the bird on fire

Review by Movie Enthusiast Leo Milmet

Grade: A+

Sing Street helped me discover even more about what exactly I love about film as an art form and why I have such an incredible passion for film. Sing Street is one of the truly great films of the 2000s. Why? For me, it’s the potent feeling it gives me every time I watch it.

Now, trust me, no one is more cynical about the modern American film industry than I am. In my humble opinion, most films nowadays are a joke. Most big-budget films are often well-crafted, yes, but to what purpose? Money? An Oscar? Most films, in general, are well-intentioned and perhaps even well-created but forgettable. They are created for selfish commercial reasons, not truly as art. Sing Street is a completely different story. Sing Street is so quietly bold as to take countless risks without even letting you know it’s taking them. Yes, Sing Street includes some cliches for this type of film in general, but the entire idea of a film about a very musical young man in high school being bullied by boys (and men) who don’t understand the meaning of art or creativity–who “have the power to destroy, but not to create” as the protagonist Conor puts it in one scene–is so boldly original that (and I rarely say this about clichés) I simply don’t care.

The film is set in Dublin, Ireland, in the 80s. In the opening scene, Conor is strumming his guitar in his room, with the audio of his arguing parents in the background. They call him out and say they’re transferring him from his posh school to a Jesuit school. Cut to an all boys’ high school–it’s pretty much totally uncivilized. Boys are screaming, fighting, laughing. All play, nothing is sacred, nothing is serious. They behave like toddlers. The rest of the film, despite mostly being an amazing romance story with great music, is truly about the introduction of a limited amount of art into a community full of teenage (and adult) ignorance. Ultimately, this changes so much without really changing much at all. It’s perfectly realistic. That’s why I love this film. It dares to be both optimistic and cynical, staying realistic throughout. All of this is partly due to the beautiful music and the brilliant cinematography. The music acts as the emotional heartbeat of the film, while the gray look of the film (contrasting with a few brilliant, deliberately oversaturated dream scenes) seems to ground the film in reality. However, this is not to take away from the incredibly smart writing in this film. After just a handful of scenes, we have already fallen in love with maybe four-five different characters, and while not every member of Sing Street (the band, not the movie) gets enough to do, every major character in this film is on par with those characters we love from the true classics of the coming-of-age genre. Sing Street is not a musical that uses its music as a crutch. The great music is another necessary element of the brilliant story, which is, at its heart, definitely the finest coming-of-age story this side of Boyhood. The film is perfectly paced and incredibly well-structured. There’s never a scene that feels rushed, nor is there a scene that drags. Some subplots could be cut without changing much, but they are more than engaging enough to not only keep our attention but to enrich the film itself. This is quite an achievement. In my humble opinion, John Carney, the film’s director, shows as much expertise in this one film as anyone has in one film in the past three years.

However, there are a few small negatives: some characters seem totally underdeveloped and are only there to flesh out the band; some scenes in the film are a tiny bit repetitive and/or very slightly contradictory; and, if this bothers you, an ending scene leaves loose ends and involves lapses in logic. However, the ending is open to interpretation in many ways, so it doesn’t bother me. I was swept up in the emotion of the moment and didn’t realize any of this until I had seen the film five times. However, none of these total nitpicks takes away from what a masterfully-created, beautiful film this is. Sure, it’s not for everyone (looking at you, lovers of only spectacle and/or mindless entertainment), but for those of you who like to experience art that is unique and interesting, this beautiful work of art deserves, at least, the meager attention of one viewing.

Editor: Charles Schnell (who agrees with just about everything Leo says of this film)