>I think it's a great way
>to start a movie.
>I bet there are a
>few (wink, wink) movies, songs,
>works or art, that was
>created because that person was
>pissed off. Would you
>not agree?

It's a great way to start an essay. It's a great way to start a sermon. It's a great way to start a "letter to the editor."

Perhaps it's even a great way to write music lyrics, which tend to be a much more concise form.

Many works of art may have started with the artist reacting strongly to something. But fiction - and film - is a form that benefits from a clear train of thought and specificity of purpose. These things are often compromised when the writer's mind is clouded by anger (or any other intense feeling). The better writers can channel this emotion into the work, but it is harder than working from a clear purpose and thought from the beginning.

And Spike is not one of the better writers.

One of the main problems I have with Bamboozled is the lack of clarity. He has too many targets he's trying to hit, and spending time on hitting them all detracts from sufficient character development, clear motives and successful resolution.

In my opinion, these problems exist because he started by being angry and wanting to lash out.

So, the
>same holds true here.
>I think the only thing
>that's different is that Spike
>Lee is the person creating
>this work, which lends itself
>to being criticized more the
>average director.

Spike Lee may be criticized more than the average director, but it's because he puts himself on the line more than the average director. Few members of the media, certainly none of any reputable standing, criticize his films more simply because he's Spike. Lot's of people criticize HIM, though.

But like I've said, it's an important movie that everyone should see.

RED

Signatures are soooo last millennium.