movie, choosing to focus on the strategy side, enforcing the common cliché that "sports is a business."

Perhaps a better way to frame the movie is that it wants to focus on athletes as people. To enforce this notion, Soderbergh filmed interviews with a few NBA players, most of whom recently entered the league, asking them about the experiences and lessons learned from their transition to the pros. He divides the story up and fills these interviews in to remind audiences that while the movie is fiction, the scenarios and challenges in it are very real.

André Holland, who had a supporting role in "Moonlight," stars as Ray, a top sports manager who has landed himself the number one overall draft pick, Erick Scott (Melvin Gregg), as a client. With the players association and the league locked out, however, players aren't getting paid, which leads Erick to make some short-sighted decisions that could jeopardize his first rookie contract.

The story begins extremely business-like in its approach to the subject matter and slowly reveals the bigger picture at hand, though it remains intellectual in its primary function as a story. The script hints at more emotional subplots, specifically past traumas of its characters, but empathy is largely in short supply. For as smart as it is, however, it feels rushed. You keep waiting for it to change gears and offer something different, but it has a single tone and pace, one that it does extremely well thanks to Soderbergh's naturally sleek style, but nevertheless, it's singular in vision.

Soderbergh's involvement in the film feels less about his direction and more about getting this project financed. The film has points to make, points that are complex and compelling about athletes and the systems that contain them, but they aren't given a lot of time to sink in.

There's a lot of Aaron Sorkin in this film. Sorkin writes scripts that are intellectually stimulating with a pulsing rhythm, that are on to the next witty exchange before you can appreciate the previous one. It's a film that feels smarter than you, that you have to rise up to meet. That's largely the entertainment factor that we get from "High Flying Bird." The Soderbergh-McCraney pairing has that explosive dynamism to it, but the film consciously limits the breadth of what it can offer audiences.

Steven C

Thanks for reading! Visit Movie Muse Reviews for more
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Surprisingly Good
ivans5366 March 2019
Considering the piles of questionable material Netflix pumps out these days, it's nice to find a relatively unknown production that turns out to be surprisingly good.

It's basically a heist movie with a political mission, and the use of basketball in the marketing is not doing it any favors. Dialogue heavy and without flashy action (or Basketball gameplay), this movie is not for everyone. But for such a small budget and being filmed only with an iPhone it's impressive how it manages to hold and keep your attention while still delivering both potent & relevant political commentary coupling it with a satisfying payoff with a twist. It all feels fresh, relevant and realistic, leaving you wondering why Netflix isn't signing deals with rookies everywhere.

The only issue I have is cramming the racism into the political message since it leaves out that the white players wages & bargaining power are just as miniscule.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
High Flying Bird is a Slow Moving Film
Coachcrane2 March 2019
Other than some decent conversations between characters, not much happened in this movie. As many have already posted, this isn't a basketball movie, which is fine. But it's also not a movie with any conflict, pacing, or resolution. It acts as though it has some sort of surprise or twist ending, or a "how did he do that?" moment like Ocean's Eleven. But it doesn't. We know what happened. We were there every step of the way. It even had a flashback to fill in the parts we missed, but they were completely unnecessary. I was disappointed.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews

Recently Viewed