The under-appreciated power of 'balance'.

Rating: 7/10 (2 August 2006)

Disappointingly I felt, the majority of this film is devoted to the time of his life when Malcolm X was self-admittedly in error. In later years he was an inspirational man, but I spent most of the film hating him and the aggressive ideals he adopted for so long before his eventual renunciation. Unfortunately it seemed Lee was more interested in his dubious activities, instead of giving equal weight to BOTH sides of such a complex character.
I understand that 'length' would have been a concern in evaluating this, but here is where I think Lee and his editor could have been more judicious in selecting crucial points of emphasis. They were certainly different men in a lot of ways, but in "Ali" I think Michael Mann did a much better job of capturing the overall essence of a person by zeroing in on pivotal moments and excising as much of what could be thought 'supplementary material' as possible. I still gave grudging respect to the composition even at times when I was dissatisfied with the path taken, though, because undeniably the scenes are exceptionally well-realised and blended together, throughout.
If Spike had tried to balance it out and given more of the running time to Malcolm's conciliatory efforts then I would most likely be saying it was a masterpiece and calling it an honest and just portrait. When such a large amount of coverage is devoted to an 'unsavoury' element, it makes it seem almost as if 'extremism' is what we should most remember the man for. It isn't. I bitterly regret that what we were handed does not represent the 'even spread' that it should have.