From the trailers I've seen on TV and (especially) from the Chicago Sun-Times article linked-to in the second message above, I have the impression that the musical performances will probably be pretty good, but the historical accuracy will be very disappointing.

For those of us who know all about the blues and 1950s-type R&B, the film might well be enjoyable for the performances, but only for those indiviudals who are able to ignore the factual shortcomings. Those of us who are historical scholars and/or trivia experts may be too distracted (or even enraged) by the various inaccuracies to simply enjoy the music.

Younger viewers, and everyone not especially familiar with the Chess legacy, are likely to come away from the film with a lot of misconceptions. They'll have no way of distinguishing the few bits of true history from the many "reinterpretations" and outright lies.

Is widespread exposure to the music, and the possibility of bringing a new appreciation to new audiences, worth the rampant fictionalization? Some will say yes, others no, and there'll probably be a lot of controversy. Perhaps if the controversy becomes really vocal and widespread, the naive majority of the viewers just might become aware that much of the story they've seen is seriously fictionalized.

I had been wondering why the title of the film is deliberately fictional ("Cadillac" Records, not Chess) while the entire cast of characters consists of real people whose lives revolved around Chess Records. That Sun-Times article goes a long way towards explaining why.

(It's hard for me to envision Beyonce as Etta James, but I'm willing to give her a chance...)