From: isbell@ai.mit.edu (Charles L Isbell)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
Subject: Re: spike lee &  boston celtics
Date: 20 Nov 92 15:25:38
Organization: MIT Artificial Intelligence Laboratory
	<1992Nov18.212243.27945@u.washington.edu> <98314@netnews.upenn.edu>
	<1992Nov19.195319.27398@u.washington.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: panther.ai.mit.edu
In-reply-to: il@bambam.u.washington.edu's message of Thu, 19 Nov 1992 19:53:19 GMT

il@bambam.u.washington.edu (Il Hwan Oh) writes:
|myra@saul.cis.upenn.edu (Myra VanInwegen) writes:
|> iho@cac.washington.edu writes:
|> >I've seen a few of his films (_Do_The_Right_Thing_, _Mo'_Better_Blues_,
|> >and _Jungle_Fever_) and have to disagree with you.  While they were
|> >interesting to watch, I wouldn't have minded missing them.  
|> >  His movies incorporate a lot of very
|> >stylistic elements and uniquely innovative techniques.  
|> You wouldn't have missed them despite their use of these uniquely
|> innovative techniques? Maybe your disagrement with the content is
|> blinding you to their artistic merit, which even you admit.

|Maybe I misstated my feelings.  I don't feel like I really need to
|see his movies any more because they all tend to be about the same
|subject.  It's this limited scope of subject matter that I have a
|problem with.  For me, it gets old really fast.  The innovative
|techniques are nice, but they should be used to enhance the movie
|rather than become the attraction in the movie, in my opinion.

I'd love to see you explain how _She's Got To Have It_ is "about the
same subject" as _Mo Better Blues_, _Do The Right Thing_, or _School
Daze_ or how any of those movies is about the same thing.

The only common thread is that there are Black people in the lead
roles.  This does not make them the same.

|[descriptions of some of S. Lee's techniques deleted]
|> >It's also blatantly obvious that
|> >the movies were written and directed by a black person,
|> Am I supposed to think that there's something wrong with this?

|There's more to a person than his/her color.  If he/she can't get beyond
|that, he/she is cheating him/herself as well as the world of lots of
|potential

And if critics cannot get beyond this then they are cheating
themselves of lots of potential.

|> >and I think there's a lot more to life than that.
|> 
|> WHAT? Let's not just think of this movie, but consider American movies
|> as a whole. The vast majority of them are written and directed by
|> whites (specifically white males). And here's one, just one, that was
|> written and directed by a black guy, and you are faulting it for
|> showing this. I think there's alot more to life than just white folks
|> and white folks' concerns. Or are you suggesting that movies made by
|> white males are universal and cover all possible points of view, so we
|> don't need movies made by any other types of people?

|My problem is that his subject matter is always about racial conflicts/
|problems.  There are many other stories to be told.  As you said, there
|are countless white directors and writers, but very few of their movies
|are about the same subject.  Their subject matters cover a much broader
|spectrum.

You're being narrow.  Linking _School Daze_ to _Mo Better Blues_ or
_Jungle Fever_ is a huuuuge stretch.

|> > His movies reflect (and encourage) thinking in very limited terms.

|> I think just the opposite. These movies serve a very useful function
|> of exposing middle class whites (like myself) to points of view other
|> than the ones we meet in our day to day lives. And, in fact, these are
|> points of view that we as a nation will have to understand and do
|> something about. What were the LA riots other than the result of the
|> people in power in this nation ignoring exactly the problems presented
|> in this movie?

|That's view is a perfect valid one for anyone (including yourself) to
|hold.  My point was just that if someone has a problem with Spike Lee's
|public image and stated opinions, there's a good chance that he/she
|would not like his movies.  I base this conclusion on the fact that
|his movies are always about the one subject he has widely publicized
|and controversial opinions about.

Well, I think your conclusion is flawed for various reasons.  Try
linking each of his known films:

1) She's Gotta Have It
2) School Daze
3) Do The Right Thing
4) Mo Better Blues
5) Jungle Fever
6) Malcolm X

I don't think it can be done.  SGHI and MBB are hardly about racism in
any sense of the word, the former being about gender roles and the
latter about love in the mind of the self-centered individual and the
need to be immortal.  SD perhaps but it's more of a discussion about
class struggle and a diatribe against organizations that subvert
individuality (using frats as an example).  DTRT is about the ethnic
tensions that exist below the surface and can be brought to the
surface by forces beyond the control of those involved *and* about the
inevitability of occassional outbreaks *precisely* because the final
results of violence seem unlinked to the events that preceed them.

JF is about many things, family pride and racism being among them and
Malcolm X is simply about a man who was forged from his time and
transcended himself, a story of self-creation and continual
self-awareness.

Show me PLEASE how these are "about the same thing."

--
Peace.
                     "When society acknowledges you as one of its victims 
                      rather than one of its members, it no longer has 
                      any responsibility to help you."
                                - Kyle Baker, Why I Hate Saturn
                                   -\--/-
    Don't just adopt opinions     |  \/  |       Some of you are homeboys
          develop them.           |  /\  | but only I am The Homeboy From hell
                                   -/--\-