Do the Right Thing

Controversy aside, this third picture by writer/director/producer/actor Spike Lee is an astonishing picture, with a style, clarity, and urban energy that reveal a major talent. Whatever else he may be, Lee is just a damn good filmmaker. The fact that he chooses to direct his energies towards exploring some of the larger ambiguities of modern life is simply a bonus. As has been endlessly described, the picture focuses on what happens on the hottest day of the year in a neighborhood in Bed-Stuy, but really it's about bitterness, race, intransigence, and misunderstanding, about misdirected energies and poor communication. Yet for such a thematically heavy picture, it is imbued with tremendous verve and wit and peopled with characters of such distinction that even the minor supporting roles stand out.

Throughout the film, you can feel the storm clouds gathering for what will be the final confrontation, but along the way Lee presents an almost lyrical look at the daily life of this particular neighborhood. That vision, incidentally, has been criticized as being falsely idyllic and charming (i.e. no drugs, crack, Uzis, or despair), but I don't think that's the point. The point is the unravelling of societal fabric, which has less to do with the weather than the undercurrents of tension which lurk in most every environment, but are especially heightened in those with a racial mix and the added elements of poverty and discontent thrown in. The interesting thing about all this is that Lee shows it all in a basically non-judgmental fashion (which may be what some critics object to). He sets the stage, serves up the tale, and lets the viewer decide the moral perspective. The tragedy of the film is that this sweltering urban playground, whose funked-out energy we start to get into, must inevitably be shattered. But Lee leaves it up to us to decide if there is anyone to blame, and if so, who.

Even the much-talked-about pair of quotes (Martin Luther King and Malcolm X) which close the picture (against and in support of violence, respectively) are designed for a sense of ambiguity; Lee does not reveal which quote he finds the more compelling. One could probably make a case for either based on the evidence in the film, and everybody will have to draw his or her own conclusion. I suppose that this sense of ambiguity can be viewed as somewhat disconcerting, because one would normally expect that a filmmaker of Lee's obvious range and talent would ultimately use the medium to make a statement, to occupy a moral position, and let viewers decide whether they agree or not, and this probably bothered some people. Had Lee come down squarely on either side of the debate he would have been attacked by somebody, but here he leaves things in a bit of disarray, and any variety of factions could claim that the picture was sympathetic to their side... or denounce it as damaging propaganda. Here it is hard to believe either the writing OR the writer; even in his interviews Lee has been less than clear about where he stands. The picture is exceptional: technically accomplished, with superb performances from all the players. It is cut very close to the bone, with only a few odd moments which seem out of place (i.e. the racial epithet litany--we would get the point without it). But the bottom line is that when it is over, you have to supply some of the answers yourself. Not everybody will be happy about this, but they will be thinking about the picture, and talking about it, and these days, that alone is a triumph.