Miracle at St. Anna trailer

[jabroni2kz]

here it is
http://movies.yahoo.com/movie/1809947151/video/8293703

[pablo_super1!]

With all the hub-ub over what Spike Lee said to Clint Eastwood over Flags and Letters, and him bringing up slavery. I think Spike Lee is a Moron.

But Despite what I think of Spike Lee personally, he sure can make a good film. This looks to be a really good film and I can't wait for it. Also I'm glad to See Joseph Gordon Levitt in it, even if his screen time is short.

Here's the poster.

http://img396.imageshack.us/img396/3874/miracleatstanna1gg2.jpg

[Moviefan1234]

This looks like one damn fine film. That poster is brilliantly effective.

[ilovemovies]

Looks to be another another solid effort from Spike. I'm there. As far as war films goes, I'm still looking forward to Defiance more. But this still looks damn good.

[therealjohng]

Looks pretty good.....

[FilmKing2000]

I must say, this film looks very compelling. It's certainly an intriguing look into a side of WWII that we rarely see depicted on film and it's awesome how most of the story is pretty much being kept under wraps. I've always been a big fan of most of Spike Lee's work and I can't wait to see how he's going to handle this material (which seems like a great departure for him).

Definitely one of my most anticipated of the year.

[echo_bravo]

Spike is a twat but I do look foward to his joints.;)

[Zeeboe]

I've been looking forward to watching this movie for a while now, but after seeing the trailer...I don't know. It looks like it might be really boring. Watching a long, boring film is not an enjoyable experience. I'll wait and read how long it runs when it comes out, and even though I've never been one to go to the critics for advice on what movies to watch, I might make an exception this time. I'll see what Ebert, and our own Joblo has to say about it in the event that either of them watch it.

[xseanymacx]

I'll have to wait for some reviews. It seems as though Spike Lee has made a black war movie JUST to prove a point. If that's all it is, then the movie is going to blow. I'll need to see if it actually runs a story or not.

[bigred760]

I saw the trailer in theaters, and thought it looked excellent. Will probably check it out.

[Bourne101]

Spike is a twat but I do look forward to his joints.;)

Couldn't have said it better myself.

[BananaDancer]

Look really awesome! I loved Spike's last one, Inside Man, I was happy for him that he finally had some "commercial" success. It looks that trend will continue with Miracle. This one definitely looks like it will have mass appeal, you know?

[poopontheshoes7]

Looks damn good to me. I'm a reluctant fan of Lee because like others I think he's a douche. But when he makes a good movie he certaintly makes a good movie.

[ElderPredator]

Spike Lee is a digusting human being but damn this does look like an awesome movie.

[therealjohng]

^wtf, how?

[Backstabba]

I think Spike Lee is a hypocritical, egotistical, smug jerk.
But this looks really good.

[sbunn10]

looks like its worth a good $7.50

[Cop No. 633]

^wtf, how?

haha, that's what I'm wondering. I don't care about what Spike says outside of his films. The man knows controversy sells and I'm sure he just got a few asses in the theater just because of that manufactured feud. If it was enough to get some people riled up, they are the suckers.

This actually looks better than any of Clint's war films honestly. I like Clint, but his best work was Unforgiven and that was 16 years ago. Spike doesn't have a perfect record by any means but I'll take more of chance with him.

[the saw is family]

I'll have to wait for some reviews. It seems as though Spike Lee has made a black war movie JUST to prove a point. If that's all it is, then the movie is going to blow. I'll need to see if it actually runs a story or not.

what a ridiculous statement. the film is based on a novel that was first published over 5 years ago before spikes comments about eastwood and flags of our fathers. it is not an original spike lee creation, so it's not a black war movie just to prove a point:rolleyes:.

[Bourne101]

If Spike wasn't black, he wouldn't have adapted the novel. Simple as that. But I mean, that's how shit works. Most filmmakers that make films about history are going to make films that are historically important to them. OBVIOUSLY black history is VERY important to Spike Lee, so much that it leads to the dumb comments he made toward Eastwood.

But who really cares? Spike Lee is an idiot, but that's not going to keep me from enjoying his film. That is, if it is actually as good as it looks. There are plenty of filmmakers out there who are idiots, but a lot of them can make some damn good films.

[the saw is family]

If Spike wasn't black, he wouldn't have adapted the novel. Simple as that. But I mean, that's how shit works. Most filmmakers that make films about history are going to make films that are historically important to them. OBVIOUSLY black history is VERY important to Spike Lee, so much that it leads to the dumb comments he made toward Eastwood.

But who really cares? Spike Lee is an idiot, but that's not going to keep me from enjoying his film. That is, if it is actually as good as it looks. There are plenty of filmmakers out there who are idiots, but a lot of them can make some damn good films.

well if spike only adapts novels because he's black, or adapts things because they feature black characters then why did he adapt 25th hour? yes race is very important to spike lee, but i'm sick of people acting like it's the only factor when it comes to what films he makes.

[Cop No. 633]

If Spike wasn't black, he wouldn't have adapted the novel. Simple as that. But I mean, that's how shit works. Most filmmakers that make films about history are going to make films that are historically important to them. OBVIOUSLY black history is VERY important to Spike Lee, so much that it leads to the dumb comments he made toward Eastwood.

But who really cares? Spike Lee is an idiot, but that's not going to keep me from enjoying his film. That is, if it is actually as good as it looks. There are plenty of filmmakers out there who are idiots, but a lot of them can make some damn good films.

Who is the idiot here, the man who makes a film that many people will watch or the man who calls him an idiot and yet will still pay money to see said film? I'm not trying to be coy, but I just find it strange when people have hatred towards somebody and yet still pay to see their work. I despise Michael Bay's films, who might be the nicest guy on Earth, but you'd never catch me paying to see his movies. I think if you're going to take such a stance against somebody, you might as well go all the way and not just resort to talking trash on a message board and then giving your hard earned money to see the guy's work.

I don't think Spike's an idiot at all. He's gotten pretty heavy handed about things, but so have the rest of us and most people aren't nearly as talented. Besides, those comments directed at Eastwood gave this film even more press than if he hadn't said anything, so he's winning in the end with all this "controversy" he created. That's a smart move if you ask me.

[Smiert Spionam]

So why is Spike Lee so hated again?

[KingofKings2525]

Spike Lee is one of the greatest directors of our time.

[sbunn10]

I've found most of his films to be very entertaining and well made. I don't pay attention to anything he says really.

[Bourne101]

Who is the idiot here, the man who makes a film that many people will watch or the man who calls him an idiot and yet will still pay money to see said film? I'm not trying to be coy, but I just find it strange when people have hatred towards somebody and yet still pay to see their work. I despise Michael Bay's films, who might be the nicest guy on Earth, but you'd never catch me paying to see his movies. I think if you're going to take such a stance against somebody, you might as well go all the way and not just resort to talking trash on a message board and then giving your hard earned money to see the guy's work.

You realize that probably many films that you watch and enjoy are directed by idiots. It's pointless to just not see a movie because the filmmaker is an idiot. Shia LaBoeuf has done some dumb shit over the past year, but is that going to keep me from seeing some of his movies? No. Robert Downey Jr., mistakes? Yes. Am I going to not watch his films because of them? No. Did Mel Gibson make some mistakes? Yes. Does that mean that I can't enjoy Apocalypto, Passion of the Christ etc. No. I have no respect for holding grudges. I don't care if Mel Gibson is the worst person on the planet, the dude knows how to make a good flick and that's all I care about.

I don't think Spike's an idiot at all. He's gotten pretty heavy handed about things, but so have the rest of us and most people aren't nearly as talented. Besides, those comments directed at Eastwood gave this film even more press than if he hadn't said anything, so he's winning in the end with all this "controversy" he created. That's a smart move if you ask me.

So all the sudden he's not an idiot because he's talented and his absolutely ridiculously idiotic comments are promoting his film? That's like saying what Michael Richards said at that comedy club was okay, because in the end Seinfeld DVD sales went up.

Spike Lee is an idiot. No doubt about it.

[Bourne101]

So why is Spike Lee so hated again?

Because he doesn't know when to shut his mouth, and makes pointless, idiotic comments on a regular basis. The Eastwood comments were not the first. Lee has a long record of stupid comments, and I have zero respect for him when he's not behind the camera.

[Bourne101]

Spike Lee is one of the greatest directors of our time.

Really? I beg to differ, but to each his own.

His only great films are Do the Right Thing, Malcolm X, 25th Hour, and Inside Man. And really the only two of those that I'd ever watch again are 25th Hour and Inside Man. He has had A LOT of shitty films.

[the saw is family]

Really? I beg to differ, but to each his own.

His only great films are Do the Right Thing, Malcolm X, 25th Hour, and Inside Man. And really the only two of those that I'd ever watch again are 25th Hour and Inside Man. He has had A LOT of shitty films.

clockers, summer of sam, crooklyn, bamboozled, when the levees broke, he got game, jungle fever and mo better blues are all good films. especially clockers which is criminally underrated. he's had some missteps with girl 6 and she hate me, and i've never been a fan of school daze or she's gotta have it (although that was an important indie). i'd say his filmography stands among the best especially with as many films that he has under his belt.

[Bourne101]

clockers, summer of sam, crooklyn, bamboozled, when the levees broke, he got game, jungle fever and mo better blues are all good films.

That's a whole lot of meh. He Got Game and Summer of Sam weren't bad, but they weren't anything special. The rest are pretty crappy.

i'd say his filmography stands among the best especially with as many films that he has under his belt.

I could make a list of a shitload of filmmakers with a better filmography than Spike Lee.

[BananaDancer]

At the end of the day, I'm usually able to look past what Spike's opinions are and am able to recognize his talents as a director. Do I agree with half the things that come out of his mouth? No, but I do enjoy watching his movies. I'm really interested to see how he goes about directing "soldiers" in a war movie. I think it will be pretty fascinating to see how he handles the camera and dialog in such an intense setting.

[Cop No. 633]

You realize that probably many films that you watch and enjoy are directed by idiots. It's pointless to just not see a movie because the filmmaker is an idiot. Shia LaBoeuf has done some dumb shit over the past year, but is that going to keep me from seeing some of his movies? No. Robert Downey Jr., mistakes? Yes. Am I going to not watch his films because of them? No. Did Mel Gibson make some mistakes? Yes. Does that mean that I can't enjoy Apocalypto, Passion of the Christ etc. No. I have no respect for holding grudges. I don't care if Mel Gibson is the worst person on the planet, the dude knows how to make a good flick and that's all I care about.

I guess I'm different because I wouldn't pay to see a film if it starred or was directed by somebody I didn't respect or thought was a buffoon. I don't know, I'd feel dumb contributing to their pocket if I went to see their film. That's just me. I don't personally care about the private lives of actors/directors or what they're like, but if it was enough to really bother me, I honestly wouldn't pay to see their work.

So all the sudden he's not an idiot because he's talented and his absolutely ridiculously idiotic comments are promoting his film? That's like saying what Michael Richards said at that comedy club was okay, because in the end Seinfeld DVD sales went up.

Spike Lee is an idiot. No doubt about it.

Bad analogy because Michael Richards didn't spike any sales of the Seinfeld DVD. On top of that, what Richards said was beyond stupid, it was violent: "Fifty years ago we would have hung you by a tree." That's not just stupid, that's psychotic. Everyone knows Spike's comments built up to this film thus making many critics and people pay closer attention to a film that probably wouldn't have received the kind of attention it got if not for Spike himself secretly promoting this film with that stupid feud with Clint Eastwood. Like I said, it's a smart move on his part because it's got people like you pissed off but still wanting to see his film. Spike isn't an idiot. He's kept himself in the filmmaking game since the mid 80's. If he was an idiot, he would have disappeared after a few films.

I'm not supporting, nor defending what Spike said, I'm merely pointing out that he's not an idiot like you're painting him out to be. He was outspoken, but it's like that old saying: even bad press is good press.

[therealjohng]

I could make a list of a shitload of filmmakers with a better filmography than Spike Lee.


I'm all fucking ears.

[Bourne101]

I'm all fucking ears.

Oh let's see (these are all living obviously, or else my list would be pages and pages long)...

Martin Scorsese
Paul Thomas Anderson
Steven Spielberg
The Coen Brothers
Quentin Tarantino
Ridley Scott
Tim Burton
David Fincher
Frank Darabont
Francis Ford Coppola
Christopher Nolan
Clint Eastwood
Milos Forman
Sidney Lumet
Peter Jackson
Jonathan Demme
Sam Mendes
Guillermo Del Toro
Robert Zemeckis
James Cameron
Darren Aronofsky
David Lynch
Mel Gibson
Woody Allen
Oliver Stone
Michael Mann
Alfonso Cuarón
Danny Boyle
Brian De Palma
Edward Zwick

To name just a few.

[Bourne101]

but if it was enough to really bother me, I honestly wouldn't pay to see their work.

I don't let it bother me, it's just blatantly obvious that he's an idiot. You could say that about a lot of actors/directors, but to make it keep you from seeing their films is just pointless.

Everyone knows Spike's comments built up to this film thus making many critics and people pay closer attention to a film that probably wouldn't have received the kind of attention it got if not for Spike himself secretly promoting this film with that stupid feud with Clint Eastwood. Like I said, it's a smart move on his part because it's got people like you pissed off but still wanting to see his film. Spike isn't an idiot. He's kept himself in the filmmaking game since the mid 80's. If he was an idiot, he would have disappeared after a few films.

Sure, maybe it was smart, but that doesn't mean he's not an idiot. To say what Spike said to Clint Eastwood, promotional or not, was probably the dumbest thing I've heard in ages. And it's not like that's the only thing he's stirred up controversy about. Like Eastwood said, Spike needs to learn to shut his mouth.

If he was an idiot he would have disappeared after a few films? That makes no sense. There are many directors out there who are idiots, but make films on a yearly basis. They're smart and talented, but that doesn't mean that they're not idiots.

And I would be seeing Miracle at St. Anna regardless if Spike ever said anything

I'm not supporting, nor defending what Spike said, I'm merely pointing out that he's not an idiot like you're painting him out to be. He was outspoken, but it's like that old saying: even bad press is good press.

So you're saying that what Spike said was 100% to promote his film? You think that Spike doesn't actually believe what he said. You bet your ass he believed what he said, and it just shows how misguided he really is. Talented behind the camera, yes, but very, very misguided.

I guess we just have different views on what constitutes an "idiot". I think Spike Lee is an idiot, you don't. Enough said. End of story.

[sbunn10]

Oh let's see (these are all living obviously, or else my list would be pages and pages long)...

Martin Scorsese
Paul Thomas Anderson
Stephen Spielberg
The Coen Brothers
Quentin Tarantino
Ridley Scott
Tim Burton
David Fincher
Frank Darabont
Francis Ford Coppola
Christopher Nolan
Clint Eastwood
Milos Forman
Sidney Lumet
Peter Jackson
Jonathan Demme
Sam Mendes
Guillermo Del Toro
Robert Zemeckis
James Cameron
Darren Aronofsky
David Lynch
Mel Gibson
Woody Allen
Oliver Stone
Michael Mann
Alfonso Cuarón
Danny Boyle
Brian De Palma
Edward Zwick

To name just a few.

DAMN :)

I agree that Lee is a good filmmaker, but to say that he is better than most of these guys listed.... thats just wrong.

[Bourne101]

I agree that Lee is a good filmmaker, but to say that he is better than most of these guys listed.... thats just wrong.

Indeed.

[the saw is family]

That's a whole lot of meh. He Got Game and Summer of Sam weren't bad, but they weren't anything special. The rest are pretty crappy.



I could make a list of a shitload of filmmakers with a better filmography than Spike Lee.

i respect your opinion, but to say when the levees broke was meh seems ridiculous to me. how is a documentary about one of the most important events this decade and one of the greatest disasters in us history meh?

[Bourne101]

i respect your opinion, but to say when the levees broke was meh seems ridiculous to me. how is a documentary about one of the most important events this decade and one of the greatest disasters in us history meh?

I just didn't enjoy it. It was very preachy and boring. I can definitely see why people liked it, but it wasn't my cup of tea. I like a good documentary (check out The Corporation if you haven't already), but this just didn't do it for me. To each his own.

[therealjohng]

Martin Scorsese
Paul Thomas Anderson
Steven Spielberg
The Coen Brothers
Quentin Tarantino
Ridley Scott
Tim Burton
David Fincher
Frank Darabont
Francis Ford Coppola
Christopher Nolan
Clint Eastwood
Milos Forman
Sidney Lumet
Peter Jackson
Jonathan Demme
Sam Mendes
Guillermo Del Toro
Robert Zemeckis
James Cameron
Darren Aronofsky
David Lynch
Mel Gibson
Woody Allen
Oliver Stone
Michael Mann
Alfonso Cuarón
Danny Boyle
Brian De Palma
Edward Zwick



I'll give you Scorsese, Spielberg, Coens, Lumet, Eastwood and Allen. The rest of that list is full of great filmmakers but fucking seriously, better than Lee, hahah right. Mel Gibson? He's made two great movies and one big fucking clunker. Edward Zwick? Really? Really? Edward Zwick? Ok...

Cuaron has made one of the best films of all time in Children of Men, and the third Potter film is the best of the series, but other than that he really hasn't knocked one out of the park. DePalma WAS a great director but has since shit the bed. Danny Bolye is fantastic director, but he hasn't made a film up to the quality that Lee has.

Christopher Nolan? No. He is a great director, but he needs another decade under his belt and then we'll see. Fuck Robert Zemeckis, I'm not even gonna touch his filmography because it's an insult to include him with those others.

Tarantino is one of my favorite director but he's not as original as Lee. Ridley Scott is a great director, but I don't see him as vital to filmmaking as Lee is in the past 25 years.

I'll put Fincher in the same boat as Nolan. Darabont has made 3 great movies, but I don't see him as an important part of filmmaking, in terms of Lee's status.

Peter Jackson has made the LOTR trilogy. And that's about it....

Don't get me started on the fucking hack called Tim Burton who has made a career of remaking the same movie over and over. Mann has considerable talent, but I'm waiting for something big and grand for him again.



I will agree that Lee is a fucking idiot in life and just says shit because he can and know he'll get free press. But in terms of how great a filmmaker he is, he squashes 3/4 of the list you presented. In my opinion.

[scottmushroom]

I think I realized Spike Lee was a fuckhead when he tried to sue SpikeTV for "infringing on his image" or some bullshit....I guess he also went ahead and sued volleyball commentators, tentmakers, vampire hunters, bartenders, stock market analysts, sports shoes, and Spike Jonze too.....

[Bourne101]

I'll give you Scorsese, Spielberg, Coens, Lumet, Eastwood and Allen. The rest of that list is full of great filmmakers but fucking seriously, better than Lee, hahah right. Mel Gibson? He's made two great movies and one big fucking clunker. Edward Zwick? Really? Really? Edward Zwick? Ok...

Gibson has made The Man Without a Face, Braveheart, The Passion of the Christ, and Apocalypto. 4 films which I would watch in a heartbeat over any of Spike's films. But this is all coming down to a matter of opinion. I just can't see anything great outside of 25th Hour, Malcom X, Do the Right Thing, and Inside Man. Malcom X is more like a one time deal. You watch it, and move on with life. Inside Man and 25th Hour are really the only two with any re-watch value.

Zwick has Glory, Legends of the Fall, The Siege, The Last Samurai, and Blood Diamond. So even if he's not as good as Spike, he's not far behind.

Cuaron has made one of the best films of all time in Children of Men, and the third Potter film is the best of the series, but other than that he really hasn't knocked one out of the park. DePalma WAS a great director but has since shit the bed. Danny Bolye is fantastic director, but he hasn't made a film up to the quality that Lee has.

Cuaron has more than just Potter and Men. Love in the Time of Hysteria, A Little Princess, and Y Tu Mamá También are all excellent films. Spike Lee has just as many or more pieces of shit as De Palma. There's really no denying that. Danny Boyle has Shallow Grave, Trainspotting, 28 Days Later, Millions, and Sunshine. Maybe not yet, but eventually, his track record will own the fuck out of Spike Lee. And I would say Trainspotting is better than ANY of Spike Lee's films.

Christopher Nolan? No. He is a great director, but he needs another decade under his belt and then we'll see. Fuck Robert Zemeckis, I'm not even gonna touch his filmography because it's an insult to include him with those others.

I would definitely say Nolan is already better than Lee. Look at his filmography... The Following, Memento, Insomnia, Batman Begins, The Prestige, and The Dark Knight. Not one bad film, while Lee has handfuls.

Tarantino is one of my favorite director but he's not as original as Lee. Ridley Scott is a great director, but I don't see him as vital to filmmaking as Lee is in the past 25 years.

Not as original as Lee. A lot of Lee's work is just adapted novels, which isn't original. And I don't think there is any arguing that Scott is better. The Duellists, Alien, Blade Runner, Thelma & Louise, Gladiator, Hannibal, Black Hawk Down, Matchstick Men, Kingdom of Heaven (director's cut is brilliant), and American Gangster. He also has two potential great films coming out in Body of Lies and Nottingham, and a potential MASTERPIECE in Blood Meridian.

I'll put Fincher in the same boat as Nolan.

Lee may be more important than some of these directors, but that doesn't necessarily make him better. Fincher has Se7en, The Game, Fight Club, Panic Room, and Zodiac. With also the potential masterpiece The Curious Case of Benjamin Button. I agree, he will need some more time, but the guy has been nearly flawless in his short film career. Even Panic Room which was just a basic, simple thriller, was superb.

I will agree that Lee is a fucking idiot in life and just says shit because he can and know he'll get free press. But in terms of how great a filmmaker he is, he squashes 3/4 of the list you presented. In my opinion.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I think Spike is a solid filmmaker, but he has way too many duds compared to his 4-6 good or great films.

[Danger^Cart]

haha, that's what I'm wondering. I don't care about what Spike says outside of his films. The man knows controversy sells and I'm sure he just got a few asses in the theater just because of that manufactured feud. If it was enough to get some people riled up, they are the suckers.



Okay, so he's not just a racist self-involved asshole, but a manipulative one at that.

[BananaDancer]

I'm still just really interested to how Lee directs a war film, you know? Sort of like when Oliver Stone did Platoon or Edward Zwick ( a favorite of mine) did Glory. I'm a fan of most of Spikes work, but I think it will be cool to see his first stab at in the war genre.

[NathanRomano]

Excited for this for sure. Looks like another great Spike Lee movie

[Cop No. 633]

Okay, so he's not just a racist self-involved asshole, but a manipulative one at that.

I'm curious, what is the most racist thing Spike's ever done? I want to know. I'm not trying to say what he did was right. Hell, I can respect that he's a manipulative bastard because I'm a director and that's in our nature. Like I said, I personally don't care about a man's personal life when it comes to films... do we take away from Salvador Dahli's genius because he was an abusive man who was cruel to the women in his life? I'm not about to do that. I critique the work. Besides, I don't think anybody is perfect by any means so I'm not going to go out of my way to judge somebody who I respect at least on an artistic level.

I genuinely want to see this movie. I think it will be another solid work from Spike Lee.

[Lawgick]

Since I don't watch the news very often I didn't know anything about this Lee/Eastwood fued so I went and got caught up on it. With all the hatred I saw in here towards Lee and his supposed stupidity I really expected to find him being a complete and total asshole when I did my research.

Sadly, but not surprisingly, this is just another case of blacks being told to STFU about racism in its modern form. Spike Lee did not disrespect or insult Eastwood, he just pointed out Historical inaccuracy in his films. It was Eastwood that got insulting. So why is it that Lee is the one being attacked? What's with all the knee-jerk reactions?

I swear it seems that people just want blacks to act like nothing happened and everything is fine now. Racism doesn't happen, its no big deal, your overly sensitive. Rarely do you ever see any support for those that point out racism. This is nonsense.:rolleyes:

[Bourne101]

Sadly, but not surprisingly, this is just another case of blacks being told to STFU about racism in its modern form. Spike Lee did not disrespect or insult Eastwood, he just pointed out Historical inaccuracy in his films. It was Eastwood that got insulting. So why is it that Lee is the one being attacked? What's with all the knee-jerk reactions?

Please tell me how it was a historical inaccuracy? In terms of Flags of Our Fathers, were any of the flag raisers black? No. So why the fuck would there need to be black actors? The movie's focus is on the soldiers who raised the flag, not some black soldiers who had nothing to do with raising the flag. In terms of Letters from Iwo Jima, the film is about JAPANESE soldiers. The whole fucking movie. But by your logic, we should throw some black actors in amongst the Japanese actors, just for a little equality. That's fucking bullshit. For Spike Lee to condemn Eastwood for not depicting black soldiers is worthy of every insult that Eastwood threw at Lee. Eastwood was not racist for a second in the making of the Iwo Jima series.

This is nonsense.:rolleyes:

The only nonsense is Lee's idiotic comments which he made toward Eastwood.

[Lawgick]

Please tell me how it was a historical inaccuracy? In terms of Flags of Our Fathers, were any of the flag raisers black? No. So why the fuck would there need to be black actors? The movie's focus is on the soldiers who raised the flag, not some black soldiers who had nothing to do with raising the flag. In terms of Letters from Iwo Jima, the film is about JAPANESE soldiers. The whole fucking movie. But by your logic, we should throw some black actors in amongst the Japanese actors, just for a little equality. That's fucking bullshit. For Spike Lee to condemn Eastwood for not depicting black soldiers is worthy of every insult that Eastwood threw at Lee. Eastwood was not racist for a second in the making of the Iwo Jima series.



The only nonsense is Lee's idiotic comments which he made toward Eastwood.

Actually Spike Lee was not talking about the soldiers holding the flag. He was talking about the thousands of soldiers on the battlefield. 900 black soldiers were involved in that battle and many of them were handling ammunition on that battlefield. So the question is where are they? That's the problem...that's always the problem. Those black soldiers put their lives on the line just like everyone else and they earned their place in these historical films. I understand why they were marginalized 50 years ago...racism. Now they're being marginalized by what? Racism? Ignorance? Both sorry excuses.

As for Letters From Iow Jima, I haven't seen it yet so I'll reserve judgement.

Again I say...nonsense.

[Bourne101]

Actually Spike Lee was not talking about the soldiers holding the flag. He was talking about the thousands of soldiers on the battlefield. 900 black soldiers were involved in that battle and many of them were handling ammunition on that battlefield. So the question is where are they? That's the problem...that's always the problem. Those black soldiers put their lives on the line just like everyone else and they earned their place in these historical films. I understand why they were marginalized 50 years ago...racism. Now they're being marginalized by what? Racism? Ignorance? Both sorry excuses.

But there were only about 1 or 2 sequences on the battlefield in which only a few soldiers were shown. This movie wasn't about the battlefield, it was about the men who raised the flag and how it affected their lives. It's obvious you didn't understand the intentions of the film. You're simply wrong on all matters of your argument.

And to make your argument even more useless, a crystal clear still from the great film, Flags of Our Fathers...

http://nymag.com/daily/entertainment/images/soldiers.jpg

Again I say...nonsense.

And again, you're simply wrong. You didn't understand the intentions of the film, and there WERE African-American actors portraying soldiers in Flags of Our Fathers anyway.

[Lawgick]

But there were only about 1 or 2 sequences on the battlefield in which only a few soldiers were shown. This movie wasn't about the battlefield, it was about the men who raised the flag and how it affected their lives. It's obvious you didn't understand the intentions of the film. You're simply wrong on all matters of your argument.

And to make your argument even more useless, a crystal clear still from the great film, Flags of Our Fathers...

http://nymag.com/daily/entertainment/images/soldiers.jpg



And again, you're simply wrong. You didn't understand the intentions of the film, and there WERE African-American actors portraying soldiers in Flags of Our Fathers anyway.


http://www.freewebs.com/theallmightycow/PWNED!.JPG

[drc5145]

Oh let's see (these are all living obviously, or else my list would be pages and pages long)...

Martin Scorsese
Paul Thomas Anderson
Steven Spielberg
The Coen Brothers
Quentin Tarantino
Ridley Scott
Tim Burton
David Fincher
Frank Darabont
Francis Ford Coppola
Christopher Nolan
Clint Eastwood
Milos Forman
Sidney Lumet
Peter Jackson
Jonathan Demme
Sam Mendes
Guillermo Del Toro
Robert Zemeckis
James Cameron
Darren Aronofsky
David Lynch
Mel Gibson
Woody Allen
Oliver Stone
Michael Mann
Alfonso Cuarón
Danny Boyle
Brian De Palma
Edward Zwick

To name just a few.

Of These ones...Okay, Lee is definitely better than Gibson, I'm not sure about Zwick and Boyle, though boyle did sunshine and Trainspotting so I deserves some recognition.

I think Lee is a great Director and deserves a mention when talking about fantastic directors. But he really does have a knack for saying some really wild stuff I may or may not agree with.

[FireCaptain4]

http://www.freewebs.com/theallmightycow/PWNED!.JPG

Hahahaha!

Wait... what?

Well, at least you admit you got your ass handed to you.

[Robot]

Gibson has made The Man Without a Face, Braveheart, The Passion of the Christ, and Apocalypto. 4 films which I would watch in a heartbeat over any of Spike's films. But this is all coming down to a matter of opinion. I just can't see anything great outside of 25th Hour, Malcom X, Do the Right Thing, and Inside Man. Malcom X is more like a one time deal. You watch it, and move on with life. Inside Man and 25th Hour are really the only two with any re-watch value.

Zwick has Glory, Legends of the Fall, The Siege, The Last Samurai, and Blood Diamond. So even if he's not as good as Spike, he's not far behind.



Cuaron has more than just Potter and Men. Love in the Time of Hysteria, A Little Princess, and Y Tu Mamá También are all excellent films. Spike Lee has just as many or more pieces of shit as De Palma. There's really no denying that. Danny Boyle has Shallow Grave, Trainspotting, 28 Days Later, Millions, and Sunshine. Maybe not yet, but eventually, his track record will own the fuck out of Spike Lee. And I would say Trainspotting is better than ANY of Spike Lee's films.



I would definitely say Nolan is already better than Lee. Look at his filmography... The Following, Memento, Insomnia, Batman Begins, The Prestige, and The Dark Knight. Not one bad film, while Lee has handfuls.



Not as original as Lee. A lot of Lee's work is just adapted novels, which isn't original. And I don't think there is any arguing that Scott is better. The Duellists, Alien, Blade Runner, Thelma & Louise, Gladiator, Hannibal, Black Hawk Down, Matchstick Men, Kingdom of Heaven (director's cut is brilliant), and American Gangster. He also has two potential great films coming out in Body of Lies and Nottingham, and a potential MASTERPIECE in Blood Meridian.



Lee may be more important than some of these directors, but that doesn't necessarily make him better. Fincher has Se7en, The Game, Fight Club, Panic Room, and Zodiac. With also the potential masterpiece The Curious Case of Benjamin Button. I agree, he will need some more time, but the guy has been nearly flawless in his short film career. Even Panic Room which was just a basic, simple thriller, was superb.



I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I think Spike is a solid filmmaker, but he has way too many duds compared to his 4-6 good or great films.


I really don't have anything to add to this already finely established discussion, but I will say I agree with everything you said in this post Bourne101.

I've seen the preview for Miracle at St.Anna several times at the theater now and it does seem interesting enough to warrant a trip to the theater. The only thing that bugged me during the trailer is there is a shot of all the main actors standing together and I didn't understand why it was thrown in there the way it was. Otherwise, this could turn out to be a very solid effort.

[Ron34]

im feeling alot of negative energy in this room. lets put that aside and focus on the film.

the film looks good and i cant wait to see.

[Cosimo]

the first half of the trailer was well handled till that music kicked in. the last shot was cool too

[Lawgick]

Hahahaha!

Wait... what?

Well, at least you admit you got your ass handed to you.

LoL, no need to be a douche about it guy! If I'm wrong I'm wrong. What am I gonna do, cry? Its the intraweb!:p :D

[Triadkd]

Oh let's see (these are all living obviously, or else my list would be pages and pages long)...

Martin Scorsese- Agree
Paul Thomas Anderson-Disagree
Steven Spielberg- Agree
The Coen Brothers-Disagree Most of their films are "quirky" fluff
Quentin Tarantino-Disagree Entertaining but no substance
Ridley Scott-Disagree. A glorified Michael Bay
Tim Burton-Disagree
David Fincher-Disagree Talented but not their yet
Frank Darabont-Disagree Lifetime orignal movies with a higher budget
Francis Ford Coppola-Agree Brilliant AN is my favorite war film
Christopher Nolan-Disagree
Clint Eastwood-Disagree People seem to get off on this guy squinting. I don't
Milos Forman-Disagree
Sidney Lumet-Agree
Peter Jackson-WTF?!? Disagree.
Jonathan Demme-Disagree
Sam Mendes-Disagree
Guillermo Del Toro-Disagree
Robert Zemeckis-:rolleyes:
James Cameron- Agree
Darren Aronofsky-Disagree
David Lynch-Disagree
Mel Gibson-Disagree
Woody Allen-Disagree
Oliver Stone-Disagree
Michael Mann-Agree My favorite
Alfonso Cuarón-Disagree
Danny Boyle-Disagree
Brian De Palma-:rolleyes:
Edward Zwick-:rolleyes:

To name just a few.

I enjoy fantasy/science fiction but I do not hold the films or directors in as high regard as most of you seem to do. Cameron is pretty much the only American director to make good films that just happen to be sci-fi. I think Spike Lee is a brilliant director and I can't wait to see this.

[Nutcracker]

I enjoy fantasy/science fiction but I do not hold the films or directors in as high regard as most of you seem to do. Cameron is pretty much the only American director to make good films that just happen to be sci-fi. I think Spike Lee is a brilliant director and I can't wait to see this.

Agreed. I took one look at that list, and started shaking my head. If most of those guy are better than Lee, then original filmmaking has truly gone to shit.

Genre directors are automatically overrated on sites like this. I enjoy nerd appeal movies as much as the next guy, but that doesn't mean Christopher Nolan is the second coming of Stanely Kubrick. Maybe Lee doesn't generally make movies designed to appeal to 16-35 year old white males (INSIDE MAN and 25TH HOUR excepted) that dominate opinion on geek sites, but I can appreciate it all the same. His filmography is teeming with undervalued gems like CROOKLYN, CLOCKERS, HE GOT GAME (better than 25th hour, imho, but without as much appeal to white people), MO BETTER BLUES ect. And on the basis of 4 LITTLE GIRLS, THE ORIGINAL KINGS OF COMEDY and WHEN THE LEVEES BROKE, I'd class him among the top 5 documentary filmmakers currently working. He's a well rounded talent. It's sad to think that people would probably appreciate Lee more if he put his tremendous gifts to service a BATMAN movie or some Sci-fi actioner. He also needs to make more movies about white people and their problems, like 25TH HOUR. I'm sure that would add to his replay value.Heh!

Lee is an incredible director, with distinct style and vision. And contrary to the stated opinion, the only "bad" movie Lee has made is the atrocious GIRL 6. SHE HATE ME was an interesting failure, and about 10 times more interesting and thought provoking than the bland, middle-brow crap usually foisted upon the world by the likes of Frank "I blew my wad with Shawshank" Darabont and Edward Zwick. Oliver Stone is more inconsistent than Lee, with a higher perctantage of rotten films on RT than Lee (and Lee has made more movies). Burton and Tarantino define "style over substance". Brian DePalma is an overrated hack who spent his entire career ripping off Hitchcock (sorry, "homage") before running out of ideas...and he's supposed to be better than Lee.:(

[Bourne101]

Agreed. I took one look at that list, and started shaking my head. If most of those guy are better than Lee, then original filmmaking has truly gone to shit.

Hahaha, and Lee is more original than most of those people listed? You realize Lee usually adapts novels or directs screenplays written by other people, right? The last screenplay he wrote was She Hate Me which was a fucking load of crap. Take another long look at that list.

It's sad to think that people would probably appreciate Lee more if he put his tremendous gifts to service a BATMAN movie or some Sci-fi actioner.

What are you talking about? First of all, Christopher Nolan has directed more than just Batman. Have you seen Memento, Insomnia, The Prestige, and Following. All films I would watch in a heartbeat over ANY of Lee's films. And you realize that there are only like four or five directors on that list that have been involved with Sci-Fi films, and they have all made plenty of other films that are not Sci-Fi.

And contrary to the stated opinion, the only "bad" movie Lee has made is the atrocious GIRL 6. SHE HATE ME was an interesting failure

Uh, have you even looked at his filmography or watched all of his films? He has had many horrible films...

Joe's Bed-Stuy Barbershop: We Cut Heads
She's Gotta Have It
School Daze
Mo' Better Blues
Crooklyn
Girl 6
The Original Kings of Comedy
Bamboozled
She Hate Me

Among others that aren't very good..

[Bourne101]

Martin Scorsese- Agree
Paul Thomas Anderson-Disagree Each of his films are better than ANYTHING that Lee has done
Steven Spielberg- Agree
The Coen Brothers-Disagree Most of their films are "quirky" fluff They are better filmmakers than Spike Lee
Quentin Tarantino-Disagree Entertaining but no substance Hahahhahah
Ridley Scott-Disagree. A glorified Michael Bay WHAT THE FUCK??? What are you talking about?
Tim Burton-Disagree
David Fincher-Disagree Talented but not their yet All of his films, save for The Game are better than anything that Lee has done
Frank Darabont-Disagree Lifetime orignal movies with a higher budget I disagree
Francis Ford Coppola-Agree Brilliant AN is my favorite war film
Christopher Nolan-Disagree
Clint Eastwood-Disagree People seem to get off on this guy squinting. I don't Eastwood is a better filmmaker than Lee, hands down, no question
Milos Forman-Disagree
Sidney Lumet-Agree
Peter Jackson-WTF?!? Disagree.
Jonathan Demme-Disagree
Sam Mendes-Disagree
Guillermo Del Toro-Disagree
Robert Zemeckis-
James Cameron- Agree
Darren Aronofsky-Disagree Pi + Requiem for a Dream = better than anything Lee has done
David Lynch-Disagree I assume you haven't seen all of his films
Mel Gibson-Disagree
Woody Allen-Disagree
Oliver Stone-Disagree
Michael Mann-Agree My favorite
Alfonso Cuarón-Disagree
Danny Boyle-Disagree
Brian De Palma-
Edward Zwick-

To name just a few.

I enjoy fantasy/science fiction but I do not hold the films or directors in as high regard as most of you seem to do. Cameron is pretty much the only American director to make good films that just happen to be sci-fi. I think Spike Lee is a brilliant director and I can't wait to see this.

You realize that there aren't very many science fiction directors on that list. And the ones that have directed science fiction have also directed many other genres.

[Bourne101]

SHE HATE ME was an interesting failure, and about 10 times more interesting and thought provoking than the bland, middle-brow crap usually foisted upon the world by the likes of Frank "I blew my wad with Shawshank" Darabont and Edward Zwick. Oliver Stone is more inconsistent than Lee, with a higher perctantage of rotten films on RT than Lee (and Lee has made more movies). Burton and Tarantino define "style over substance". Brian DePalma is an overrated hack who spent his entire career ripping off Hitchcock (sorry, "homage") before running out of ideas...and he's supposed to be better than Lee.:(

Have you seen The Green Mile or The Mist? The Mist is arguably the best horror film of the decade, and The Green Mile IMO is better than anything that Lee has done. Not to mention that Shawshank absolutely owns anything that Lee has done. Edward Zwick has Glory, Legends of the Fall, The Last Samurai, Blood Diamond, and the fantastic looking upcoming film Defiance. All of those films better than most of Lee's work, and certainly better than the last shit I took a little while ago entitled She Hate Me. Oliver Stone has had a few duds, but not as many as Lee and he is far more consistent than Lee. Platoon, Natural Born Killers, and JFK are better than all of Lee's films. Burton has a certain style, but that doesn't mean he doesn't have substance in his films. I think you're simply overlooking the substance in his films. Same with Tarantino. All of Tarantino's films, save for Death Proof are better than all of Lee's films. Scarface, The Untouchables, and Carlito's Way are better than anything Lee has done.

[Nutcracker]

I'm seriously starting to suspect you haven't seen that many of Lee's films. Don't worry. You wouldn't be the first. It's pretty common for people with limited first-hand knowledge of Lee's filmography to dismiss his entire output, simply because they think he's an uppity prick. You wouldn't be the first, and you won't be the last.

I've watched the majority of Lee's films, so unlike you, I actully know what I'm talking about. I'm not just trolling IMDB checking which of his films have low user ratings, and claiming that they are "bad" on that basis.

Who the fuck has even seen JOE BED STUY BARBERSHOP; WE CUT HEADS? I haven't (and I'm a Lee fan), and I'm pretty sure you haven't either (unless you are some super-Lee afficionado who religiously hunts down absolutely everything he's done). It's a student thesis film that Lee made in College, not an officially released feature length film. To claim it as part of his professional filmography is ludicrous. I don't know if it's bad, because I've never seen it. Yet you list an obscure first student film (that you've never seen and isn't even available on home video) as "evidence" that Lee is a bad fillmmaker. You, my friend, are full of it. If you are pulling this sort of stuff, how is anyone supposed to believe you've seen most of his stuff? Lee's professional feature length debut was SHE'S GOTTA HAVE IT. If you want to sound believable as some sort of authority on his work, you'd be better off scrubbing JOE BED STUY off whatever or IMDB or Spike Lee google search you found it on, and pretend it doesn't exist. Because it's a sure sign that you are talking about stuff you haven't seen.

Of all the alleged "bad" Lee movies you listed (excluding the student film I'm 99.9% certain you've never seen, and which doesn't have an RT rating because most critics never reviewed it either) only 3 of them have "rotten" ratings on Rotten Tomatoes. THE ORIGINAL KINGS OF COMEDY (83% on RT) was a critically acclaimed documentary that was nominated for a major documentary award (like most of Lee's documemtaries). It may not be to your taste (a documentary about black comedians), and I have my doubts that you've seen it at all, but it was critically regarded as a first-rate film. Same for SHE'S GOTTA HAVE IT (93% RT) and MO' BETTER BLUES (83% RT) and CROOKLYN (82% RT). SCHOOL DAZE isn't as highly rated, but it was no critical failure either (62% RT).

BAMBOOZLED, GIRL 6 and SHE HATE ME are about the only negatively reviewed films he's directed.

Of the 24 feature films Lee has directed to date (including documentaries), he's only had 4 critical failures (4 rotten on RT). Do you realise what a ridiculous percentage that is, considering how prolific he is. He's directed 24 movies and only got poor critical reviews for 4 of them. He's one of the most consistent directors of the past 20 years, critically speaking. People make a big deal when he gets a critical trashing, because it so rarely happens. Oliver Stone, whom you claim to be more "consistent" has directed 16 feature films, and 8 of them are rotten on RT. Half of the films Stone has directed got bad reviews. Lee has directed far more than him, and still has less critical duds to his name.

It's clear that his subject matter or whatever isn't to your taste. You may be outside the demographic he usually covers. But critically speaking, he has very few "bad" films to his name. You haven't really got critical consensus on your side, just, so the thrust of your argument basically amounts to "Spike Lee's movies are bad, cuz I said so".

You need to do better.

[bigred760]

I haven't seen many of Lee's films . . . not my cup of tea. I enjoyed Malcolm X, He Got Game, and Inside Man, but most of his other movies don't seem that appealing to me.

But the man has talent. You don't direct movies for 25+ years without making a mark on Hollywood. He is arguably the most famous black director in movie history.

I wouldn't compare him to that many directors because his movies are, for the most part, HIS movies. They are the movie HE wanted to make, including Miracle at St. Anna.

One of my biggest issues with the guy is he can't seem to keep his mouth shut about anything . . . which sometimes gets him in trouble.

[Nutcracker]

Hahaha, and Lee is more original than most of those people listed? You realize Lee usually adapts novels or directs screenplays written by other people, right? The last screenplay he wrote was She Hate Me which was a fucking load of crap. Take another long look at that list.



What are you talking about? First of all, Christopher Nolan has directed more than just Batman. Have you seen Memento, Insomnia, The Prestige, and Following. All films I would watch in a heartbeat over ANY of Lee's films. And you realize that there are only like four or five directors on that list that have been involved with Sci-Fi films, and they have all made plenty of other films that are not Sci-Fi.



Uh, have you even looked at his filmography or watched all of his films? He has had many horrible films...

Joe's Bed-Stuy Barbershop: We Cut Heads
She's Gotta Have It
School Daze
Mo' Better Blues
Crooklyn
Girl 6
The Original Kings of Comedy
Bamboozled
She Hate Me

Among others that aren't very good..

Where are you getting this stuff? Firstly, adapted material has nothing to do with orginality as a director. Kubrick adapted just about everything he did from novels and such, but he distilled them in an orginal vision that was all his own.

Secondly, in spite of that point being largely irrelevant, Lee's has written original scripts for at least 10 of his fiction feature films (including his Best Original Screenplay Academy Award nominated screenplay for DO THE RIGHT THING). I'd hazard a guess that other than Woody Allen on your list of "superior directors", no other director has written as many original screenplays that they directed as Lee. That doesn't in itself make him a better director than those who don't write many original screenplays, but it does make your point seem somewhat...pointless. He adapts screenplays, uses other writers and writes original stuff in equal measure....so what?

[Bourne101]

I'm seriously starting to suspect you haven't seen that many of Lee's films. Don't worry. You wouldn't be the first. It's pretty common for people with limited first-hand knowledge of Lee's filmography to dismiss his entire output, simply because they think he's an uppity prick. You wouldn't be the first, and you won't be the last.

I have seen most of his films, and I dislike the majority of them. The only ones that I think are great films are 25th Hour, Inside Man, Malcom X, and Do the Right Thing. He has other good ones, but nothing spectacular. I also believe he has not one masterpiece. All of his films have flaws, and none are worthy of a 10 rating. You talk like you know me, yet you don't know what the fuck you are talking about. I've seen most of Lee's films, why the hell would I be even talking right now if I didn't? Why would I waste my time debating with you, Mr. I Love Spike Lee?

I've watched the majority of Lee's films, so unlike you, I actully know what I'm talking about. I'm not just trolling IMDB checking which of his films have low user ratings, and claiming that they are "bad" on that basis.

Wow dude, what the fuck are you talking about. You completely just contradicted yourself. You hand out some IMDB worthy insults and then say that you aren't that of an IMDB troll. And I have seen as many, possibly more Spike Lee films than you have, so I have just as much of a right to discuss this as you. Get over yourself.

Who the fuck has even seen JOE BED STUY BARBERSHOP; WE CUT HEADS? I haven't (and I'm a Lee fan), and I'm pretty sure you haven't either (unless you are some super-Lee afficionado who religiously hunts down absolutely everything he's done). It's a student thesis film that Lee made in College, not an officially released feature length film. To claim it as part of his professional filmography is ludicrous. I don't know if it's bad, because I've never seen it. Yet you list an obscure first student film (that you've never seen and isn't even available on home video) as "evidence" that Lee is a bad fillmmaker. You, my friend, are full of it. If you are pulling this sort of stuff, how is anyone supposed to believe you've seen most of his stuff?

Hahaha, man, you crack me up. Your claims toward me are fucking ludicrous. You can find directors' college films and amateur films all over the internet. Being the avid movie fan that I am, I love to search around looking for old college and amateur films of today's famous directors. I saw Joe's Bed Stuy probably back in 2006, and although you are right in saying that it shouldn't be included in his filmography, it still is fucking garbage, regardless of when he made it.

Of all the alleged "bad" Lee movies you listed (excluding the student film I'm 99.9% certain you've never seen, and which doesn't have an RT rating because most critics never reviewed it either) only 3 of them have "rotten" ratings on Rotten Tomatoes. THE ORIGINAL KINGS OF COMEDY (83% on RT) was a critically acclaimed documentary that was nominated for a major documentary award (like most of Lee's documemtaries). It may not be to your taste (a documentary about black comedians), and I have my doubts that you've seen it at all, but it was critically regarded as a first-rate film. Same for SHE'S GOTTA HAVE IT (93% RT) and MO' BETTER BLUES (83% RT) and CROOKLYN (82% RT). SCHOOL DAZE isn't as highly rated, but it was no critical failure either (62% RT).

BAMBOOZLED, GIRL 6 and SHE HATE ME are about the only negatively reviewed films he's directed.

Regardless of these RT ratings, which aren't exactly accurate because most of them don't even have enough reviews to have a general consensus, most of these films that are considered "good", aren't "great". A director can make 100 "good" films, but when he only has 4 "great" films, 2 of which I will never watch again in my life, one of which may not be able to be even considered great, he simply can't be considered one of the best directors working today. Most of his films are preachy, boring, and heavily flawed.

It's clear that his subject matter or whatever isn't to your taste. You may be outside the demographic he usually covers. But critically speaking, he has very few "bad" films to his name. You haven't really got critical consensus on your side, just, so the thrust of your argument basically amounts to "Spike Lee's movies are bad, cuz I said so".

Critical consensus? There aren't enough reviews for most of his films to deem a general consensus, and of the films that have received enough reviews 4 of those films have been deemed "shit". Even if they had received enough reviews, it wouldn't matter. This is my opinion, one side of a debate, you implying that I'm wrong because I don't like some of these movies is simply stupid. As of late, in 2006 he had Inside Man and in 2004 he had 25th Hour. Before that, his latest great film was Malcom X in 1992. Out of the last 10 years, I would take Paul Thomas Anderson's track record of Boogie Nights, Magnolia, Punch Drunk Love, and There Will Be Blood over Lee's past 10 year track record any day. And those four Anderson films are better than anything Lee has done, no question.

You need to do better.

No, you need to show a little bit of respect and stop talking out of your ass. If you're going to keep throwing this personal shit toward me, then there might as well not be a discussion about this subject. Keep it strictly to films, not saying what you want to believe to feel better about yourself Nutcracker.

[Bourne101]

Where are you getting this stuff? Firstly, adapted material has nothing to do with orginality as a director. Kubrick adapted just about everything he did from novels and such, but he distilled them in an original vision that was all his own.

It's an original vision, but that does not mean original material. Spike Lee often takes the works of other writers, adapts it, and puts it on film. That's fine, many directors do it and do it well. Lee has done it well. But that does not mean that he is the most original filmmaker out there today. The most original filmmakers are the ones who write and direct all of their films. Does that make them better? No. But adapting material does not make it your original work. Maybe from a visual standpoint, but not from a material standpoint.

Secondly, in spite of that point being largely irrelevant, Lee's has written original scripts for at least 10 of his fiction feature films (including his Best Original Screenplay Academy Award nominated screenplay for DO THE RIGHT THING).

Actually, I believe Lee has only written 7 original screenplays (possibly 8), with the last decent one being He Got Game in 1998. And he's only been associated with 12 screenplays, not including Joe's Bed Stuy, with his last one being the dreadful She Hate Me. He had nothing to do with writing Inside Man or 25th Hour. Two of the four great films that he has made.

[Triadkd]

You realize that there aren't very many science fiction directors on that list. And the ones that have directed science fiction have also directed many other genres.

Look neither of us are going to change the others mind, but you and other Lee haters need more than this to dismiss a great film maker because "racist uppity" black men scare you. :rolleyes: If you can't handle a film that tackles real world solutions without easy answers than go watch Batman. You can't just dismiss films like crooklyn and he got game because you can't relate to black people, or think their issues are important.

[Bourne101]

Look neither of us are going to change the others mind, but you and other Lee haters need more than this to dismiss a great film maker because "racist uppity" black men scare you. :rolleyes: If you can't handle a film that tackles real world solutions without easy answers than go watch Batman. You can't just dismiss films like crooklyn and he got game because you can't relate to black people, or think their issues are important.

Haha, what the fuck?

First of all, I'm not a Lee hater from a directorial standpoint. Do the Right Thing, Malcolm X, 25th Hour, and Inside Man are all great films. I just don't think he is at the top of the list of directors working today. I don't dismiss any film no matter who directs it (you'd know this if you read previous posts in this thread). And "racist uppity" black men aren't exactly scary. That comment was completely unnecessary. Can't handle a film that tackles real world solutions? What the fuck are you talking about. Because I don't always enjoy Lee's preachy style, I'm all the sudden a dumbass who can only handle Batman films? Wow, you really need a reality check man. There are far more complex and important films out there, many of which I have seen, enjoyed and understood. Have you seen A Clockwork Orange, Schindler's List, Citizen Kane, or Magnolia? Four films right there, more complex than any of Lee's films, and I have seen, enjoyed the hell out of, and understood the complexities of each one. But, all the sudden because I don't enjoy a couple of Spike Lee blaxploitation films, I all the sudden can only enjoy Batman films?

This is laughable.

You can't just dismiss films like crooklyn and he got game because you can't relate to black people, or think their issues are important.

I can dismiss any film I want, as can anyone else in this world. In my opinion Crooklyn is a medicore film, and He Got Game is just a solid film. Relating to black people has nothing to do with it. There are plenty of blaxploitation films which I enjoy, Lee has some I do enjoy, and some I don't enjoy. That's life, it's called an opinion.

[AceD]

"Regardless of these RT ratings, which aren't exactly accurate because most of them don't even have enough reviews to have a general consensus, most of these films that are considered "good", aren't "great". A director can make 100 "good" films, but when he only has 4 "great" films, 2 of which I will never watch again in my life, one of which may not be able to be even considered great, he simply can't be considered one of the best directors working today. Most of his films are preachy, boring, and heavily flawed."

I disagree with your premise that Lee isn't one of the two or three best directors of his time, but I like the point here. Here's my counter: In my opinion, Do the Right Thing and Malcolm X are SO great that they in and of themselves put him ahead of most of the directors you mentioned. The only films by the directors you mentioned that are in the same stratosphere as Right Thing and X are:

Goodfellas
Magnolia
Schindler's List & SPR
Fargo
Shawshank
Children of Men
The Godfather part II

For me, that's it. I think Spielberg is the only other director of this era who has made two films that are true, beginning-to-end masterpieces. Which is not in ANY way meant to take anything away from most of the people you mentioned, since most of them have made wonderful films. But Lee's ability to make such epicly great films, as a black man in an industry that doesn't like him, is mind boggling to me. I like the guy more than you do, and that's fine, but that's my argument as to why he's among the best ever, and many you mentioned are not (yet).

[AshleysDad]

disagree with your premise that Lee isn't one of the two or three best directors of his time, but I like the point here. Here's my counter: In my opinion, Do the Right Thing and Malcolm X are SO great that they in and of themselves put him ahead of most of the directors you mentioned. The only films by the directors you mentioned that are in the same stratosphere as Right Thing and X are:

Goodfellas
Magnolia
Schindler's List & SPR
Fargo
Shawshank
Children of Men
The Godfather part II

For me, that's it. I think Spielberg is the only other director of this era who has made two films that are true, beginning-to-end masterpieces. Which is not in ANY way meant to take anything away from most of the people you mentioned, since most of them have made wonderful films. But Lee's ability to make such epicly great films, as a black man in an industry that doesn't like him, is mind boggling to me. I like the guy more than you do, and that's fine, but that's my argument as to why he's among the best ever, and many you mentioned are not (yet).

Epicly great films. Wow, that is quite a statement. Well, if two beginning to end masterpieces is all it takes to be a great director, I am going to list a few who I believe are all better than a very talented Lee. (Spielberg is on a list too)

Quentin Tarantino: Pulp Fiction and Reservoir Dogs
Oliver Stone: Platoon and Wall Street
John Singleton: Boyz in the Hood and High Learning
Martin Scorsese: Raging Bull and Goodfellas
Sydney Pollack: Absence of Malice and Out of Africa
Clint Eastwood: Million Dollar Baby and Unforgiven
James Cameron: The Terminator and Titanic
Tim Burton: Edward Scissorhands and Beetlejuice

[Lawgick]

Epicly great films. Wow, that is quite a statement. Well, if two beginning to end masterpieces is all it takes to be a great director, I am going to list a few who I believe are all better than a very talented Lee.



You said that as if two beginning to end masterpieces isn't enough to make someone a great director...

Seems like enough to me. Proves your not a one hit wonder even if after the two you go downhill fast.

[AshleysDad]

You said that as if two beginning to end masterpieces isn't enough to make someone a great director...

Seems like enough to me. Proves your not a one hit wonder even if after the two you go downhill fast.

I was just quoting and getting to the number 2. To me, a top of the list, great director should have a least two masterpieces and at least 3 other very, very good films. That would knock off more than half my list I gave.

[biff_debris]

Ridley Scott is a great director, but I don't see him as vital to filmmaking as Lee is in the past 25 years.

Not sure what "vital to filmmaking" means, but insofar as having an influence and impact on films and filmmaking in general in the past 25 years, I would have to say that Scott exceeds Lee by far. Nothing against Spike Lee, who is indeed a great director, but Scott's work is truly archetypical.

And I do agree he gives lipservice simply to promote whatever he may be doing at the moment, which is clever and shrewd of him. And that (steering back to topic) Miracle at St. Anna looks very interesting. It reminds me of the rumors of the Knight Templar, who supposedly worshipped a stone carved head...

[AceD]

"Epicly great films. Wow, that is quite a statement. Well, if two beginning to end masterpieces is all it takes to be a great director, I am going to list a few who I believe are all better than a very talented Lee."

Not really 'quite a statement', just my opinion. Of the films you listed, I think
Pulp Fiction, Platoon, Boyz in the Hood, Raging Bull and Goodfellas are all unquestionably great films; true classics. Of the others you mentioned, many are very good, although I have some major issues with each of them (i.e. I think the ending of Unforgiven undermines all that has come before). But the films above (i.e. Pulp & Boyz), while great, are not masterpieces to me. The reason is that I believe each has either a sequence or a performance that just doesn't work or doesn't support the story or something else that takes it away from true masterwork status. Now, understand that I have pretty high standards here, so I'm not insulting any of those films. But I think Do the Right Thing and Malcolm X are perfect.

As far as the number two, my point is that in just those two films, the overall level of greatness achieved by Lee surpasses that of most directors over many films. Obviously you feel differently, and that's more than fine. But that's why I think just on the basis of those two Spike's at the top of the list. And under your definition, I think 25th Hour, He Got Game, Clockers and 4Little Girls all fall into the 'great' catergory.

[Nutcracker]

Haha, what the fuck?




I can dismiss any film I want, as can anyone else in this world. In my opinion Crooklyn is a medicore film, and He Got Game is just a solid film. Relating to black people has nothing to do with it. There are plenty of blaxploitation films which I enjoy, Lee has some I do enjoy, and some I don't enjoy. That's life, it's called an opinion.

God, this statement sums you up in nutshell. Ignorant, and very possibly prejudiced. What next, you're going to say you have a negro friend as well?

Lee doesn't make "blaxploitation" films. He makes films about black people (and sometimes about white people too). His films have never been classified as "blaxploitation". The difference might be too subtle for you to work out, but c'est la vie.

Blaxploitation is a 1970's genre that is pretty much dead. It's occassionally revived in "homage" by geeky, nostalgic white guys, not unlike yourself (Tarantino's JACKIE BROWN is pretty much an updated blaxploitation film. Tarantino loves his dead genres, like blaxploitaton and grindhouse).

I'd love to keep it to films, but your actual knowledge of film seems to be incredibly suspect and limited. I'd possibly have been mildly impressed if you listed guys like Francois Ozon, Mike Leigh, Ken Loach, Michael Winterbottom, Werner Herzog, Jim Jarmusch ect among Lee's contemporaries, instead of the predictable collection of 1970's American iconoclasts, mainstream hacks, comic book movie directors and "hot" young turks with 3 or 4 films to their name.

Leigh and Loach in particular have filmographies that equal or even exceed the calibre of Lee (though I suspect their films might be too "boring" for you), and might be a worthwhile discussion, yet I'm wasting my time arguing with someone who seriously thinks vanilla formula guys like Ed Zwick and Frank Darabont belong in the same discussion as Lee in auteur terms (And before you say it for the umpteenth time...I'll save you the trouble. Zwick and Darabont have made many films far better than Lee ever will, and he isn't fit to lick their formulaic boots).

[Bourne101]

Not really 'quite a statement', just my opinion. Of the films you listed, I think Pulp Fiction, Platoon, Boyz in the Hood, Raging Bull and Goodfellas are all unquestionably great films; true classics. Of the others you mentioned, many are very good, although I have some major issues with each of them (i.e. I think the ending of Unforgiven undermines all that has come before). But the films above (i.e. Pulp & Boyz), while great, are not masterpieces to me. The reason is that I believe each has either a sequence or a performance that just doesn't work or doesn't support the story or something else that takes it away from true masterwork status. Now, understand that I have pretty high standards here, so I'm not insulting any of those films. But I think Do the Right Thing and Malcolm X are perfect.

You have pretty high standards and think Do the Right Thing and Malcolm X are masterpieces? They're great films, but they are more flawed than both Pulp Fiction and Boyz 'n in the Hood. General consensus is something that has been brought up here a few times, so if we're taking that into consideration, Do the Right Thing and Malcolm X are rarely or never used on any professional top 100 list. Of the directors I mentioned, there are many that have better films than any of Lee's films.

Here is a list of those directors I mentioned and films that they have made that are better than anything that Lee has done.

Martin Scorsese- Mean Streets, Taxi Driver, Raging Bull, Goodfellas, Cape Fear, Casino, Gangs of New York, and The Departed.
Paul Thomas Anderson- Boogie Nights, Magnolia, Punch Drunk Love, There Will Be Blood.
Steven Spielberg- Jaws, Raiders of the Lost Ark, E.T., The Color Purple, Empire of the Sun, Schindler's List, Saving Private Ryan, Catch Me If You Can, and Munich.
The Coen Brothers- Blood Simple, Miller's Crossing, Barton Fink, Fargo, The Big Lebowski, O Brother, Where Art Thou?, and No Country For Old Men
Quentin Tarantino- Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction, Jackie Brown, and Kill Bill.
Ridley Scott- Alien, Blade Runner, Gladiator, Black Hawk Down, Matchstick Men, and American Gangster.
Tim Burton- Edward Scissorhands, Ed Wood, and Big Fish.
David Fincher- Se7en, Fight Club, and Zodiac.
Frank Darabont-The Shawshank Redemption, The Green Mile, and possibly The Mist.
Francis Ford Coppola- The Godfather, The Conversation, The Godfather: Part II, and Apocalypse Now.
Christopher Nolan- Following, Memento, Insomnia, The Prestige, and The Dark Knight.
Clint Eastwood- Unforgiven, Mystic River, Million Dollar Baby, Flags of Our Fathers, and Letters From Iwo Jima.
Milos Forman- One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, Amadeus, and Man on the Moon.
Sidney Lumet- Dog Day Afternoon, Network, The Verdict, and Before the Devil Knows You're Dead.
Peter Jackson- The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring, The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers, The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King, and King Kong.
Jonathan Demme- The Silence of the Lambs, Philadelphia, and The Manchurian Candidate.
Sam Mendes- American Beauty, and Road to Perdition.
Guillermo Del Toro- Pan's Labyrinth, and The Devil's Backbone.
Robert Zemeckis- Back to the Future, Forrest Gump, and Cast Away.
James Cameron- The Terminator, Aliens, The Abyss, Terminator 2: Judgement Day, and Titanic.
Darren Aronofsky- Pi, Requiem for a Dream, and The Fountain.
David Lynch- Eraserhead, The Elephant Man, Blue Velvet, Lost Highway, and Mulholland Drive.
Mel Gibson-The Man Without a Face, Braveheart, The Passion of the Christ, and Apocalypto.
Woody Allen- Annie Hall, and Manhattan.
Oliver Stone- Platoon, Wall Street, JFK, and Natural Born Killers.
Michael Mann-Manhunter, The Last of the Mohicans, Heat, The Insider, and Collateral.
Alfonso Cuarón- Love in the Time of Hysteria, Y Tu Mamá También, and Children of Men.
Danny Boyle- Trainspotting, 28 Days Later, Millions, and Sunshine.
Brian De Palma- Carrie, Scarface, The Untouchables, and Carlito's Way.
Edward Zwick- Glory, Legends of the Fall, and The Last Samurai.

[Bourne101]

God, this statement sums you up in nutshell. Ignorant, and very possibly prejudiced. What next, you're going to say you have a negro friend as well?

Wow dude, you're just looking for a one way ticket out of here aren't you? My post said nothing more than everyone is entitled to their opinion, that I have enjoyed some of Spike Lee's films, and that I have disliked some of Spike Lee's films. Whatever else you got out of that was simply something that you want to believe for some apparent reason.

Lee doesn't make "blaxploitation" films. He makes films about black people (and sometimes about white people too). His films have never been classified as "blaxploitation". The difference might be too subtle for you to work out, but c'est la vie.

Many of Lee's films are blaxploitation. There really is no denying that. Not all of them, but many of them.

I'd love to keep it to films, but your actual knowledge of film seems to be incredibly suspect and limited. I'd possibly have been mildly impressed if you listed guys like Francois Ozon, Mike Leigh, Ken Loach, Michael Winterbottom, Werner Herzog, Jim Jarmusch ect among Lee's contemporaries, instead of the predictable collection of 1970's American iconoclasts, mainstream hacks, comic book movie directors and "hot" young turks with 3 or 4 films to their name.

Mildly impressed? At this point, the last thing I would want to do is impress the likes of someone as insulting and prejudice as you. You don't know a thing about me, yet I'm an idiot for not enjoying a few of Spike Lee's shitty movies? Expand your horizons, you probably haven't even seen something like Y Tu Mamá También, Pi, Love in the Time of Hysteria, or Eraserhead. I'll give you some advice... watch some movies like those and expand your horizons beyond some of Spike Lee's complete tripe.

70s predicatable American iconoclasts? Who are you referring to? Scorsese? Coppola? You realize that they are recognized for a reason, and that would be because they are two of the greatest directors of all-time. Mainstream hacks? Like who? Some of the people I mentioned may have films that may appeal to mainstream audiences, but that doesn't make them a hack. It's called great films appealing to a wider range of audience. If you're talking about Nolan as the "comic book movie director" then you really don't know what you're talking about. Have you seen Following, Memento, Insomnia, or The Prestige? And those "hot" young turks you refer to are the ones responsible for the future of movies. Maybe show a little respect. Paul Thomas Anderson, even with his small filmography, is already a better filmmaker than Spike Lee.

Leigh and Loach in particular have filmographies that equal or even exceed the calibre of Lee (though I suspect their films might be too "boring" for you), and might be a worthwhile discussion, yet I'm wasting my time arguing with someone who seriously thinks vanilla formula guys like Ed Zwick and Frank Darabont belong in the same discussion as Lee in auteur terms (And before you say it for the umpteenth time...I'll save you the trouble. Zwick and Darabont have made many films far better than Lee ever will, and he isn't fit to lick their formulaic boots).

Get this guy out of here please. His racist and insulting bigotry is sickening. I have no time for someone who thinks Spike Lee is the greatest thing since sliced bread, yet condemns some of the greatest directors of our time, whose films he probably hasn't even seen.

[Triadkd]

Wow dude, you're just looking for a one way ticket out of here aren't you? My post said nothing more than everyone is entitled to their opinion, that I have enjoyed some of Spike Lee's films, and that I have disliked some of Spike Lee's films. Whatever else you got out of that was simply something that you want to believe for some apparent reason.



Many of Lee's films are blaxploitation. There really is no denying that. Not all of them, but many of them.



Mildly impressed? At this point, the last thing I would want to do is impress the likes of someone as insulting and prejudice as you. You don't know a thing about me, yet I'm an idiot for not enjoying a few of Spike Lee's shitty movies? Expand your horizons, you probably haven't even seen something like Y Tu Mamá También, Pi, Love in the Time of Hysteria, or Eraserhead. I'll give you some advice... watch some movies like those and expand your horizons beyond some of Spike Lee's complete tripe.

70s predicatable American iconoclasts? Who are you referring to? Scorsese? Coppola? You realize that they are recognized for a reason, and that would be because they are two of the greatest directors of all-time. Mainstream hacks? Like who? Some of the people I mentioned may have films that may appeal to mainstream audiences, but that doesn't make them a hack. It's called great films appealing to a wider range of audience. If you're talking about Nolan as the "comic book movie director" then you really don't know what you're talking about. Have you seen Following, Memento, Insomnia, or The Prestige? And those "hot" young turks you refer to are the ones responsible for the future of movies. Maybe show a little respect. Paul Thomas Anderson, even with his small filmography, is already a better filmmaker than Spike Lee.



Get this guy out of here please. His racist and insulting bigotry is sickening. I have no time for someone who thinks Spike Lee is the greatest thing since sliced bread, yet condemns some of the greatest directors of our time, whose films he probably hasn't even seen.

Man up chump. You can't ban this guy for calling you out for your bullsheit racist assesment of Lee's films(what the hell does shaft and malcom x have in common?) or your refusal to acknowledge black dramas as serious films and not "blaxploitation" :rolleyes:. God you are a racist idiot. Just because a film has black people in it who curse or do violence, that doesen't make it an exploitation film. Are their any black film's or film makers you do take seriously? Or do they have to make "white films" like the 25th Hour in order for you to acknowledge their talent?

[Nutcracker]

Man up chump. You can't ban this guy for calling you out for your bullsheit racist assesment of Lee's films(what the hell does shaft and malcom x have in common?) or your refusal to acknowledge black dramas as serious films and not "blaxploitation" :rolleyes:. God you are a racist idiot. Just because a film has black people in it who curse or do violence, that doesen't make it an exploitation film. Are their any black film's or film makers you do take seriously? Or do they have to make "white films" like the 25th Hour in order for you to acknowledge their talent?

Don't worry about me. He knows I caught him in a series of terrible gaffes (lying about watching Lee's student movie, offensively calling Lee a blaxploitation director), so his final resort is to try and get me banned, before I make him look worse than he does already. Man up, indeed.

It's obvious that he's got serious cultural issues with black films and filmmakers (and is too stubborn to admit it), and it's sad to see in this day and age. I'm not even African-American (I'm British), but it's so obvious to me that this dude has issues, and I'm glad you see it as well. There's nothing inherently wrong about not being attuned to a particular culture's lifestyle or stories, as long as you are man enough to admit it. I'm sure there are plenty of black people out there who don't see what the big deal is about SEINFELD or Woody Allen movies, but that's also down to cultural ignorance (ie Jewish humour might not appeal to them becuse can't connect to it), not because SEINFELD and Allen aren't great at what they do (well, Allen used to be great at what he did). He probably thinks I'm being racist by saying that some blacks don't see the appeal in Jewish humour, but it's justy an honest , adult observation. Just like it's an honest observation that many white people dismiss the work of Lee, because they can't connect with black issues. I'm never surprised to see that Lee's most popular movie among white internet geeks is 25TH HOUR, which is basically a film about white people. It's not close to being his best film, yet so many white film geeks act as if it is because it's the one film he's made that speaks directly to them. That's not racist to say, just an honest assesment, imho.

I found a lot of his ranting offensive and racist (as far as I'm concerned, calling Lee's films blaxploitation is ignorant at worst, and in this particular case, racist). The difference being, I can take care of myself, and I'm not going to go crying to the moderaters at the first sign of losing an argument. He's needs to grow up, because any thread about Spike Lee is always going to cause controversial statements.

I expect he'll be calling for your head on a stick as well.

[Lawgick]

Don't worry about me. He knows I caught him in a series of terrible gaffes (lying about watching Lee's student movie, offensively calling Lee a blaxploitation director), so his final resort is to try and get me banned, before I make him look worse than he does already. Man up, indeed.

It's obvious that he's got serious cultural issues with black films and filmmakers (and is too stubborn to admit it), and it's sad to see in this day and age. I'm not even African-American (I'm British), but it's so obvious to me that this dude has issues, and I'm glad you see it as well. There's nothing inherently wrong about not being attuned to a particular culture's lifestyle or stories, as long as you are man enough to admit it. I'm sure there are plenty of black people out there who don't see what the big deal is about SEINFELD or Woody Allen movies, but that's also down to cultural ignorance (ie Jewish humour might not appeal to them becuse can't connect to it), not because SEINFELD and Allen aren't great at what they do (well, Allen used to be great at what he did). He probably thinks I'm being racist by saying that some blacks don't see the appeal in Jewish humour, but it's justy an honest , adult observation. Just like it's an honest observation that many white people dismiss the work of Lee, because they can't connect with black issues. I'm never surprised to see that Lee's most popular movie among white internet geeks is 25TH HOUR, which is basically a film about white people. It's not close to being his best film, yet so many white film geeks act as if it is because it's the one film he's made that speaks directly to them. That's not racist to say, just an honest assesment, imho.

I found a lot of his ranting offensive and racist (as far as I'm concerned, calling Lee's films blaxploitation is ignorant at worst, and in this particular case, racist). The difference being, I can take care of myself, and I'm not going to go crying to the moderaters at the first sign of losing an argument. He's needs to grow up, because any thread about Spike Lee is always going to cause controversial statements.

I expect he'll be calling for your head on a stick as well.

You should know by now that trying to make people on the internet to see they have racist views is like trying to get donations for the NAACP at a KKK meeting. Your wasting your time.:rolleyes:

Good Job though.:cool:

[Bourne101]

Man up chump. You can't ban this guy for calling you out for your bullsheit racist assesment of Lee's films(what the hell does shaft and malcom x have in common?) or your refusal to acknowledge black dramas as serious films and not "blaxploitation" :rolleyes:. God you are a racist idiot. Just because a film has black people in it who curse or do violence, that doesen't make it an exploitation film. Are their any black film's or film makers you do take seriously? Or do they have to make "white films" like the 25th Hour in order for you to acknowledge their talent?

Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.

See ya!

[Bourne101]

I guess all chances of having a civilized conversation have been thrown out the window. If all you guys want to do is bitch and moan without even talking about films, then go right ahead. Calling me a chump, racist idiot, ignorant, and a white film geek are no way to have a civilized conversation. I have repeatedly said that I have enjoyed several of Lee's films, and I have disliked some of his films. So all the sudden I'm a racist idiot, because I don't like every single fucking one of Spike Lee's films? You guys need a reality check.

[AceD]

"You have pretty high standards and think Do the Right Thing and Malcolm X are masterpieces? They're great films, but they are more flawed than both Pulp Fiction and Boyz 'n in the Hood. General consensus is something that has been brought up here a few times, so if we're taking that into consideration, Do the Right Thing and Malcolm X are rarely or never used on any professional top 100 list. Of the directors I mentioned, there are many that have better films than any of Lee's films."

I don't feel like general concensus matter since I know my opionion is well-informed (which is not to say it's right, only that I don't think anyone else's is more valid). However, even by that standard...Do the Right Thing is on The AFI Top 100, the personal top lists of Ebert and Berardinelli, the National Film Registry (as only the 3rd film to be inducted in its first year of eligibility)...those are just some of the respected lists where the film appears. So I'm nowhere near in the minority by including it. And, as I stated, I believe Pulp, Boyz, and the rest are all at least slightly more flawed than Do the Right Thing and Malcolm X are.

As far as the list you made....again, I think I made myself pretty clear that I disagree, so please don't feel like you need to keep listing films you find better. I 100% respect your opinion. Obviously a lot of people would agree with you. But this is how I feel.

And, for the record, I don't think you're a racist.

[Triadkd]

I guess all chances of having a civilized conversation have been thrown out the window. If all you guys want to do is bitch and moan without even talking about films, then go right ahead. Calling me a chump, racist idiot, ignorant, and a white film geek are no way to have a civilized conversation. I have repeatedly said that I have enjoyed several of Lee's films, and I have disliked some of his films. So all the sudden I'm a racist idiot, because I don't like every single fucking one of Spike Lee's films? You guys need a reality check.

Civility went out the window when you dismissed Lee's films as blaxploitation and compared him to hacks like Zwick and Daranbont. You don't have to like all of his films or any of them. But you can't dismiss his talent because he makes "black" films instead of cinematic treasures like Lord of the Rings and Batman.

[Bourne101]

"You have pretty high standards and think Do the Right Thing and Malcolm X are masterpieces? They're great films, but they are more flawed than both Pulp Fiction and Boyz 'n in the Hood. General consensus is something that has been brought up here a few times, so if we're taking that into consideration, Do the Right Thing and Malcolm X are rarely or never used on any professional top 100 list. Of the directors I mentioned, there are many that have better films than any of Lee's films."

I don't feel like general concensus matter since I know my opionion is well-informed (which is not to say it's right, only that I don't think anyone else's is more valid). However, even by that standard...Do the Right Thing is on The AFI Top 100, the personal top lists of Ebert and Berardinelli, the National Film Registry (as only the 3rd film to be inducted in its first year of eligibility)...those are just some of the respected lists where the film appears. So I'm nowhere near in the minority by including it. And, as I stated, I believe Pulp, Boyz, and the rest are all at least slightly more flawed than Do the Right Thing and Malcolm X are.

As far as the list you made....again, I think I made myself pretty clear that I disagree, so please don't feel like you need to keep listing films you find better. I 100% respect your opinion. Obviously a lot of people would agree with you. But this is how I feel.

And, for the record, I don't think you're a racist.

Now that is a respectable, civilized, and respectful post. You truly understand the meaning of an opinion. I did not know that Do the Right Thing was on the AFI top 100, but thanks for the info! We will agree to disagree on the extent of the flaws on those mentioned films, that's cool. :cool:

[Bourne101]

Civility went out the window when you dismissed Lee's films as blaxploitation and compared him to hacks like Zwick and Daranbont. You don't have to like all of his films or any of them. But you can't dismiss his talent because he makes "black" films instead of cinematic treasures like Lord of the Rings and Batman.

Okay first of all, for the billionth time, I did not say that all of Lee's films were blaxploitation. I said that some of them were, not all of them. Calling Zwick and Darabont hacks is ignorant and disrespectful. They have both make excellent and important films, just as Lee has. I have not dismissed his talent. I think he is an excellent director who has made some great films, and some other films which I do not think are very good. I certainly did not dismiss any of his films because they are "black" films. Where are you getting that from? And did you look at the list of directors I listed and just picked out Peter Jackson and Christopher Nolan? Did you happen to notice the other list of directors who have made some of the greatest films ever made, have won many awards, and are considered some of the best filmmakers of all-time? You think because I don't enjoy all of Spike Lee's films, that I can only enjoy mainstream entertainment? You obviously know nothing about me or my taste for films, so why don't you keep your prejudice comments to yourself. Thanks.

[AceD]

For the record, Do the Right Thing did not appear on the first incarnation of the AFI list, but is on there as of the 10 year update.

And in case I wasn't clear, I think that some of best films (Pulp, Boyz, Goodfellas, Schindler's, Private Ryan, etc) are almost indistunguishable from Do the Right Thing. I don't think it's the best by a mile or anything. There's just something about it that works for me more than any other film works for me.

[Bourne101]

For the record, Do the Right Thing did not appear on the first incarnation of the AFI list, but is on there as of the 10 year update.

And in case I wasn't clear, I think that some of best films (Pulp, Boyz, Goodfellas, Schindler's, Private Ryan, etc) are almost indistunguishable from Do the Right Thing. I don't think it's the best by a mile or anything. There's just something about it that works for me more than any other film works for me.

Thanks for that info as well. And I very much understand your stance on Do the Right Thing. It is a great film like I mentioned before. Do the Right Thing for you is like Goodfellas for me. You love one the most, but realize the greatness of the other at the same time.

[Bourne101]

Don't know if this has been mentioned, but the runtime for Miracle at St. Anna is 2 hours and 46 minutes. That is great news.

[bigred760]

Don't know if this has been mentioned, but the runtime for Miracle at St. Anna is 2 hours and 46 minutes. That is great news.

Just the way a war movie should be.

[AshleysDad]

I don't feel like general concensus matter since I know my opionion is well-informed (which is not to say it's right, only that I don't think anyone else's is more valid). However, even by that standard...Do the Right Thing is on The AFI Top 100, the personal top lists of Ebert and Berardinelli, the National Film Registry (as only the 3rd film to be inducted in its first year of eligibility)...those are just some of the respected lists where the film appears. So I'm nowhere near in the minority by including it. And, as I stated, I believe Pulp, Boyz, and the rest are all at least slightly more flawed than Do the Right Thing and Malcolm X are.

As far as the list you made....again, I think I made myself pretty clear that I disagree, so please don't feel like you need to keep listing films you find better. I 100% respect your opinion. Obviously a lot of people would agree with you. But this is how I feel.
.

I feel that Do the Right Thing and Malcolm X are both average at best. Far from being flawless. There is a reason he is not as celebrated in Hollywood as one might like. I believe that reason to be him. He does not want to be. I do think one day at the very least that Spike will get a lifetime Oscar.

[AceD]

I feel that Do the Right Thing and Malcolm X are both average at best. Far from being flawless. There is a reason he is not as celebrated in Hollywood as one might like. I believe that reason to be him. He does not want to be. I do think one day at the very least that Spike will get a lifetime Oscar.

Obviously we disagree about Right Thing and X, and that's fine. I do agree with the second half of your statement though, in that I think the reason Lee is not consistently mentioned with Spielberg, Kubrick, Coppola et al is because he's abrasive and doesn't cower or pander to Hollywood, not because his films aren't in their league. And while I always try to resist playing the 'race card', and I do commend many in the film community for coming around on things faster than the culture has, being an African-American in that industry hasn't helped Lee either as far as getting respect goes.

[Bourne101]

being an African-American in that industry hasn't helped Lee either as far as getting respect goes.

I don't think that is the issue, since there are plenty of African-American actors and filmmakers in that industry that are extremely successful and are very well respected. The difference between them and Spike Lee is that they don't make everything a race issue. The Flags of Our Fathers/Letters From Iwo Jima comments were completely idiotic and unnecessary. Even if it was a marketing ploy, it's pretty sad, and just shows how little faith Lee has in his film at the box-office. Some people may be attracted to the film because of his comments, but others might not give Lee the time a day and not spend their $10 on what should be an excellent film.

[AshleysDad]

Obviously we disagree about Right Thing and X, and that's fine. I do agree with the second half of your statement though, in that I think the reason Lee is not consistently mentioned with Spielberg, Kubrick, Coppola et al is because he's abrasive and doesn't cower or pander to Hollywood, not because his films aren't in their league. And while I always try to resist playing the 'race card', and I do commend many in the film community for coming around on things faster than the culture has, being an African-American in that industry hasn't helped Lee either as far as getting respect goes.


Spike Lee is no where near the level of director that Spielberg, Kubrick and Coppola are. To even mention then in the same sentence as Lee is an insult. There is you and about 5 other people that love Spike Lee movies as much to think him to be on of the greatest of the last 25 or so years. One of those people is Spike.

I hear the man has his own awards ceremony that he calls the Shelton's. A Shelton is a gold statue, just like an Oscar only shorter and angry. He holds it every year, two days before the Oscars. Danny Aiello is always a presenter and John Turturro is the MC. He holds it in his garage. The funny thing is he has never lost and years when he does not have a movie, he gives himself awards for "keeping it real" and not bowing down to the masses for not making movies people actual watch.

[AceD]

I don't think that is the issue, since there are plenty of African-American actors and filmmakers in that industry that are extremely successful and are very well respected. The difference between them and Spike Lee is that they don't make everything a race issue. The Flags of Our Fathers/Letters From Iwo Jima comments were completely idiotic and unnecessary. Even if it was a marketing ploy, it's pretty sad, and just shows how little faith Lee has in his film at the box-office. Some people may be attracted to the film because of his comments, but others might not give Lee the time a day and not spend their $10 on what should be an excellent film.

I see your point, but the vast majority of successful African-Americans have come into the industry well after Lee did. And while as I mentioned racism is not as prevelant in the industry as it is in most industries, there are still huge strides to be made (i.e. think of how few starring roles feature black people but are not films about racism...there are not very many). And I think there's something to be said for the fact that the most powerful black actors and directors are closely affiliated with Lee and publicly support him.

Now, is Lee a little nutty? For sure. But I don't think he does anything to get pub, I think he really believes what he says (which is certainly not to say it's right). Sometimes what he says seems to be way off, but I think he believes himself. Again, though, as has been said, it's easier for most people to respect Lee the director than Lee the person.

Ashley: I've already awknowledged myself that I'm in the minority on putting Lee in that league (although not quite in the minority to the degree that you suggest). That doesn't make me wrong, and it's not an insult to anyone. It's not like his films are factually worse, or like I'm trying to put Uwe Boll or F. Gary Gray in that league. You don't have to like Lee, but a whole lot of people do, and a whole lot of people also think that Right Thing and X are quite a bit better than 'average.'

[Nutcracker]

You don't have to like Lee, but a whole lot of people do, and a whole lot of people also think that Right Thing and X are quite a bit better than 'average.'

Just wanted to point out that DO THE RIGHT THING appears in even more "greatest films" lists than you initially mentioned. It's in no.29 in the British Sight And Sound poll from 2002 (This is a poll that's been taken once every 10 years since 1952, and asks leading film critics from around the world to vote. Probably the most detailed, incisive and least bias critics poll in the world). MALCOLM X came in at no.31 in the same Sight And Sound Poll.

DO THE RIGHT THING came in at no. 100 in FilmFour's 100 Greatest Films Of All time Poll. That was a particularly impressive result for Lee, since it wasn't a critics poll, but a vote open to the British public. Much of the list is composed of hugely populist favourites like THE TERMINATOR, THE GODFATHER. THE SOUND OF MUSIC, JAWS (and there's also a strong British bias in the list), so it says something that the British public made room for Lee's film, him being so unpopular and all.

DO THE RIGHT THING is also at no.81 in Entertainment Weekly's 100 greatest movies of all-time. It's also in the National Society Of Film Critics 100 essential films.

I think Lee knows full well he'd be a more popular and beloved filmmaker if he abandoned "black issues" and made more generalised or "inclusive" films like INSIDE MAN. That film did big box office because it played like a really intelligent genre film, and not Spike Lee "black issues" film. Even Denzel Washington can't sell HE GOT GAME to the public at the box office, because it's so obviously a film focusing on Lee's favorite topic of African American issues, which is an immediate turn off for many.

He's a stubborn bastard, I'll give him that. I do have to wonder if he'll start making more generalised films, because he's more personal work tends to get marginalised these days. Spike Lee's THE DEPARTED or Spike Lee's DARK KNIGHT might do wonders for his public image and stature in the fanboy community.

[Bourne101]

And you realize that most of the directors that I listed all have films on those lists, occasionally multiple films, most of which are ahead of Do the Right Thing. The argument here isn't if Lee is a good director or not, because he is, we've established that a LONG time ago, before you even came into this argument. The argument was, is Spike Lee at the top of the list of directors working today. With many of the directors that I listed having films on those lists, most of which have films above Do the Right Thing on those lists, then by your logic, no, Spike Lee isn't at the top of the list.

And The Departed is a very professional film. Don't throw it around like it's a shitty film because it appeals to a wider range of audience. His public image has nothing to do with the films he makes, but rather the absolutely stupid words that come out of his mouth.

[Nutcracker]

Nutcracker, I don't mean to take up your time, but could you give me links to the following polls which you have mentioned:

FilmFour's 100 Greatest Films of All-time Poll
British Sight and Sound Poll
Entertainment Weekly's 100 Greatest Movies of All-time
National Society Of Film Critics 100 Essential Films


Filmfour Poll;

http://www.filmsite.org/filmfour.html

Sight & Sound Poll;

http://www.films101.com/ss02n.htm

Entertainment Weekly 100 Greatest

http://www.filmsite.org/ew100.html


National Society Of Film Critics 100 essential films (DO THE RIGHT THING is at no.27)

http://www.filmsite.org/alist.html

[Triadkd]

I don't think that is the issue, since there are plenty of African-American actors and filmmakers in that industry that are extremely successful and are very well respected. The difference between them and Spike Lee is that they don't make everything a race issue. The Flags of Our Fathers/Letters From Iwo Jima comments were completely idiotic and unnecessary. Even if it was a marketing ploy, it's pretty sad, and just shows how little faith Lee has in his film at the box-office. Some people may be attracted to the film because of his comments, but others might not give Lee the time a day and not spend their $10 on what should be an excellent film.

Their was nothing idiotic about Lee's comments. A reporter asked him why he was doing the film and he told him it was because hollywood ignored the African American experience in WW2. Which they do. He cited Eastwoods film because it was the most recent example. And why would he use those films as a marketing ploy? They both dissapointed box office wise and with critics so their is nothing to gain from using them.

[Triadkd]

Just wanted to point out that DO THE RIGHT THING appears in even more "greatest films" lists than you initially mentioned. It's in no.29 in the British Sight And Sound poll from 2002 (This is a poll that's been taken once every 10 years since 1952, and asks leading film critics from around the world to vote. Probably the most detailed, incisive and least bias critics poll in the world). MALCOLM X came in at no.31 in the same Sight And Sound Poll.

DO THE RIGHT THING came in at no. 100 in FilmFour's 100 Greatest Films Of All time Poll. That was a particularly impressive result for Lee, since it wasn't a critics poll, but a vote open to the British public. Much of the list is composed of hugely populist favourites like THE TERMINATOR, THE GODFATHER. THE SOUND OF MUSIC, JAWS (and there's also a strong British bias in the list), so it says something that the British public made room for Lee's film, him being so unpopular and all.

DO THE RIGHT THING is also at no.81 in Entertainment Weekly's 100 greatest movies of all-time. It's also in the National Society Of Film Critics 100 essential films.

I think Lee knows full well he'd be a more popular and beloved filmmaker if he abandoned "black issues" and made more generalised or "inclusive" films like INSIDE MAN. That film did big box office because it played like a really intelligent genre film, and not Spike Lee "black issues" film. Even Denzel Washington can't sell HE GOT GAME to the public at the box office, because it's so obviously a film focusing on Lee's favorite topic of African American issues, which is an immediate turn off for many.

He's a stubborn bastard, I'll give him that. I do have to wonder if he'll start making more generalised films, because he's more personal work tends to get marginalised these days. Spike Lee's THE DEPARTED or Spike Lee's DARK KNIGHT might do wonders for his public image and stature in the fanboy community.

Lee should continue doing what he has always done. Create great films dealing with the African-American experience past and present. Fuck fanboys and their all of their superhero tough guy bullshit. Hollywood is not inclusive toward black's so why should he have to include white people in anything?

[Bourne101]

Filmfour Poll;

http://www.filmsite.org/filmfour.html

Sight & Sound Poll;

http://www.films101.com/ss02n.htm

Entertainment Weekly 100 Greatest

http://www.filmsite.org/ew100.html


National Society Of Film Critics 100 essential films (DO THE RIGHT THING is at no.27)

http://www.filmsite.org/alist.html

Shit, sorry about that. I had looked up the lists, and then edited my request to you.

Thanks anyway.

[Nutcracker]

Their was nothing idiotic about Lee's comments. A reporter asked him why he was doing the film and he told him it was because hollywood ignored the African American experience in WW2. Which they do. He cited Eastwoods film because it was the most recent example. And why would he use those films as a marketing ploy? They both dissapointed box office wise and with critics so their is nothing to gain from using them.

Lee actually clarified himself in a recent interview, and said he's made efforts to aplogise to Eastwood for the whole thing being taken out of context (Lee actually got Steven Speilberg to mediate a truce between them, and offered to send Eastwood a free print of MIRCALE AT ST ANNA by as a peace offer). A shame very few people are paying attention when Lee is actually showing a rare act of contrition.

Here's what Lee said about the situation at this wek's Toronto film festival, and he sounds perfectly reasonable about the whole thing;

"Here's the thing", said Lee. "To be honest I was not speaking out against Clint Eastwood and Flags Of Our Fathers and Letters From Iwo Jima. I said Clint Eastwood is a great fillmmaker. But I was also stating a fact; There were no black servicemen in these films. Somebody told me there was a shot of three in one film. I must have blinked."

"But I'm sorry it escalated to where it did and as far as I'm concerned, it's over and done with".

"The big picture is that Clint Eastwood is not the director of every single film in Hollywood of the World War 2 genre that belittled or disrespected or ommitted the contribution of the 1.1million African-American men or women who fought and participated in World War 2", Lee said.

"It's not about Clint Eastwood. It's about Hollywood".

[Bourne101]

Their was nothing idiotic about Lee's comments. A reporter asked him why he was doing the film and he told him it was because hollywood ignored the African American experience in WW2. Which they do. He cited Eastwoods film because it was the most recent example. And why would he use those films as a marketing ploy? They both dissapointed box office wise and with critics so their is nothing to gain from using them.

Lee's comments were idiotic, no doubt. He said that there weren't any black people in Flags of Our Fathers/Letters From Iwo Jima and that it was historically inaccurate. Not only is that idiotic, but it simply isn't true. Flags of Our Fathers completely focused on those who raised the flag in Iwo Jima and how it affected their lives. They were all white, none of them were black. If they had put black actors in there to satisfy the black community, that would have been historically inaccurate. And there were African-American soldiers portrayed in the film anyway, just not when the flag was being raised. And Letters From Iwo Jima was a film which focused solely on the Japanese side of the battle. Why the fuck would there be black people in an entirely Japanese film?

It's obvious that part of Lee's intentions for running his mouth toward Eastwood was because he wanted to promote and gain buzz for Miracle at St. Anna. He's not using Eastwood's films as a marketing ploy (you obviously don't understand the matter), he's just stirring shit up so he can get some recognition, so people will see his movie.

As for the critical and box-office success of Flags of Our Fathers, and Letters from Iwo Jima. You're wrong here as well. Flags of Our Fathers received a 73% fresh rating on RT. Letters From Iwo Jima received a 91% fresh rating on RT. Flags of Our Fathers was nominated for 2 Academy Awards. Letters From Iwo Jima won an Academy Award, and was also nominated for Best Picture, Best Director, and Best Original Screenplay. So what the fuck are you talking about? As for the box-office, neither film was ever set out to be a box-office hit. Flags of Our Fathers was released during a slow box-office period during the year, in barely over 2000 theatres, while Iwo Jima was always in limited release.

[Bourne101]

Lee should continue doing what he has always done. Create great films dealing with the African-American experience past and present. Fuck fanboys and their all of their superhero tough guy bullshit. Hollywood is not inclusive toward black's so why should he have to include white people in anything?

Hahahahaha.

[Nutcracker]

Lee should continue doing what he has always done. Create great films dealing with the African-American experience past and present. Fuck fanboys and their all of their superhero tough guy bullshit. Hollywood is not inclusive toward black's so why should he have to include white people in anything?

I don't think he should totally abandon films dealing with the African-American experience at all. But honestly, I do think it's a smart way to broaden his fanbase, and get people interested in checking out the rest of his body of work. I read a lot of posts on IMDB by people who watched INSIDE MAN saying they'd never seen a Spike Lee movie before that, but that film made them want to check out his other stuff. It's kind of a win-win situation. Generalised films keep him "bankable", thus allowing him to finance more personal projects, and thus broaden his fanbase. Since he's definitely making a sequel to INSIDE MAN, I think Lee is probably coming around to that way of thinking as well.

Obviously, I'd be horrified if Lee turned round and announced he was going to direct FANTASTIC FOUR 3 or something. But he can make generalised, respectable, audience pleasing films that fall within his skill-set, and don't make him look like a complete sell-out. INSIDE MAN is one example of this. Something like THE DEPARTED or even COLLATERAL . Then he could turned round and demand financing for all those African-American themed projects he wants to make, but Hollywood never wants to finance because he's not percieved as being bankable enough (Lee's Joe Louis and Jackie Robinson biopics have never been able to get financing. With increased box-office, clout, he'll get it).

[AshleysDad]

I think any director should do whatever film tickles their fancy. Lee should not feel he has to cater to anyone at this point in his career. He is kinda like a black Woody Allen to me.

Lee should have been called out about his comments. He deserves the heat he took on. Now, let's move on.

The funniest thing I have ever heard is a couple of black men called Spike Lee an Uncle Tom Motherfucker after a trailer of Inside Man was shown.

[Nutcracker]

He is kinda like a black Woody Allen to me.



20 years ago that might have been considered a compliment. If Lee ends up like Allen is today, I'd advise him to retire. All Allen does now is make the same film over and over again with diminishing results, occassionally changing the setting (no more New York, now it's London), and casting some new guy as "Woody Allen".

There is something to be said for making an effort to grow and evolve as a fillmmaker. Take a few risks and challenge yourself to do something different, or face becoming irrelevant. Allen never did, imho. Lee seems as if he might be making that effort.

But you are right. A director should make whatever he wants, and Lee certain follows his own tune. I do think Lee is keen to take on new challenges, which I admire. A mainstream heist movie and a War film are not something I'd usually class within Lee's comfort zone.

[ilovemovies]

James Berardinelli didn't care for this movie. If I had to guess he'll probably end up giving it 2 and a half stars. But he said it was overlong and poorly focused. He did say there were a few great scenes though.

[Bourne101]

But you are right. A director should make what he wants.

Indeed. Scorsese enjoys making crime films, he's the best there is when it comes to the crime genre. The majority of his films are from the crime genre. There's nothing wrong with that, as long as the films are consistently great, which is the case with Scorsese. It's not like Scorsese's films were box-office smash hits all the time, he worked his ass off, was extremely consistent, mastered the crime genre, and people now realize that. Hence the reason why The Departed was so successful. He's earned that respect by consistently making great films (regardless of if the majority are of the same genre) and has maintained very professional and classy social and public behavior.

[Bourne101]

James Berardinelli didn't care for this movie. If I had to guess he'll probably end up giving it 2 and a half stars. But he said it was overlong and poorly focused. He did say there were a few great scenes though.

Yeah, this is very disappointing news. Not that we should just listen to one or two critics, but the criticisms "overlong" and "poorly focused" are not usually good things, especially when put in the same sentence. I'll be honest the "overlong" part doesn't really bother me, because I love very long movies, and usually when it is used as a criticism I disagree. But the one thing I worried about happening to this movie was it being poorly focused. Hopefully some better reviews start coming in, but on top of Berardinelli there have been a few other negative reviews.

[AceD]

Yeah, Variety also has a review up calling the movie overlong and oddly constructed. I've also read that the production values aren't quite on par even with something like Tropic Thunder. Still, everyone seems to agree there are a few great scenes, and as a fan, obviously, I'll see it on opening day. But my hopes have tapered a bit.

[Bourne101]

I'll see it on opening day. But my hopes have tapered a bit.

Oh for sure. The trailer was superb and I think it looks great. That's the only evidence I need to see it on opening day. But these reviews have definitely tapered my hopes a bit as well.

For those who are interested, here are a few of the reviews...

James Berardinelli

Miracle at St. Anna is historical fiction based on the novel by James McBride (who wrote the screenplay). It follows four members of the 92nd Infantry Buffalo Soldiers caught behind enemy lines in a small village in Tuscany during the waning days of the war. The Germans have become desperate and are turning against their Italian allies and the spillover of this conflict reaches all the way into the seemingly remote hiding place where Staff Sergeant Stamps (Derek Luke), Sergeant Cummings (Michael Ealy), Corporal Negron (Laz Alonso), and Sam Train (Omar Benson Miller) are hiding out, awaiting extraction. While there, they share some quiet moments with the locals, care for a boy rescued by Train from a collapsing building, and prepare for the inevitable that will accompany the arrival of the Germans.

Lee emphasizes the prejudice experienced by black soldiers during the second World War in ways both subtle and obvious. One character tellingly remarks that he "feels more free in a foreign country" than at home. Sex between a black man and a white woman is not the taboo in Tuscany that it would have been in the United States. The arguments presented in Miracle at St. Anna are not dissimilar to those in Glory, although there's an 80 year gap between the time periods reflected in the movies. Lee arguably becomes too heavy-handed with his decision to make a commanding officer a one-note racist. It's easy enough to understand why Lee pounds the pulpit so hard, since stories of black wartime heroism are few and far between.

Miracle at St. Anna is overlong and poorly focused. It tends to meander, the military context is not well established, and too much time is spent on interaction with underdeveloped secondary characters. The bookending sequences which take place in 1984 get the movie off to a rousing start but provide a weak ending and ultimately prove unnecessary and perhaps even detrimental to the story as a whole. On the other hand, there are three exceptionally powerful sequences: an event early in the proceedings in which members of the 92nd must face a verbal barrage from propagandist "Axis Sally" as they approach an engagement, a German massacre at a church, and the final battle against improbable odds. There's enough energy in those scenes to indicate what Miracle at St. Anna could have been. Because of the subject matter, it's impossible not to admire what Lee has wrought here, and the evident passion with which it has been brought to the screen. However, the realization is flawed, and those flaws make this 160-minute epic feel a little too much like an ordeal.

Todd McCarthy

Spike Lee loses the battles and the war in “Miracle at St. Anna,” a clunky, poorly constructed drama designed to spotlight the little-remarked role of black American soldiers in World War II. Clocking in at 160 minutes, this is a sloppy stew in which the ingredients of battle action, murder mystery, little-kid sentiment and history lesson don’t mix well. Nor is it remotely clear who the audience is meant to be; the R rating pretty much rules out younger students, and extensive subtitles will deter action fans, who would be bored anyway. Best B.O. will likely be in Italy, where most of the melodrama takes place.

Pic is a particular disappointment after Lee’s reputation-restoring previous feature, “Inside Man,” which saw the director working imaginatively within an established genre. Same can’t be said here, as Lee has imposed no discipline on novelist James McBride’s script, which trudges from digression to digression to the detriment of any dramatic focus.

It remains a wonder that no one, from Lee to the various producers and studio execs, demanded that someone whip this story into more sensible shape before the cameras rolled, so obvious are its excesses and indulgences. Yarn starts with a murder case -- a sixtysomething black postal worker, a devout man and recipient of the Purple Heart, shoots a man who comes to his window to buy a stamp. News of his arrest, and the fact he is in possession of a piece of Italian statuary worth millions, has weird repercussions in Italy, whereupon the action flashes back to Tuscany, 1944, where the Yanks are putting the hard press on dug-in Nazis.

Focus falls on the Buffalo Soldiers, black soldiers within the 92nd Infantry division in the segregated American Army. A number of grunts are sent to ford a river beyond which Germans are thought to wait. The way they’re mowed down reinforces the notion that “Eleanor Roosevelt’s niggers,” as they are derided by racist white officers, are regarded as little more than cannon fodder. In one of the few successful touches, the troops’ river crossing is accompanied by a propaganda broadcast from Axis Sally (Alexandra Maria Lara, in an outstanding reading), who goes on about how their country doesn’t care about them and even says the Nazis have nothing against the blacks.

Making it across the river and, shortly, up to the small medieval village of Colognora, are Second Staff Sergeant Aubrey Banks (Derek Luke); Sergeant Bishop Cummings (Michael Ealy); Cpl. Hector Negron (Laz Alonso), the man charged with murder 40 years later; and PFC Sam Train (Omar Benson Miller).

Train, a large man with little military discipline and a preoccupation with religious superstition, saves a 7-year-old boy, Angelo (Matteo Sciabordi), and thereafter watches over him. This sort of heart-tugging, and very Italian, story strand hasn’t been seen in an American war movie in years, maybe even decades, and one can see why; it’s embarrassing.

The other three guys are made of sterner stuff, but the film comes down with a case of severe lethargy once the men hole up in the village. Issues surrounding a fascist father, his lovely daughter, Renata (Valentina Cerri), whom Bishop gets the hots for, internecine quarrels among the local partisans, and the wait to figure out where the Germans are reduce the picture to the speed of a lumbering tank; two successive scenes of dreadful slaughter put the nail in the coffin. A coda blatantly attempts to pull the heartstrings, but it’s not earned.

Beyond the dramatic deficiencies, the writing for character is not good, so that even at the protracted running time, the men don’t emerge as strongly etched individuals. Train stands out because of his size and blubbery vulnerability, Stamps is notable for his courage and ability to speak Italian, and Bishop is the randy, gold-toothed one -- but fully dimensional they’re not.

Lee breaks up the slow flow by plugging in little episodes to dramatize discrimination, notably in a flashback in which German prisoners are allowed to eat in a Southern diner but black G.I.s are not. “I love Italy. I ain’t a nigger here,” one of them later says to further underline the point. Too bad the film wasn’t better written to make the sentiment implicit rather than needing to be said.

Production values are OK without being particularly notables, and Terence Blanchard’s score drones on virtually throughout. Lee’s early-career cinematographer, Ernest Dickerson, handled second-unit chores.

Cole Smithey

Spike Lee boxes outside of his directorial weight-class with a war story bogged down with ham-handed smacks of magical realism and over-pronounced examples of racial prejudice. Lee’s muddle of inappropriate camera angles, overemphasized exposition, and overall inability to get beyond the scope of the source material makes the cinematic garment seem like it was made with a shortage of fabric. James McBride’s script, based on his own novel, proves problematic in its attempt to create a believable fictionalized account of the experiences of a group of four Buffalo Soldiers (African-American men) fighting in the 92nd Infantry Division in Tuscany, Italy between August 1944 and November of 1945. The troop survive crossing a shallow river into enemy territory where they remain trapped with a group of Italian locals, unaided by their unit’s white commander who refuses to send in reinforcements because he doesn’t believe their reported location. The group’s largest soldier Sam (Omar Benson Miller) has a knack for lugging around heavy things, like a decapitated statue head, and a lost little Italian boy named Angelo who he believes will keep his squad safe from harm. This is a war movie that’s all over the place. Its performances range from disappointing to mediocre in an overlong film that’s more likely to give you a headache than any sense of thematic resolve.

[tbone]

The reviews the have come out demonstrate what I have this movie might be -- still will be worth a look however

[Lawgick]

Despite these disappointing reviews I'll be seeing the movie anyway. I'm not at all surprised that they felt the emphasis on racism was too strong. Ignorance is bliss...

[Bourne101]

I'm not at all surprised that they felt the emphasis on racism was too strong. Ignorance is bliss...

It's okay if the issue is brought up a few times throughout the movie, because it was a massive issue in those days (and still is today), but when it is constantly shoved in your face to the point where the entire movie's focus is on black people condemning white people, then it is worthy of complaint. The movie is about a group of black soldiers who get stuck inside German lines in an Italian village. I'd rather the emphasis be on that story and mystery than 166 minutes of Spike Lee throwing in constant cheap shots toward white people, creating characters that only resemble himself.

[Lawgick]

..It's okay if the issue is brought up a few times throughout the movie, because it was a massive issue in those days...


Hmmm...

[Bourne101]

So you suggest the whole movie should be a group of black soldiers condemning white people? That's not what I want to see Miracle at St. Anna for.

[DareDevil]

Martin Scorsese
Paul Thomas Anderson
Michael Mann
Steven Spielberg
Quentin Tarantino
Ridley Scott
Tim Burton
David Fincher
Francis Ford Coppola
Clint Eastwood
Peter Jackson
Sam Mendes
Guillermo Del Toro
James Cameron
Oliver Stone
Alfonso Cuarón
Danny Boyle

I agree with those from your list bourne

[Nutcracker]

Moriarty from AintItcool News has an interesting positive review of Miracle At St Anna up. I actually respect Moriarty as a critic and writer (unlike Harry, whose opinions I'll happily ignore) so this is making me a bit more enthusiastic after the early not-so-good reviews. Anyway, Moriarty suggests that this is Lee's geekiest film to date (in that film geeks will enjoy his heavy reference to previous cinema), and is like an array of cinematic influences (1930's Warner Bros. Melodrama, 1940's WW2 picture, 1950's Italian neorealism, and magical realism as well). He thinks it's a rich and ambitious film, and Lee isn't resting on his laurels like many other great directors. I don't know if I'll like the film, but Moriarty makes it sound incredibly interesting. Doesn't sound anything like a conventional war movie. Could be an initially misunderstood film that finds a lot of supporters (Aronofsky's THE FOUNTAIN or Gibson's APOCALYPTO springs to mind. Many people love them, but a lot of critics really hated those films).

http://aintitcool.com/node/38250

(be warned. The talkback makes this thread seem like an episode of the Brady Bunch:D)

[Triadkd]

Despite these disappointing reviews I'll be seeing the movie anyway. I'm not at all surprised that they felt the emphasis on racism was too strong. Ignorance is bliss...

EXACTLY. That is the white film community and white people in generals problem with Spike Lee and his films. White people LEGALLY treated black people like shit until rougly 40 years ago. It should NEVER be forgotten or glossed over in any way. Lee tells the truth and he does not sugar coat a thing which is why I love him. The thing that kills me is that their has never been a film or television show which depicts the full on savergy of white people towards blacks and guys like bourne still act like it's too much. How many holocaust films have been made and how many more will be made in the future? I have yet hear someone complain about hollywood harping WW2 and the holocaust.

[Bourne101]

This has nothing to do with the actual depiction of racism, slavery, etc. There are plenty of films out there that solely depict racism toward black people in about the most graphic and brutal way that the MPAA will allow. This movie isn't a depiction of actual racism. It is a film about a group of black soldiers who get stuck inside German lines in an Italian village and the mystery which surrounds it. Obviously they are probably going to talk about racism because of the situation at that time, but when it completely takes focus off of the plot, then that is a problem, and that is just bad filmmaking.

Hollywood has made films specifically about the holocaust and WWII. Movies specifically depicting the holocaust and WWII. There are also many films depicting the racism toward black people during slavery and post-slavery. That's fine, it's called depicting history and that is great. But Miracle at St. Anna isn't about racism (at least the plot doesn't indicate it), hence the reason it is a fault in the film craft. That would be like watching a version of Knocked Up where the characters (who are mainly Jewish) just talk about how much they hate Germans throughout its runtime.

But hey, if you want to listen to a group of black soldiers condemn white people for 2 hours and 46 minutes, that's cool. That's just not my idea of a potentially great film like Miracle at St. Anna, and hopefully it is not as extreme as the above reviews indicate. I am still very much looking forward to seeing it and seeing how the story unfolds when these soldiers become trapped inside German lines in the Italian village, as well as learning the mystery of Hector Negron and the statue head.

[Lawgick]

So you suggest the whole movie should be a group of black soldiers condemning white people? That's not what I want to see Miracle at St. Anna for.

Is that what I suggest? hmmm...?

[Bourne101]

Is that what I suggest? hmmm...?

Well what do you suggest? I make a post which says that it's alright for the issue to be brought up, just not in excess so it ruins the focus of the film. You reply with something that implies "What the fuck are you talking about? This movie should be filled with black soldiers condemning white people."

So again, what do you suggest? That the movie bring up the issue to get the point across, but not in excess so it takes away from the focus of the film. OR... have the whole movie consist of dialogue which condemns white people?

PS.

There are some new wonderful comments courtesy of Spike Lee over in the Celeb Talk/Gossip forum. As you've probably suspected, it's typical Spike Lee bullshit.

[Lawgick]

Well what do you suggest? I make a post which says that it's alright for the issue to be brought up, just not in excess so it ruins the focus of the film. You reply with something that implies "What the fuck are you talking about? This movie should be filled with black soldiers condemning white people."

No, That's what you choose to see in my reply. You got the "what the fuck are you talking about?" part right but the latter part is just you trying validating your own views about the movie.

So again, what do you suggest? That the movie bring up the issue to get the point across, but not in excess so it takes away from the focus of the film. OR... have the whole movie consist of dialogue which condemns white people?

How about I present my own option instead of the 2 you present here? I would want the movie to give a realistic view of the constant hardships and prejudice the black soldiers had to endure as well as the reaction the soldiers would have to such treatment. There is no doubt in my mind(or I would assume the mind of any rational thinking person) that these soldiers would talk about what they go through OFTEN.

My fellow soldiers(white) treat me like shit even though I put my life on the line?...YEAH, I'm going to talk about that to my fellow soldiers(black) that deal with the same abuse...ALOT!

My fellow soldiers(wHite) are showing more respect to the enemy POWs(white) that were trying to kill them then they do me?....YEAH, I'm going to talk about that...ALOT.

My fellow soldiers still callin me a nigger out in the field...are less likely to watch my back....may even let me die to save a white soldier...Can't trust my Fellow Soldier????....YEAH, I'm going to talk about that...ALOT. It happened and even if black people may not have talked about it very often around whites it doesn't mean we didn't talk about it often. In fact, WE STILL DO. SURPRISE!

I'm glad Lee didn't bow down to the constant pressure to downplay the racism that is still prevalent in this country so that certain people wouldn't feel uncomfortable. If the ugly face of racism makes alot of people fell uneasy...TUFF NUTS. It makes people uneasy because its not being addressed.

LEE addresses it and for that he is called an asshole, a prick, and a racist(ironic!).


PS.

There are some new wonderful comments courtesy of Spike Lee over in the Celeb Talk/Gossip forum. As you've probably suspected, it's typical Spike Lee bullshit.

Yeah I suspect there will be some bullshit alright, but not from Lee.

Truth be told I believe that the issue of racism won't be nearly as distracting for people that are willing to accept reality. For those that want to bury their heads in the sand however...it will be "excessive".

[Nutcracker]

Edited; Because I really can't be bothered.

[DME]

Lee actually clarified himself in a recent interview, and said he's made efforts to aplogise to Eastwood for the whole thing being taken out of context (Lee actually got Steven Speilberg to mediate a truce between them, and offered to send Eastwood a free print of MIRCALE AT ST ANNA by as a peace offer). A shame very few people are paying attention when Lee is actually showing a rare act of contrition.

Here's what Lee said about the situation at this wek's Toronto film festival, and he sounds perfectly reasonable about the whole thing;

"Here's the thing", said Lee. "To be honest I was not speaking out against Clint Eastwood and Flags Of Our Fathers and Letters From Iwo Jima. I said Clint Eastwood is a great fillmmaker. But I was also stating a fact; There were no black servicemen in these films. Somebody told me there was a shot of three in one film. I must have blinked."

"But I'm sorry it escalated to where it did and as far as I'm concerned, it's over and done with".

"The big picture is that Clint Eastwood is not the director of every single film in Hollywood of the World War 2 genre that belittled or disrespected or ommitted the contribution of the 1.1million African-American men or women who fought and participated in World War 2", Lee said.

"It's not about Clint Eastwood. It's about Hollywood".

I like how this whole bit got ignored as the thread continued...

[Bourne101]

I like how this whole bit got ignored as the thread continued...

Because it was bullshit and just Lee covering up his tracks because he knew he fucked up badly.

[Lawgick]

Because it was bullshit and just Lee covering up his tracks because he knew he fucked up badly.

LMAO! Did Lee rape you in a former life or something? Wow!:rolleyes:

[Nutcracker]

LMAO! Did Lee rape you in a former life or something? Wow!:rolleyes:

LOL!

It's gotten ridiculous, hasn't it. When I saw he was the one who started the brand new Lee bashing thread on the celeb forum (I don't think he was getting enough anti-Lee sentiment in here), I just fucking gave up.

[Bourne101]

So you guys think those apologies were genuine? What world do you live in?

[ilovemovies]

Who fucking cares! This thread is suppose to be about Miracle at St. Anna. It's not suppose to be about Spike Lee's personality or his spat with Clint Eastwood. This has gotten off topic. I've seen too many threads that have been derailed lately. It's kind of gotten out of hand.

[DME]

Because it was bullshit and just Lee covering up his tracks because he knew he fucked up badly.

Well, that's when people tend to apologize. When they fuck up, you know?

[Bourne101]

Well, that's when people tend to apologize. When they fuck up, you know?

Yeah, but there's a difference between a sincere apology, and apologizing simply so you're chances of winning an Oscar are better. You really think that Spike Lee doesn't fucking despise Clint Eastwood because there weren't any black people in a Japanese movie? Remember, Lee is the one who said that it was a sin for a white man to direct Ali and Amistad, and that Larry Bird was the most overrated basketball player in the White media.

But like ilovemovies said, we should stick to the topic of Miracle at St. Anna. If you want to bitch about Spike Lee or suck his dick, head on over to one of the many threads about him in the Celeb Talk/Gossip section.

[DME]

Yeah, but there's a difference between a sincere apology, and apologizing simply so you're chances of winning an Oscar are better. You really think that Spike Lee doesn't fucking despise Clint Eastwood because there weren't any black people in a Japanese movie? Remember, Lee is the one who said that it was a sin for a white man to direct Ali and Amistad, and that Larry Bird was the most overrated basketball player in the White media.

But like ilovemovies said, we should stick to the topic of Miracle at St. Anna. If you want to bitch about Spike Lee or suck his dick, head on over to one of the many threads about him in the Celeb Talk/Gossip section.

Aside from the absolute blasphemy that is the Larry Bird comment (and I'm a Laker fan, but let's not discuss that until the '09 season tips off), I don't think what he said above is entirely invalid in any instance.

And I didn't know you could fellate someone via the internet. Technology continues to amaze...

[therealjohng]

This might be the wrong thread idk, but Ebert loved the movie Miracle at St. Anna.



Just checked, shit, sorry. I thought this was the thread for Miracle at St. Anna. Turns out it's the thread about Spike Lee. Sorry for derailing the topic.

[Bourne101]

Here's the RT link, for those who want to see the incoming reviews...

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/miracle_at_st_anna/

[Bourne101]

Ebert loved the movie Miracle at St. Anna.

Could you give me a link to the review or snippet where you found this info?

[therealjohng]

Could you give me a link to the review or snippet where you found this info?


http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080905/FILMFESTIVALS03/809079994

[Bourne101]

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080905/FILMFESTIVALS03/809079994

Thanks.

[Lawgick]

But like ilovemovies said, we should stick to the topic of Miracle at St. Anna. If you want to bitch about Spike Lee or suck his dick, head on over to one of the many threads about him in the Celeb Talk/Gossip section.

hey hey Now guy! keep your kinky fantasies in your own dirty closet, I have no interest in joining your circle jerks.:rolleyes:

[Bourne101]

hey hey Now guy! keep your kinky fantasies in your own dirty closet, I have no interest in joining your circle jerks.:rolleyes:

Can you take a joke without responding with the rolleyes smiley?

[Lawgick]

Can you take a joke without responding with the rolleyes smiley?

You do realize that the smiley is just pixels on a screen right? Don't worry it wont hurt you..............................;)




























:rolleyes:...damn almost made it!

[Bourne101]

You do realize that the smiley is just pixels on a screen right? Don't worry it wont hurt you..............................;)


Yes I realize what it is, but it is generally used as a cop-out for someone who has no argument.

[Lawgick]

Yes I realize what it is, but it is generally used as a cop-out for someone who has no argument.

Or as a way to attach an emotion to your statement, hence the name..."emoticon"...;)

Anyway, I'm done with this thread. The horse is beyond dead, it's mutilated.:p

[AshleysDad]

Time to close this thread, me thinks.

[blankpage]

I as well.

This thread has seriously gotten way out of hand.

Feel free to start a new Miracle at St. Anna thread, but let's stick to talking about the FILM next time. :)