First, let's recap: On May 21, Eugene posted about Spike Lee's continued criticism of Clint Eastwood'sFlags of Our Fathers and Letters from Iwo Jima for not including African Americans. Lee was asked why Eastwood did it as he did, and I have to say, I don't blame him for responding: "If you reporters had any balls you'd ask him why. There's no way I know why he did that -- that was his vision, not mine..." Today, we got word that Eastwood has responded, with the eloquent "A guy like him should shut his face." He then went on to talk about revisionism.

So, MTV went back to Lee, who is taking, and I quote: "the Obama high road." (New political slang alert! What's next?) He continued: "I've said my statement. I have no ill will towards Mr. Eastwood. What I said to him was not a personal attack, it was an observation. So that's really the end of it."

Think what you will of Lee, but this whole thing is a little ridiculous. If you head back to Erik's 2007 post about Miracle at St. Anna, Lee discussed how he'd met a black veteran who fought at Iwo Jima and was disappointed in Eastwood's portrayal, and how this inspired him to make the film and pay tribute to African American soldiers. Now he's getting crap thrown at him about revisionist history, and all of this is stemming from people asking him to talk about it, and him saying he couldn't answer for Eastwood. Lee might say some controversial things sometimes, but he was really backed into a corner this time around.
categories Cinematical