It’s hard not to look at what’s happening right now and not think about Spike Lee’s Do the Right Thing or Malcolm X. For that matter, it’s hard not to think about Ava DuVernay’s Selma, or 13th, or When They See Us. These filmmakers are just two who have always been ready to directly confront urgent issues like those that have reached a boiling point on the streets of America in 2020.
Spike Lee’s Do the Right Thing, one of the greatest American films ever made, came out in 1989. Lest we forget. That was 31 years ago. In the film, Mookie (played by Spike Lee himself) throws a chair through the window that serves as a catalyst for a neighborhood uprising, quite a controversial moment at the time. Here is an excerpt from a NY Times piece written the year it premiered:
Spike Lee’s new film, ”Do the Right Thing” – which depicts racial tensions on the hottest day of the summer in the Bedford-Stuyvesant section of Brooklyn, ending with the killing of a black man by the police and a riot – has generated considerable discussion about its portrayal of blacks, racism and violence. The New York Times recently invited a group to explore issues raised by the film.
The discussion that followed, featuring many different voices from different walks of life, includes none other than director Paul Schrader who says at one point something quite profound:
I remember when I was young and very angry, I wrote this movie ”Taxi Driver.” Spike Lee does not have that privilege; he doesn’t have the privilege to be that angry. Society won’t let him. It’s too dangerous for a black person to be that psychopathically angry at whites, the way that white character in ”Taxi Driver” was at blacks. It’s just not allowed to him. Art doesn’t need to be responsible. Art can be incendiary. Art can be inflammatory. Spike has been held to an extraordinary level of responsibility, and he has risen to it. Which was more than we should ever ask of any artist, and to his great credit that he did.
Another participant, Dr. Alvin F. Poussaint, says:
One thing I think there should be no question about: the movie clearly is an indictment of police brutality in the black community. He dedicates the film to [ Eleanor ] Bumpers and to Michael Stewart and five or six people who were killed by policemen under controversial circumstances. That’s very clear.
Obviously, as far back in 1989 police brutality was a hot-button topic, and it’s discouraging that it’s taking so long to sink in, to the degree that it needed to. When 1992 rolled around, on-the-scene bystander videography was a new thing, so when millions of people were able to see Rodney King being mercilessly beaten by a handful of cops – who were later acquitted of all charges – massive protest and riots broke out on the streets of Los Angeles. Those of us who lived in LA at the time were simultaneously scared and sympathetic. What didn’t happen back then, though, was the mobilization of the entire country. In contrast, the on-camera murder of George Floyd has compelled Americans to come out of their homes during a worldwide pandemic to protest police brutality. This, thanks in large part to the determination and devoted work of the Black Lives Matter movement.
But back in 1992, there was a sense that the black community was on its own with the riots, which destroyed their community downtown – not to mention a misguided retaliatory display of violence when a truck driver was pulled from his vehicle and dragged through the streets of LA. It was, back then, controversial to call it an uprising or a protest – it was most definitely considered a riot. Spike Lee had already foretold how anger over the unjust death of a black man at the hands of cops could inevitably escalate into that kind of violent uprising, so imagine what a powder keg was lit after the Rodney King verdict. King survived his brutal assault, and of course, made his famous plea, “Can’t we all get along.” But that was really only the beginning of a long endless spiral toward worse collisions between the black community and the LAPD. We would soon be caught up in Mark Furhman’s disgraceful OJ tapes where he spewed racial slurs throughout. This problem of crude and often lethal policing is neverending and ongoing and is far from being resolved.
Spike Lee has consistently examined the topic of direct action, even violent action, when it comes to activism for racial injustice with his take on Malcolm X starring Denzel Washington. Decades later, Ava DuVernay would present an alternative but simpatico viewpoint with her Martin Luther King Jr biopic, Selma. Both of these films and indeed both these filmmakers have been diligently exploring this topic – protest, police brutality, systemic racism – for the entirety of their careers.
The main thing that has changed since Do the Right Thing is the level of public response. Everyone is listening now and everyone finally sees a message that black filmmakers have been trying to get across for 30 years.
What I love so much about Do the Right Thing is that Lee’s characters, all of them, are so complex – they are flawed, imperfect, impulsive, contradictory. There are no heroes and no villains. They are locked in a combative place much like American culture then and now.
For her part, Ava DuVernay has explored mass incarceration with with the documentary 13th, which probably does more to explain what brought us to this moment than any other film. She starts with slavery, and traces the line through the Jim Crow laws, the crime bill, to show how American society may have freed the slaves but then found insidious new ways to systematically oppress the black community for the next 100 years.
Most recently, she made the Netflix series When They See Us about the Central Park five who were falsely accused of raping a white woman. And the aftermath of the consequences for the young men who were railroaded. There is nothing happening on the news right now that isn’t explored in DuVernay’s or Lee’s films. What’s interesting is why it took so long for the broader American public to take it seriously enough to risk their own health during a pandemic to rise up and attempt real change.
There has never been an absence of brilliant people willing to take great risks to talk about police brutality, most notably filmmakers who have dared to warn us us of the powder keg that was about to explode. What hasn’t happened until now is enough people listening, understanding, and endeavoring to make meaningful change. Social media can a horrendous incident that might have previously been covered up into a starkly lit impetus that can be shared globally, which is why we now seen worldwide protests over the murder of George Floyd.
The question now becomes how can we create meaningful change to end the sickening cycle that keeps repeating so often for so long? What will it take to change how people in positions of authority perceive black men and women on the streets of America so that they aren’t hunted down and murdered in cold blood. The answers have to be hammered out between leaders of both political parties, and thankfully we have courageous leaders in the black community to ensure effective solutions in good faith. But as we look for guidance to map the right pathways, a really good place to start is with Spike Lee and Ava DuVernay.
Also, I recently watched La Haine for the first time. Damn, what an experience. Masterclass filmmaking, and a message that is as relevant today as it was in the mid-90s.
Some recent films I would add to this list:
Get Out
If Beale Street Could Talk
Queen & Slim
I Am Not Your Negro
Les Miserables (Ladj Ly)
Blindspotting
Strong Island
Hale County This Morning, This Evening
Fruitvale Station
OJ: Made In America
Sorry To Bother You
By the way, the reviews for Da 5 Bloods seem pretty strong so far even though this sounds considerably messier and weirder than BlacKkKlansman: https://www.metacritic.com/movie/da-5-bloods/critic-reviews
He’s earned the right to go weird.
Absolutely (I’d go so far as saying that I like Spike Lee’s films more when they’re weird both tonally and stylistically and even that my small issues with BlacKkKlansman come from a feeling that it’s a little bit too modest compared to a lot of his other films)
I’ll take that action. BlacKkKlansman felt way too conventional to me. There was nothing bold about it. My favorite Spike Lee films have this crackling life to them (He Got Game, Crooklyn, Do The Right Thing), which was noticeably absent in BlacKkKlansman. Da 5 Bloods seems to be a return to form.
I echo the sentiments that it is great that you use your voice and platform for good, Sasha. But I feel like the conversation is not complete without mentioning how white filmmakers are treated when they attempt to tackle race issues in their films, e.g., Kathryn Bigelow for “Detroit”, Steven Spielberg for “The Color Purple”. Why is it OK for white people to help out in this movement so long as we are not trying to tell stories about racism? That doesn’t add up to me. If someone wants to help, shouldn’t you just allow them to help you (in whichever capacity)?
You bring up an interesting thought, one that I feel is fairly on the table. I think the intention is always there when a white filmmaker makes a movie abt Black history/oppression but also why not step aside and allow a black filmmaker the production liberties to bring that story to life in the first place. The conversation is shifting away from ‘how can white people help black people’ and more towards ‘what is wrong with white people to enact such racial atrocities in the first place.’ Take American History X for example, can you imagine what they’d say if a POC directed that film. The message is always stronger coming from a relatable source and I think those who truly want to share a story about ethnithic strife will forfeit their own privileges to assure the story be told the right way. Detroit and Color Purple are amazing films nonetheless, but to direct a movie like that is to subject yourself to the nuances of the racial divide.
First, let me say that the questions I posited above are not my thoughts necessarily, but rather asked in the spirit of discussion and what is fair.
I do not think it reasonable to ask people with ideas/concepts/skills/know how to “step aside” just so that others, who didn’t necessarily have these aforementioned attributes, take a concept and run with it. I think there has to be an understanding in film, and in art, for film is art, that art is meant to be shared as a thought-provoking medium and it shouldn’t matter who puts those ideas forward.
In the case of “Detroit”, which I agree is an excellent film, Bigelow had an idea and ran with it. Should she have taken that idea to a black director and asked them to take the helm? I just don’t see how that would make any sense. But because she didn’t do that, she was crucified, largely by the black community, and I am sorry but I don’t think that is OK.
I do not have the answers here. But I think ignoring that this phenomenon exists in the first place would be a mistake.
I don’t think that was the full extent of the argument against Detroit: the main point at least to me seemed to be that for a lot of people at least the following things were problems: the film’s “idea” was muddled, the full pitch was describing a brutal experience as brutal, which has little value and wouldn’t convince anyone about anything, and the filmmakers’ point of view led to a situation where a lot of details felt wrong, a mistake that in a film that demands incredible amounts of caution led to considerable issues. These are not problems of who made the film but rather whether the film actually understands the topics it’s dealing with and whether it has anything to say about them (and if not, whether there is someone who does understand and has something to say about them).
For the record, I don’t personally think this should be blamed that strongly on Bigelow. All the issues rise from Boal’s script and it feels like Bigelow’s doing her best with what she’s got
Fair enough, but the majority of criticism I saw of the film, much like that of “Zero Dark Thirty”, was from black people who simply would not give the film a chance because it was directed by a white woman.
What do you guys think is going to happen in acting categories ? I think it is going to go this way :
Actress
1) V.Davis-Ma Raney’s Black Bottom (win)
2) J.Lawrence-Red White Water
3) J.Hudson-Respect
4) J.Chastain-The Eyes of Tammy Faye
5) M.Pfeiffer-The French Exit
With Amy Adams winning supporting category for Hillbilly Elegy.
Actor
1) B.Murray-On the Rocks (win)
2) A.Hopkins-The Father
3) G.Oldman-Mank
4) E.Redmayne-The Trial of Chicago 7
5) J.D. Washington-Tenet
At this point I’m not even sure which films will even get released this year.
Murray wins Supporting for French Dispatch
No there is no way The French Dispatch is getting acting nominees. Murray will win leading for “On the Rocks”.
Why not? Wes Anderson has been knocking on Oscar’s door ever since he righted the ship with Moonrise Kingdom. He’s got seven nominations without a win, and frankly French Dispatch looks as strong if not stronger as Grand Budapest. Not being a Netflix or Amazon product helps a ton even in this screwy year.
He surely can get a nominee for director or for screenplay But his movies are never in contention for acting nominees. He makes ensemble movies where actors cannot shine individually but just as a cast.
Murray’s snub in Rushmore was considered one of the more egregious ones in the last few decades, and Fiennes was seen as very close to a nod for Budapest
That’s why I predict he is winning leading actor for On the Rocks. He was also the frontrunner in 2004. Then Sean Penn won. This year i think they will give him that oscar.
Has On the Rocks even begun filming let alone finished?
I wonder if Tenet might actually be a very big player this year. It looks to become the “big return for cinemas after lockdown” after all.
I agree with these picks minus those below:
“J.Lawrence-Red White Water” – This film is still unnamed
Redmayne: His role is not big enough if you follow the story. I expect supporting play for Rylance.
Washington: I would love to this this, but genre film + Nolan is not a winning combination.
My Top Fives:
Anthony Hopkins – The Father (Sony Pictures Classics)
Riz Ahmed – Sound of Metal (Amazon)
Andrew Garfield – Instrumental (TBD)
Colin Firth – Operation Mincemeat (Cohen Media Group)
Adam Driver – The Last Duel (TBD)
Alternate: Armie Hammer – Rebecca (Netflix)
Saoirse Ronan – Ammonite (Neon)
Amy Adams – Hillbilly Elegy (Netflix)
Jennifer Hudson – Respect (United Artists)
Jessica Chastain – The Eyes of Tammy Faye (Searchlight)
Viola Davis – Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom (Netflix)
Alternate: Meryl Streep – The Prom (Netflix), Ruth Negga – Passing (TBD)
Forest Whitaker – Respect (United Artists)
Andre Holland – Passing (TBD)
Adrien Brody – Blonde (Netflix)
Alexander Skarsgard – Passing (TBD)
Benicio Del Toro – The French Dispatch (Searchlight)
Alternate: Rylance
Glenn Close – Hillbilly Elegy (Netflix)
Kate Winslet – Ammonite (Neon)
Olivia Colman – The Father (Sony Pictures Classics)
Tessa Thompson – Passing (TBD)
Nicole Kidman – The Prom (Netflix)
Alternate: Jodie Comer – The Last Duel (TBD)
Why have you put Ronan in leading and Winslet in supporting? Shouldn’t Winslet be leading and Ronan supporting?
I honestly wasn’t sure which way it was going to go.