Seems that Spike can pitch, but he can't catch.

[Nathyn]

I don't know what point you're making. There's still plenty of racism in the world but at the same time America's favorite heroes are usually Black. Will Smith, depending on which metric you use, is the world's most bankable actor, A skinny guy from Hawaii is sprinting towards the presidency of the world's most powerful nation, and Jordan still makes a hundred million a year off endorsements.

What you're pointing out is the exception, not the rule. And the fact of the matter is recent studies show some people still factor that skinny guy from Hawaii race into the vote as a negative even though the person is more qualified than the other person whose running the country now. Hell my College GPA 3.5. I was an A-B student with a few Cs. Our leader was a C student. Go figure. I'm smarter than our current leader and I bet many of you are too.

But the stuff you're listing sounds petulant and false.

Really? Okay believe what you want. See the world the way you want. All I know is The Nick Fury discussion board on IMDB is nothing but thread after thread about Samuel Jackson being black (keep in mind the character is actually black in the comic now) while there's NOT ONE THREAD about Jolie playing a black female in Wanted. Not one. But I guess I'm telling lies. BTW, to say something "sounds false" in the internet age where info is right at your fingertips on the same computer you're using to post the thread. I find that petulant and lazy. See how I used petulant. I didn't know what it meant so looked it up in the Webster's dictionary online. Open your eyes.

Nick Fury
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0482631/

Wanted
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0493464/

Spike has had a viral case of diarrhea of the mouth for several years.

The main point I was making was simply that Spike does talk a lot of smack but I (personally) don't think it's always just about the topic he's speaking on and I do believe there's a lot of anger in him about unseen prejudices that still exist and they don't make sense. This topic has made me realize that anger exist in myself as well and many others.

Spike's got a big mouth, and uses it to bring himself attention. God knows, unless he stumbles into making a good film, his work lately sure as hell won't.

Wow you really think "Inside Man" was bad? And "Miracle" is getting decent reviews. Where do you get "unless he stumbles into making a good film". Really?

Hollywood makes calls on the basis of the market and what they think will yield a ROI.

Everyone knows the closer you get to the comic the more word of mouth you get from the fan. Do the opposite and those same fans will tank your film. Look at the take for Sin City versus the take for Catwoman. Sin City was an indy comic by Dark Horse (a big company but not Marvel or DC). Catwoman is a very popular character in the DCU. What happened? People chose to screw things up when in this time period we know how a superhero film is supposed to be done. Stick to the story. Maybe I'm wrong and $85,000,000 Catwoman movie didn't flop. Maybe it blew up the box office and I just didn't hear about it. If you can't do a Catwoman film on a $85,000,000 budget then you shouldn't be making superhero films at all. It's like making a bad Punisher film - oh wait. The irony is it's probably cheaper to make a good Catwoman film. Catwoman has not one superpower. It's implied she has nine lives. We don't know that for sure.

A black director (who will go unnamed) told me about a pitch meeting where after the pitch the white producers basically told him what black people will buy. But I guess there's no way a black man would know what movies black people buy.

-Nate

 

[Jim Brennan]

Wow, there are some very well-thought out posts here. Interestingly, my point could have been about anything, yet because one director is black and outspoken and one is a huge hero for white America (not implying that Clint asked for that), it devolves into race.

My point was simply that one man criticized another's film, but seemed unwilling to accept similar criticism of his own.

It's telling to me that so much of this is still seething under the surface, ready to ignite. So many unresolved issues for all of us.

But for me, conversations of this nature (race, politics, philosophy, etc) suffer in this environment and are better engaged in person. So if any of you find yourself in this armpit of Colorado, look me up and we'll share a pint or two and dig deep into the muck.

Until then, cheers. :beer:

 

[Matt Grunau]

Wow you really think "Inside Man" was bad? And "Miracle" is getting decent reviews. Where do you get "unless he stumbles into making a good film". Really?


-Nate

No, I thought Inside Man was good. Miracle was good. Where those the only two movies he made, I would say he was a good director. But, here's the catch:

They weren't.

Since you like to use IMDB as a reference, I decided to use that as well. Spike has 26 movies which were not shorts, made for tv, music videos, or in any kind of production. According to IMDB, the average rating for those movies was a whopping 5.163 out of 10 stars.

So, he has had a few, lets even say 6 really good movies, which he hasn't. But let's say 6. And let's also round the total amount of movies down to a multiple of 6. Do that, and he still is only hitting 25% for really good movies.

In other words, if one was a betting man and was given the option to bet for, or against Spike's next film being a hit, I wonder which route he would go?

I know which option I would choose.

 

[Ian-T]

Jim....if I'm ever out in Colorado....I'll take you up on that.

Matt...that's silly man. But you made me think. Spike had a number of hit movies....at least I think so. If you think about it....most Oscar winning movies....are box office duds. Most of the time I never heard of that particular movie until the ceremony....and them winning STILL does not make me go out and want to watch it in the theater. I'm sorry but most of what I see winning these type of events only happen because of the names attached to it.

So....my point....Just because it was not a box office hit does not mean it was not a great film. Then again...there are also movies that are box office hits that stinks in every category (this is basically the norm). So your point in using IMDB to rate Spike Lee's movies as good or bad does not make sense..... I know you were only trying to use Nathan's example against him....but I'm sure there are better ones.

 

[Batutta]

Spike has two major failings as a director;

1) His agenda too often gets in the way of telling a story. Sometimes, the agenda is the story.

2) He does stupid sh*t with the camera. He thinks he's Scorsese but he's not.

 

[Nathyn]

It's telling to me that so much of this is still seething under the surface, ready to ignite. So many unresolved issues for all of us.

Yes Jim, now you're getting to the nitty gritty. There's so much happening underneath. Is some of it just publicity? Maybe. But there's much more to it. I bet Spike Lee goes home sometimes and says "Did I really say that?" But there is so much happening under the surface of those comments.

Since you like to use IMDB as a reference, I decided to use that as well. Spike has 26 movies which were not shorts, made for tv, music videos, or in any kind of production. According to IMDB, the average rating for those movies was a whopping 5.163 out of 10 stars.

Come on man. You said "God knows, unless he stumbles into making a good film, his work lately sure as hell won't." Those are his two of his later works. Before that was "When the Levees Broke: A Requiem in Four Acts", then there was "She Hate Me" (a totally original movie), then "25th Hour". So which of these films did he "stumble into", hmm? Most of his film are very good technically and in storytelling so what did I miss. By the way out of the last few things I mentioned the lowest rating was 5.3 for "She Hate Me". "When the Levees Broke: A Requiem in Four Acts" is rated 8.6. 25th Hour is rated 7.9. Inside Man 7.7. What? I guess he just fell into it. Spike Lee has spoken about the fact he's a big name in Hollywood but he still can't get major studios to back his movies. They're too "risky". Borrows from friends and family, just like us.

But I have to ask are you really going to look at IMDB ratings? Do you know the people on IMDB are rating "Fireproof" 1's simply because it's a Christian film it getting a lot of press. It was number #4 at the box office beating out "Burn after Reading". Do a news search on the film. Do you know it was getting low ratings before it ever got released or shown? That's IMDB, the same site where people dis black people for playing black characters and love white actors who play them. These are the same people that voted down "The Godfather" to get the Dark Knight to #1. (I haven't seen the Dark Knight but this generation obviously thinks more of it than the Godfather). I'm just reminding you about that.

Spike has two major failings as a director;

1) His agenda too often gets in the way of telling a story. Sometimes, the agenda is the story.

Granted

2) He does stupid sh*t with the camera. He thinks he's Scorsese but he's not.

I like his visual style.

-Nate

 

[CallaghanFilms]

Spike has two major failings as a director;

1) His agenda too often gets in the way of telling a story. Sometimes, the agenda is the story.

2) He does stupid sh*t with the camera. He thinks he's Scorsese but he's not.

......3) See 1 & 2


You have his number.:beer:

 

[brianluce]

. BTW, to say something "sounds false" in the internet age where info is right at your fingertips on the same computer you're using to post the thread. I find that petulant and lazy. See how I used petulant.

[
-Nate

Using IMDB discussion threads as a fact source isn't going to convince many people.

Also I don't get this argument that filmmakers shouldn't change the race of characters. What about dramatic license?

I also don't know why you'd say a Black director would know more than white producers about what works or doesn't work with regards to films targeted at the Black community. If I was an investor I'd bet on a producer's judgment not a Director's, the individual's race would barely be a consideration if at all. As an investor, I'd want number crunching and data more than a particular skin color. When it comes to money, I want numbers and red meat, not Black skin, white skin, green skin whatever.



You seem like a cool guy Nate, but you're all messed up on this one.

 

[brianluce]

Spike has two major failings as a director;

1) His agenda too often gets in the way of telling a story. Sometimes, the agenda is the story.

.

Yeah that's what I say. Spare us the sermons Spike. The irony is the guy has no touch at all with regards to the subject of race, which can be a fascinating subject to explore in film, but watching a Spike Lee movie? t's like watching a Harp Seal get clubbed to death.

I loved the scenes in X that were just about the world of the Black mob, but once the soap box comes out? BORING!

 

[Nathyn]

Using IMDB discussion threads as a fact source isn't going to convince many people.

The IMDB discussion thread proved the point I wanted to make pretty well, if not then I don't know what to say.

Also I don't get this argument that filmmakers shouldn't change the race of characters. What about dramatic license?

When working with fan based films, "dramatic license" can be your worse enemy depending on the property. Ask Halle Berry how well dramatic license did for Catwoman. This is the sole reason Marvel comics started doing their own films.

I also don't know why you'd say a Black director would know more than white producers about what works or doesn't work with regards to films targeted at the Black community.

I didn't say that. I'm point out the idea if telling a black man that black people only like or buy XYZ when they've only tried ABC doesn't wash.

You seem like a cool guy Nate, but you're all messed up on this one.

No I'm not. If you understand what I'm saying. Again you're seeing what you want to see and ignoring other things being pointed out to you.

-Nate

 

[J.R. Hudson]

Wow

This thread is a good one.

I feel, as mentioned above, that including blacks in the film (Back on topic) would have been contrived and back to my original point; they're making a film about the flag bearers, at what point during the production meeting and script development is someone supposed to say "Hey ! We should get some shots of the blacks that were on the island!"

I mean come on, ya know ?

That's ludicrous.

If it's about the battle itslef, then maybe, yes, of course, tell the story as it was. But it wasn't about that.

Blacks in Hollywood are all over the place and kicking ass; as mentioned, Will Smith is probably the biggest slam dunk in Hollywood, Obama will most likley be next President, Jamie Foxx, Halle Berry, Sam Jackson, Morgan Freeman, Denzel Washington, Cuba Gooding Jr. ...........

Put blacks in the Flags movie ? It's absurd to suggest it was on purpose (Not that anyone is) and it's absurd to bring it up (Spike).


Spike is a douchebag. Batutta had a great post. And his whole trying to sue for SPIKE TV's name is out of mind.

I also don't know why you'd say a Black director would know more than white producers about what works or doesn't work with regards to films targeted at the Black community

Look at Jackie Brown. Total movie demoed at the black market. Pam Grier ? Sam Jackson ? Chris Tucker ? Made my my man QT and Lawrence Bender.

Glory ? By Edward Zwick.

The Color Purple - Spielberg

Damn, Spike. Don't make me bust out the Reggie Jpeg again.

 

[Ryan Patrick O'Hara]

My college was gracious enough to have mr. Spike Lee to my school two years ago as a guest speaker. He spent the most of his time, speaking against George bush and hurricane katrina.

Let me say from a personal experience that Spike Lee is a very dedicated person of personnel belief. He is very dedicated with his view.

Don't ever expect the man to be nuetral. The best thing about him is his dedication to his craft. He won't apologize to anyone! And for that, he is a true filmaker. Or at least he made me feel like.

He knows how to work the machine, and he does it well. Let him be.

 

[ddp]

.....Hell my College GPA 3.5. I was an A-B student with a few Cs. Our leader was a C student. Go figure. I'm smarter than our current leader and I bet many of you are too.

-Nate

That's the line of thinking that gave many a professional critics their start....

 

[brianluce]

Blacks in Hollywood are all over the place and kicking ass; as mentioned, Will Smith is probably the biggest slam dunk in Hollywood, Obama will most likley be next President, Jamie Foxx, Halle Berry, Sam Jackson, Morgan Freeman, Denzel Washington, Cuba Gooding Jr. ...........




[/SIZE][/FONT][/B]

Don't forget Gary Coleman...He rocks!

 

[CallaghanFilms]

I gotta call foul. That a role's race is changed for any kind of agenda-driven reason is a nonsensical argument. Hell, I know a big chunk of Morgan Freeman's roles were written as white characters (Unforgiven, Shawshank, etc). I believe that count in now pushing 10 different "white" parts for Freeman, including many of his best known. I'm sure that could also be said for Will Smith and Denzel (I don't feel like researching the stats). The powers that be go with who they feel is best for the role, and (equally-more important) who is bankable enough. Plain and simple.

I also don't get the point of the whole Halle Barry/Catwoman bit? Justyn, are you saying they (the studios) knew it was a shi*ty property upfront?! 'Cause conventional wisdom shows us that Hollywood doesn't set out to make a turd. If that happens to be the case (as with Catwoman) it is usually due to a gross miscalculation on their part (of both the filmmakers and of the audience).

Edit:
typo

 

[J.R. Hudson]

I concur on the Cat Woman comment

Halle had just come off an Oscar Win and the James Bond film.

 

[Nathyn]

I also don't get the point of the whole Halle Barry/Catwoman bit? Justyn, are you saying they (the studios) knew it was a shi*ty property upfront?! 'Cause conventional wisdom shows us that Hollywood doesn't set out to make a turd. If that happens to be the case (as with Catwoman) it is usually due to a gross miscalculation on their part (of both the filmmakers and of the audience).

Edit:
typo

You assume that Hollywood cares. You know that if you make a film like Catwoman than disconnect it from the universe (The DC Comics Universe or the DCU) that the film will be a dud. That's conventional wisdom. What Justyn is saying seems to be accurate. We all know the closer to the book the better. Catwoman was a film that was set up to flop. Wesley Snipes made the same accusation about Blade 3.

Your argument about conventional wisdom is false. You can take the same bad script and do three things and have had a hit. Watch these simple steps:

1. Set the movie in Gotham City. (A no brainer). You should hear news about Batman and see signs that Batman, Robin, Nightwing etc. exist.

2. Don't have the villian be the owner of a make up company. It's nice to try to sale women on the "you're beautiful as you are look what they're doing to you message" to bad your audience will mainly be male and your movie is will suck. Try this: Have Harley Quinn poison the make up supply. Yes it's a plot stolen from Tim Burton's Batman. That's why it makes sense.

3. Catwoman and Harley fight - often.

Basically you watch Batman and remake it as Catwoman. Why is this hard? You would've had a hit and all the fans would've said "That was awesome!"

Under conventional wisdom number 1 would've been done automatically. You didn't see them take Spiderman out of New York or Superman out of Metropolis. Even Smallville takes place on the Kent farm and mentions Metropolis.

Why is the black female TOTALLY cut off from the DCU? Going back to the same argument I made about the black superheroes at Marvel (and before people say it's false please do some research) you don't make a black and white Superhero comic at a big company when conventional wisdom says black and white superhero comics don't sale. So why make a black and white comic when the super team is ALL BLACK? Don't close your eyes to it, look at it dead in the face. NEVER has a black and white non-manga comic hit the shelves from Marvel. The Conan Magazines back in the day but never a standard comic. "Standard" means full color shelf sized book.

If Halle were a white actress she would have been Selina Kyle (just like Angelina was Fox and no one batted and eye). Hm - waitaminute, just did some checking. Batman Returns:

Actress: White (Michelle Pfeiffer)

Character: Catwoman /Selina Kyle 'nuff said.

I would've loved to see a Michelle Pfeiffer Catwoman film. But since they went in this direction why not give Halle the full treatment? Why shouldn't she be Selina Kyle in Gotham city. There is not now nor ever was, a Catwoman ever named Patience Phillips. Even doing a basic search on the name "Patience Phillips" there are references to the movie but not a single reference to DC comic. This is why Marvel produces their own movies. They treated the black woman instead of giving her full treatment.

What's full treatment? Good script based closely on the source material (Spiderman, Superman, Batman, Blade, Hulk, X-men), good direction, good story and don't exploit the actor/actress and fans by simply making a movie that you never intended to be true to the source material. Yes they knew this movie would tank. The Hulk went so far as to try to meld the TV and comic-book origins.

Again money is not Hollywood's only priority otherwise with the big budgets they're dealing with they would get the simple things right all the time. I would say maybe it was just a fluke. But in 2004 the formula for making a good superhero flick had been written in stone. I can do it in my sleep. It's easy.

-Nate

 

[CallaghanFilms]

...What Justyn is saying...

I meant NATHYN, not Justyn. My mistake.

 

[Nathyn]

Oh, I was looking for that post. LOL.

-Nate

 

[brianluce]

Again money is not Hollywood's only priority otherwise with the big budgets they're dealing with they would get the simple things right all the time. I would say maybe it was just a fluke. But in 2004 the formula for making a good superhero flick had been written in stone. I can do it in my sleep. It's easy.

-Nate

I don't understand. You're saying Hollywood is motivated by things other than money? Like what?

Are you saying Hollywood intentionally creates movies to make Black people look bad? Please explain.