If you are suggesting that 'Do the Right Thing' was his last "good" movie than I think you are in the minority.
I have no problem with that.
I happen to think nearly all of his films are interesting in some way, but don't fit the typical Hollywood format of pure 'entertainment.' Spike takes a more artistic approach to film making, clearly believes sending a message in his work is important, and often his highly stylized direction does not work for the average film goer who likes Hollywood blockbusters.
If it is your suggestion that I am the average film goer, then I won't even argue. However, his 'artistic approach' has grown very little since he came on the scene. He re-uses his techniques (Or lack thereof) ad nauseum.
His movies are more similar to foriegn film that does not appeal to most mainstream American film goers.
Again? So his movies are good because they don't appeal to the public at large?
'She Hate Me,' while flawed, had some interesting ideas within it and kept my interest througout, '25th Hour' was a strong drama, where I liked the way he tied in some post-9/11 NYC issues into the story. 'Bamboozled' was one of the most ambitious, in-your-face, approaches to the kind of racism that exists in America today that we've seen in contemporary film. 'Summer of Sam,' which I didn't love upon first viewing, is one that grows on you (this was also the film which gave Adrian Brody serious attention, and a chance at other bigger roles) and 'He Got Game' was a very poignent take on the realities of the High School/College/NBA recruitment process.
This is my point exactly. Because he attempts to address serious subject matter, so many people think that the movie "must be good". Not only is he technically inferior for a director who gets so much props, but his movies leave you scratching your head---> "What was the point he was trying to make?"
Case in point: "Do the right thing"...I defy you to tell me what "The Right Thing" was. He plops a bunch of issues in the pot, mixes in some gratuity, then leaves out any true opinion or message. And that is why I can't stand Spike Lee.
Have you ever seen or read Spike Lee in an interview? He pretty much says nothing! And what he does say is usually inflammatory with no backup whatsoever.
I could go on forever, but his other films like, '4 Little Girls' (the documentary about 4 young black girls killed in the 1960's by racists who blew up a Birmingham, Alabama church) and 'Get on the Bus' are very worthwhile movies, and I'm surprised some of you don't like his 3 more mainstream films from before that, 'Clockers,' 'Crooklyn' and the long but powerful 'Malcom X' which I don't quite understand why oohah, thinks was "butchered" since it's pretty darn close to what was written in his Autobiography.
I think a movie has to do more than talk about important issues to be good. Now, if you tell me that things changed after "X" I might believe you. The reason I did not like that one is specifically because of the things he left out, some of which were very important. If you are going to make a 3+ hour movie, don't pick and choose, show it all. Also, Spike casting himself as Shorty when he can't act a lick shows him for the egomaniac he is.
I tried to watch Bamboozled (Because it ws the only thing on) and I found it unwatchable and amateurish. I watched some of "Get on the Bus" and once again, the discussion of important issues does not equal a good movie, it was slow and boring. Discussion of issues does not equal a good play or TV show for that matter. These are forms of entertainment first and foremost, if all I want is discussion of issues we have cable TV point/counterpoint shows and other forms of media that are not intrinsically meant to be entertainment.
Of course, film taste is subjective, but there still are fans out there, like me, who check for Spike's work, and I frankly admire him for not pulling any punches when making movies, when most of Hollywood is not interested in really confronting contemporary issues without giving us a "happy ending."
If Spike did not make movies about "Issues" nobody would give a damn about him. That is all he has. He is a one-trick pony.
America is not the only market in the world for movies, and some directors like Spike and Woody do better outside of the U.S.
Very true, and I certainly haven't suggested that movies from other cultures are lesser...but there is a reason why American Movies sell all over the world, not just America, and are emulated moreso than the movie-making of any other culture, and that is because our movies are meant to be entertaining and are generally slick and technically strong. And by the way, I HATE what has happened to the American cinema in the past 20 years. Movies made by marketing departments. Bleh.
Presike beat me to the punch about Spike lee. talk to any one that knows any thing about movies and they will tell you he is one of the most influencia and most important directors in film history, and the knicks are going to win tonight.... by 12
I hope you are not predicating the validity of your first comment with your prediction.
Anyway, I think you are confusing "Talked About" with "influential and important". And for your information, I know PLENTY about the CINEMA, going back to the Lumiere Bros., Keaton, Chaplin, and even the works of Griffith and Riefenstahl, who even though they espoused abhorrent viewpoints are WAY more influential than Spike Lee could ever be.
You know what I would like to see? Spike Lee make a movie that is meant to be entertaining and nothing else. Then we could see how good he really is, rather than think about the smokescreen of issues he puts on the table and leaves hanging there.
oohah
12/14/2005 2:58 PM