I was watching Bird, the bio of charlie parker, and i noticed something i thought rather odd especially after reading Miles Davis' bio....there was no mention of Miles during this period of Bird's life. For those who read Mile's bio, we know how much of an influence Bird was on Miles and they hung out frequently in New York...dizzy is mentioned but why no miles, maybe clint eastwood didnt see relavance....did i miss something....does anyone why miles might have been left out of this one.

love2thenines said:

good question, I guess clint didn't think it was a very pivotal part of his life, or maybe miles wouldn't let them use his characters (I forget what year Bird was made).

good ?

as I recall, the movie did not focus much on the 1940s portion of Birds career; most of the movie is spent on the last four or five years of his life. Miles was leading his own groups by 1950. It's been a long time since I have seen the film, however.

Stax said:

the movie focused on the 40's and the 50's, however, miles contiued to play with bird off and on, (according to miles' bio) just found it strange since dizzy and miles were both part of that time.

love2thenines said:

It was strange. But, if my memory serves well, I remember there was some controversy surrounding the movie interpretation of Bird's life due to some descrepancies in events.

Hotlegs said:

It happens all the time in film bios. Clint Eastwood is a big jazz fanatic and of Bird in particular, nonetheless I never look at filmed biographies as accurate depictions of a person's life.

RipHer2Shreds said:

Of course, it does. However, those band members who knew bird felt that descrepancies were too significant.

Hotlegs said:

from what i have learned, most of those things happended,especially since birds wife helped with the film....besides the bird miles described in the bio would have made for some interesting scenes in the movie, than what we got in the movie.