Spike's Litmus Test??

Rating: 2/10 (16 June 2020)

I'm a bit perplexed on how this movie even got made. Seriously, its pretty bad and not of Lee's caliber. Accordingly, it reminds me Stephen King and his "Richard Bachman" books from the late 70s and early 80s.
As it went, King created the ficticious author Bachman to see if his continued success was driven by his growing fame, or was the success authenticly based on his skill. King wrote several titles as Bachman, many which sold fairly well, including popular titles like Thinner and the Running Man.
With Spike Lee, if also wanting to do such a test to see if his continued market success is due actual talent or simply just his fame, then he obviously couldn't use a fictious name credit (it would leak since too many people are involed in a movie, unlike a book), so the next best thing would be to make the absolute worst movie possible that his producers would allow. Then, if this trainwreck movie was deemed a dud then it would be no suprise and he'd maybe feel that he should believe that the reviews of his other movies were at least honest. But if the trainwreck recieved sweeping acclaim by the mainstream reviewers, then it'd be obvious his "success" was probably based merely on his fame (or in the current climate, based on fear of racial backlash?),
So I hope for Lee, in a way, that this movie was his "test" (even though, judging from all the excellent reviews, he failed). Because if this wasn't a test, and this trainwreck of a Vietnam movie truely was the best that Lee could manage, then I really feel sorry for him.