Revisiting Spike Lee's *Forgotten Films* #2 - 'Girl 6' (1996)

Features
by Tambay A. Obenson
June 22, 2012 10:37 AM
29 Comments
  • |

First, as a recap of what this series is about...

I call them Spike Lee's *forgotten* films, not because we don't remember them, but rather because, when discussion of Spike's film (specifically fan favorites) are had, these are the titles that rarely get mention. 

Films like Do The Right ThingMalcolm XJungle FeverShe's Gotta Have It, and others are usually at the top of the list. They're also his most familiar films. Ask the average audience member what Spike Lee films they've seen, or know of, and one of these titles will probably be mentioned 9 out of 10 times - especially Do The Right Thing and Malcolm X

But Spike has about 25 feature films in his oeuvre, including TV movies, and documentaries. How many of those have you seen?

This series will revisit those Spike Lee films that, for any number of reasons, just aren't talked about as much as the aforementioned few. Whether it's because they were poorly received by audiences and critics alike, or there just hasn't been as much awareness of them, maybe due to a lack of accessibility/availability. For example, how many of you have seen Sucker Free City - a TV movie/pilot that never made it to TV, as the series it was intended to be (Anthony Mackie starred in it by the way, which led to both he and Spike working on She Hate Me immediately afterward); Showtime never picked it up as a series; so HBO passing on Da Brick earlier this year wasn't the first time a Spike Lee project was killed by a cable TV network after the pilot.

The first film in this series is was 2004's She Hate Me. If you missed that post, click HERE to read it.

The second film I'm revisiting is Girl 6.

We could say that there are 2 kinds of Spike Lee films - those that follow a much more conventional, traditional narrative path, and those that, well, don't. Call it the "experimental" Spike Lee; Spike playing in his sandbox, with varying results.

And as I thought about Girl 6, I did wonder, if Spike Lee was a white director, and if this was a film about a white woman, would general reactions to it have been different when it was initially released? I say that because I wonder if black filmmakers are "allowed" (and I'm being careful with my use of the word "allowed") to be "different;" to push passed the expected; to be experimental (there goes that word again); not just by the mainstream, but even within our own community. Have we all become so used to a certain kind of black cinema (limited to 3 or 4 different types or categories, especially in the last 20 years), that when something so unlike what we've come to expect, comes along, we (everyone, not just black audiences, and of course I'm making a generalization) aren't quite sure what to make of it. We don't immediately understand it, and given how critical thinking in cinema isn't exactly embraced broadly, we aren't much interested in dissecting and closely examining those not-so easily digested films; and so we quickly dismiss them.

It's easier to do that, I suppose, especially when there is so much else fighting for your attention.

I'm much more interested in what I call investigating cinema; looking at pictures as whole, or in pieces. I think even films we consider unworthy, aren't exempt from that kind of critical exploration.

And, as I started this entry stating, I imagine if Spike were a white director, and a film like Girl 6 were about a white woman, it may have been praised for its attempts (whether intentional or not) to disrupt the expected order of things, even if it wasn't entirely successful. Comparisons would have been made to past auteurs and styles, with critics discussing it as if it were some "neo-New Wave" construction. And its place in Spike's oeuvre would have been a little higher on the acceptability scale.

Although I think we could identify both kinds of Spike Lees in just about all his films. I wouldn't call him purely an experimental filmmaker (the word itself rather broad), like a John Akomfrah or Kevin Jerome Everson, for example; but I also wouldn't call him a filmmaker in the mold of pure storytellers of years past.

His films aren't always so perfectly and cleanly constructed around story, and they can have an unfinished quality about them, as if he's still working through each one. And I actually appreciate that when it occurs or when I make myself aware of it.

With films like Girl 6, I'd posit that Spike is being more than just a storyteller - pushing the boundaries of the familiar linear narrative style that most films follow. As I said, Spike Lee playing in his sandbox, with Girl 6 being Spike at his most playful - a film that was sandwiched between *serious* message movies in Clockers (a film that he said he hoped would seal the coffin on so-called "hood" movies), and Get On The Bus (a celebration of the diversity in black masculinity, and black unity); his 9th feature film, it marked a break from his previous 8 releases, with maybe She's Gotta Have It being its closest sibling (and not only because Girl 6 borrows from Nola Darling's opening monologue).

It was only after I watched it again recently that I considered appreciating Girl 6, not necessarily for the story it tells (or at least seems to want to tell - and what that is, may differ from one viewer to the next), but rather, appreciating it for the style in which it tells its story.

Although, given how active my mind constantly is, the more I thought about the film, the more layers I uncovered, and the more ways I was able to interpret it (for example, is it a story about addiction, as Girl 6 allows herself to be gradually consumed by what was effectively meant to be more of an aside, in becoming a phone sex operator in order to earn an income, so much that it takes a potentially fatal occurrence to give her the slap back into reality she needed to remember what her motivation was for entering that line of work in the first place, and what it was she really was pursuing).

But that's the beauty of art, isnt it? Being able to watch a film (in this case) and receive it in more than 1 or 2 ways; each time you watch it, you see something entirely different, which can be stifling for anyone who has to write about this stuff. You want to be thorough, but also succinct.

If we summed up its plot looking at it solely at the surface, we could say that it's a lamentation on the plight of the struggling actress, or more specifically, of the struggling black actress - her hopes (as represented in fantasy sequences featuring star Theresa Randle playing some of her favorite screen characters), and her will to survive (becoming a phone sex operator in order to earn a living, while still seemingly working on her craft, even though it's not exactly an ideal situation).

But what I felt was a relatively weak 3rd act, when Spike spoils all the fun we'd been having for the previous 80 or so minutes and gets all serious on us, trying to squeeze some lessons in there, got in the film's way.

This could be regarded as a film more about mood and setting, than story. And that works for some (it works for me) and not others. Individual scenes are probably more remarkable (the ending kiss between Randle and co-star Isaiah Washington as he ex, with multi-colored telephones dropping seemingly from the sky, all in slow motion, immediately comes to mind, whether you think it has meaning or not), than when you think of the film as a whole.

It's like the Theresa Randle show, or rather a showcase for her abilities - a highlight reel that you may have thought would lead to even more prominent roles (and she puts in a full performance, demonstrating range); but like so many other talented black actresses who came before and after her, Hollywood apparently wasn't all that interested, even though she bared almost all, showing her breasts in the film's opening sequence - one of those memorable, seemingly iconic, if controversial cinematic moments that not only raised eyebrows, but also may have raised her industry profile (for better or worse) the way it has for other actresses. I'm thinking of Sharon Stone's flash in Basic Instinct for example, and the immediate impact that movie had on her career.

Not that I'm championing Randle's *northern exposure* in the opening scenes of Girl 6; I thought it was entirely gratuitous, and the point there could really have been made without her disrobing, not only for "QT", but for the audience as well. It's the film's one misstep that comes very early on, which may have actually been a good thing in hindsight, because you get passed it very early, there isnt another occurence like it, and you soon forget it (well, hopefully).

I thought of that scene for a bit, trying to make sense of it, believing that there may have been more to it than meets the eye, but kept coming back to it as nothing much more than a case of a male director saying "I can do this so I will."

But whatever motivation or message (assuming there was an intentional one) that I was supposed to get from that moment, was clouded by the image of (and my heterosexual male appreciation for) the woman's breasts.

Like She's Gotta Have It, it's interesting to observe Spike's attempts to simultaneously celebrate young, independent (and all the word suggests) black women, while also seemingly wrestling with his own heterosexual male filmmaker biases and tendencies, when it comes to depictions of women.

But get passed that early "dark" moment, and then go play in the sand with Theresa and Spike for the next 100 minutes, because that's what it often felt like (toss in several winks, via cameos from the likes of Naomi Campbell wearing a "Models Suck" T-shirt, MadonnaRichard Belzer and Michael Imperioli, and a hotchpotch of sets on which Randle wonderfully plays out her fantasies - including impersonations of past roles played by Dorothy Dandridge and Pam Grier; really, Randle shouldn't have had to audition for another film ever again in her life!!); so your appreciation for the time you spend with Girl 6 and Jimmy, will depend in just how much you like and/or care for Girl 6 and Jimmy (Spike Lee playing a similar character he's played in his other films, although more restrained here than usual, but still hilarious at times).

In addition to the She's Gotta Have It references in Girl 6, I also saw thematic similarities with the film that was first in this series on Spike's *Forgotten* films - She Hate Me. Specifically, lead characters in both films find their livelihoods challenged, and are forced to make choices that they likely wouldn't under normal circumstances, with survival being of utmost concern for each, as both become consumed with what they likely initially believed would be temporary stints in order to earn income, however out of character; and each has their moment of realization that where they ended up, wasn't at all part of their grand plan, leading to decisions to change for the better, as we'd like to believe.

As I said earlier, this marked a departure for Spike up until it was released, and we could say a halfway point, when taking the 20 or so scripted feature films he's made in total for the big screen; as we won't get to see "experimental Spike Lee" again for another 9 or 10 films when, well, Red Hook Summer is released in less than 2 months.

Filled with familiar pieces of Spike Lee nostalgia and some of his favorite things (sports memorabilia for example), the icing on this cosmopolitan cake is? The bold colors and warm, inviting cinematography by Malik Sayeed, as well as the wall-to-wall Prince soundtrack, comprised of both the old and the new. 

So what did you see in Girl 6?

Next up in the series will be Sucker Free City.

Watch a 15-minute cut of Girl 6 below:

Features
  • |

More: Spike Lee

You might also like:

29 Comments

  • urbanauteur | June 26, 2012 6:38 PMReply

    Girl#6 was spike's nod to mastro Fredico Fellini's 8 1/2, Juliet of the Spirits and director George Sidney's most obscured masterpiece JEANNE EAGELS, starring Kim Novak, if you can find it,check it out.

  • Big Styles | June 26, 2012 5:51 PMReply

    really surprised that no one (not even Tambay) mentioned that this film is written by a woman, specifically one Suzan Lori-Parks. Not a big deal unless the Pulitzer is a big deal to you. I think you owe it to the film, (a certified classic of black aesthetic IMO) to re-examine and re-edit your story based on SLP's obvious choices. Girl 6 was collaborative, I wonder what she thought of the opening scene? BTdubs, the b-plot with the little girl and the elevator shaft is brilliant, and Debi Mazar deserves major props for her part. Also, Jennifer Lewis got to hit more than one note, she was down right subtle here. CHARLESJUDSON took it home, last but not least, Malik Sayeed. That is all.

  • Monique A. Williams | June 24, 2012 10:21 AMReply

    I love Girl 6. Though I was too young to really appreciate it when it came out, I saw it again a few years back and thought it was great, clever, and quirky. And Theresa Randle should have definitely got more work after this. Sad. And the clip you posted was a great sum of the film.
    Spike doesn't always get it right, but who does? I'd rather take a chance on a Spike Lee Joint than a Tyler Perry Presents Trash anyday.

  • Charles Judson | June 23, 2012 11:48 AMReply

    One of the things I remember most about GIRL 6 was how many reviewers felt this was Spike trying to compensate or comment on the sexism in his films. It's a weird space Spike exists in when it comes to women and sexuality. He's one of the few directors to eroticize Black folks on film without it drifting into the exotic. On the other hand he has moments like Nola's rape in SHE'S GOTTA HAVE IT. Then there are characters like Jada's Sloane Hopkins in BAMBOOZLED and Perez's Tina in DO THE RIGHT THING that at times exist as surrogates for Spike Lee as the director and writer inside the film. Spike so often wants his main characters to see the light and "wake up" and sense he can't do that, he seems to use female characters as the prods he can't be. Unfortunately, that often turns them into what some critics consider shrews, which I think is unfair because there are times Sloane in BAMBOOZLED sounds like Spike on the lecture circuit. So was the sexism charge fair? I would mostly say no. Which makes folks initial reactions to it a little unfair. Because just the idea that Black Woman's sexuality would be treated with as much depth, that she could be wrestling with how to control and wield her sexuality without it overwhelming her and defining her (which is why I think the opening scene with QT is so important and it only works if she shows her breasts--also note how wide a range the women in the hallway cover, which for a director looking for a "specific" type, QT seems to be casting an awfully wide net) is and was revolutionary. We haven't really had a film like it since. Which is interesting because 5 years later it would become a big deal that Halle Berry was going to show her breasts in SWORDFISH. Upping the ante is that 2001 is also the same year Berry would be in MONSTER'S BALL and would win an Oscar, in the words of those most critical of the movie, for "having sex with a white man" and "looking ugly". This is the same actor QT holds up as beautiful, but doesn't praise her for her acting; even stopping the casting session to focus on more of the type he's looking for. Which makes that scene kind of unintentionally meta because the year after that Tarantino would release JACKIE BROWN with Pam Grier. There's arguably no other Black actress whose sexuality has been so blatantly on display both on and off screen. Halle has been sexy on and off film, but you can find too many roles in which her sexuality is a key component of her character. Folks don't even know how to leverage it without it spilling over into camp and becoming a parody of womanhood, a la CATWOMAN. Which isn't surprising, in BOOMERANG she's the idealized woman that Murphy will make love to, but she's not Robin Givens, the woman guys f*ck. And I think that's one of the keys to GIRL 6 and Spike Lee's films. He doesn't always handle it well, but Spike is one of the few directors who's willing to even suggest that Black women (and men) want to make love and f*ck. They're like most women on the planet. Thanks to working with Park, GIRL 6 goes a bit deeper to explore that complicated relationship with sex and sexuality both on a personal level, how that comes out in one's work, and how that is shape and twisted by the film world that Randle's character wants to be a part of. There's a complexity and maturity to GIRL 6 that's still missing. Films like BABY BOY dwells on the baby making part of sex and manhood, but not much more, and has scenes like the African squat that seem like a missed opportunity to show that Black people can f*ck too and still be decent human beings. Tyler Perry can do films about marriage, but there's barely a mention that these people have healthy sex lives. In the last few years THE GOSPEL, a flawed film for sure but one I still enjoyed, stand out as one of the few films I can remember in which a Black Preacher openly admits he likes having sex with his wife and that just because they can't have children doesn't mean they should cut that part of their lives out. MEDICINE FOR MELANCHOLY stands out as a film that explores the ramifications of a one night stand and illustrates how that one moment of passion was much more than sex. I think the legacy of GIRL 6 is how much we desperately need a few more films like it.

  • Charles Judson | June 23, 2012 11:49 AM

    Indiewire's comment sections REALLY need paragraph breaks BAD.

  • Adam Scott Thompson | June 23, 2012 9:46 AMReply

    I always felt like "Girl 6" was a spiritual sequel to "She's Gotta Have It."

  • Nadia | June 23, 2012 9:16 AMReply

    Hmmm, it was a mixed bag here for me. the strength of the individual pieces did not add up to a cohesive whole. Randle's nameless character doesn't seem to come out too differently at the end than she was at the beginning. Fantasy sequences are handled very nicely. The phone sex girls give some nice diversions as they cater to a variety of clients. The subplot about a little girl who falls down an elevator shaft (6 floors) seems to parallel Girl 6's descent, but it's not handled as well as it could have. But love the songs by Prince and un cameos from Quentin Tarantino, John Turturro, Madonna, Halle Berry, etc. Like I said, a mixed bag. I liked it enough, but it's one of Spike's weakest films IMHO. He also didn't write the script. But I think as you said, an interesting diversion for Spike.

  • Rod Gailes OBC | June 23, 2012 8:56 AMReply

    I have fond memories of leaving the set of my feature film "Camouflage" after a very long shooting day and going to see "Girl 6". I was in love with Theresa Randle, a big fan of Spike's, and a maniacal Prince fan. "Girl 6" was the perfect storm as far as I was concerned. It contains Spike's least self conscious and BEST acting ever. (Playing opposite a pretty girl who's also a good actress always helps.). "Girl 6" takes us on a ride, a very dark, funny, unpredictable ride with telephones raining from the sky. Lighten up and enjoy it. Sometimes it Snows in April.

  • JMac | June 23, 2012 12:15 AMReply

    Now come on people. It's Friday night and this is a loonng post. I saw it earlier today but held off from commenting until after I watched the dreaded French slave comedy movie [which actually wasn't bad - 6.5/10] and had some time "marinate" in the article. I agree the best thing about Girl 6 (the best worst movie of Spike) is Theresa Randle - I didn't know she had those types of acting skills and irritates me that nothing much happened with her career after this. Also agree about Spike's exploitation of her. I remember it took me a few tries to get through this movie because the scenes were often too difficult and painful to watch esp as they were happening to a fellow black woman. It made me hate QT since I have a feeling he didn't have to do much acting for that part. It's been such long time since I've seen Girl 6 so I wouldn't be able to comment on the stylistic aspect of it nor those little details that hardcore movie aficionados would look for regardless of the movie or director. I would need a good uninterrupted re-viewing - with my laptop open to this page - to even attempt to contribute what little I can. We'll see who else stops by once they have the time.

  • Neziah | June 23, 2012 12:03 AMReply

    Don't worry, Carey, you are not alone. Although I don't consider it one of his best works (at least not yet), "Girl 6" caught me by surprise when I blind-bought it a few years ago on DVD (it was nearly out of print). I knew about the critical panning it got, but it was the only Spike Lee film I had left to see out of the many he had made, so I thought to myself, "Why not?" As you stated at the end of your analysis, it's a very colorful film, and I echo that statement, the cinematography in this film is among the best in a Spike Lee film, period. I also loved the film's quirky style. Like in a Fellini film, it has a very surreal quality in many of its scenes, and I have to give Spike props for experimenting and trying new things and succeeding at them, which can't be said of a lot of directors out there who attempted to redefine their style. I'm a big Prince fan. In fact, Prince would probably make my top ten musicians ever, so I quite admired his soundtrack for this film. The story itself isn't bad and Theresa Randle gave a credible and note-worthy performance (no doubt her best to date), but it's the chaotic and unconventional way the story is told that won me over, and the tone and style of the film. It kept me engaged and entertained in equal measures. I have to admit, I don't know exactly what most critics disliked about the film, and I honestly don't really care, because like all art, the quality of this film is subjective to the viewer. I personally dug the hell out of it and I'm happy to own it.

  • James Evans from the Cabrini-Green | June 22, 2012 11:59 PMReply

    Tambay, regarding the lack of posts here: could it be, could it POSSIBLY be that just PERHAPS your verbose enthusiasm for Spike's "joints" is not shared by most? Your writings are respected, but as long as you can compliment Mr. Lee is just as long as his detractors can spotlight the flaws ("flaws" being an understatement.) I promise you these films are *forgotten* (asterisks yours) for a reason.

  • CareyCarey | June 23, 2012 10:23 AM

    "Most people have *forgotten* Hitchcock's "Foreign Correspondent," despite the fact that it was nominated for Best Picture (in the same year as another Hitchcock joint, "Rebecca," which took the prize). All things must be considered". That's a five star thought. Deep too ;-) People *remember* the winner but that does not and/or should not diminish the accomplishments of those who come in 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, and some cases, last. Case in point, there will be many great athletes participating in this years summer Olympic. Some will cross the finish line in first place. They will be remembered and revered for years to come. But right behind them, there will undoubtedly be other great men and women with admirable prowess, who's names may be forgotten. Yes, all things must be considered.

  • Adam Scott Thompson | June 23, 2012 9:51 AM

    All filmmakers (directors, writers, actors, editors, etc.) have flaws -- it's part of their flavor. In any case, however you may feel about Spike he is a seminal force in black filmmaking, influencing the newest generations in ways they might only understand by reading articles such as this. Whether or not they're all masterworks, we are examining a master "doin' work." Most people have *forgotten* Hitchcock's "Foreign Correspondent," despite the fact that it was nominated for Best Picture (in the same year as another Hitchcock joint, "Rebecca," which took the prize). All things must be considered.

  • WOW | June 23, 2012 12:31 AM

    Close your mouth, your breath stinks. Could it POSSIBLY be that just PERHAPS you're an idiot who knows nothing about films? Could it POSSIBLY be that MOST of the TIME your thoughts are shared by nobody? To highlight the supposed flaws in Spike's stellar career would be the act of a self absorb hater. Yeah, I said hater, or more appropriately, a zip damn fool. MOre importantly, to imply that people are not commenting because they don't share Tambay's "enthusism", is the thought process of a child. "Agreement"has never been the calling card in S&A's comment section. It's never been that kind of party. So pull up your pants James because your skirt is showing.

  • CareyCarey | June 22, 2012 10:49 PMReply

    Mr TAMBAY A OBENSON, here we are, just me and you walking down Spike's memory lane. I know... I know... I run my mouth too much which lead to you cussing me out like I had a tail and eventually kicking me off your blog. But today, you have to know you're driving in the middle of my street. Spike Lee's street that is. I might be the biggest Spike Lee fan who visits this blog? I believe it's safe to say I am one of the few visitors who can claim ownership of an autographed copy of his 367p Do The Right Thing 20th Anniversary Book, and a poster from She's Gotta Have It. Pictures and pages from that book are right here (in my hands) take a look -->http://careycarey-carrymehome.blogspot.com/#!/2011/01/my-mind-is-on-spike-lee.html. Now of course I've seen every Spike Lee film that you mentioned and others that he merely served as the director of a one man show, such as John Leguizamo's Freak and Rodger Gweneveur's A Huey P. Newton Story. But this discussion... this post is not about me, so let's continue on down road to the man of the hour. But first, let's do a review. You said: "I'm much more interested in what I call investigating cinema; looking at pictures as whole, or in pieces. I think even films we consider unworthy, aren't exempt from that kind of critical exploration". UT OH! I think it's time I borrow a few of your words --> "and I'm being careful with my use of the word "intellectuals" ) to be "different" . Yep, mission control we have a problem. Now believe me, it's not my intent to do a LeonRaymond, proclaiming Europeans have a special gift of understanding, which black audiences... "which most of S&A readers won't have a clue". Nope, that's totally ridiculous. However, as much as I deplore the phrase "We are not a monolithic group", it's apropos for this discussion. Tambay my man, I have to tell you something that's gonna hurt me more than you. You sir... and I don't know it you know this... but you are in the minority. The overwhelming majority of moviegoers have no desire to watch a film in antisipation of a future "critical exploration". The average moviegoer, like all individuals, black, white or whatever, are fueled my our emotions, not our brains. Consequently, I believe it's safe to say the average person could care less about the inner workings of a film, nor the action and personal behind the camera. Nope, if it moves them emotionally -- on several levels -- they remember said experience. But I, on the other hand, love to talk about films, and especially Spike Lee's joints. So I've come here today, not to spank Leon for that ridiculous statement, but to talk about/discuss GIRL 6. I mean, the halls are quiet today and you've dropped a boat-load information. Some of which I agree with and others (for reasons connected to what I said above)I have to give a side-eye. But woe is me. It appears I've used up my allotted "air space". I'll come back if others are interested in a discussion on the movie, however, to do justice to your post, and it's many finer points, I'll need at least 2 more pages. I guess, in short, I am questioning the "wisdom" of psychoanalyzing Spike Lee's adventurous journey. Not that you've done such, but as you've mentioned, most folks have no idea of Spike's "participations" over the years. In his many roles as director, he has worked with athletes (i.e, Kobe & Jim Brown), comedians (The Kings Of Comedy), musicians, and a vast array of actors of all colors (not to mention his foray in commercials). Each endeavor required him to change gears and wear a different size hat. And btw, when do you plan to give us the rest of the Melvin Van Peebles story?

  • CareyCarey | June 23, 2012 3:27 PM

    Yeah Bondgirl, I understand. And through all those dynamics -- Spike was there, living and being affected by them. Consequently, it's my belief that Spike was wearing many hats while writing and directing his films. He was the conscience and the voice for many black folks in, and outside of, the cinema. So I think it's safe to say, whenever we "critique" one of his movies, maybe we should consider his position, motives, desires and the messages he was trying to convey in "each" film, which were sometimes (most of the time) independent of all the others (I do not believe he was (nor is) motivivated by "profit"). To that point, it's become apparent to me that Spike took on the heavy load of "The BURDEN OF RESPONSIBILITY!". And to be honest Bondgirl, like you, I have to revisit the film (Girl 6) to constructively talk about it's finer points. I watched Bambozzled last night. Girl 6 and He Got Game is on tommorrow's docket. Today I've been "persuaded" to see MIB and Adam Sadler's flick.

  • Bondgirl | June 23, 2012 2:33 PM

    @Carey: I would have to watch it again first before giving a viewpoint. There was a paradigm shift taking place in 1996, with regard to hip hop, socio-economic issues, and Clinton campaigning for reelection. I didn't love it, but will keep an open mind the next go round and get back to you.

  • CareyCarey | June 23, 2012 12:11 PM

    Please Nadia, YOUR argument is ridiculous AND silly. Who in the hell said I was representing the thinking of many? I'm simply giving my opinion just as YOU are. Did you take something I said personally? Did something I said sting your core? Seriously, did "I" for one minute imply that S&A did not speak to almost everyone? Hell, I know they post anywhere from 10-25 posts A DAY. What in the hell are you talking about?! Listen, look at this dumb sh*t YOU wrote--> "Don't make comments claiming to know how other people watch films or understand them because you don't know". WTF!!!??? Understand films? And what is this I am suppose to know, or not know? HOW OTHER PEOPLE WATCH FILMS??!! You're not making any sense. So believe me Nadia, you're not explaining a damn thing to me. You're the one missing the boat. And listen Nadia, you continued to show your ass in the most ridiculous fashion. Check out these words of wisdom. you said --> "As for the "average moviegoer" this site isn't for JUST one group of people or one kind of thinker. If someone isn't feeling these kinds of post, then move on. Go read something that's "lighter" then". NOW NADIA.... now WTF are you talking about? Who in the hell, EXCEPT YOU, said it was? And who -- EXCEPT YOU -- implied that people do not make their own personal choice on which posts they read?! And please tell me, what the hell does "lighter" have to do with this? And you didn't stop your foolishness Nadia (I must have hit a nerve with you!?). Look--> "How about we actually talk about the movie that's been analyzed instead of using up space arguing about whether the analysis should exist or not which is just silly". WHAT Nadia?! There you go again, talking silly and talking in circles. Let's see, we should talk about the movie and not whether or not the analysis should exist? Who said the analysis should not exist? And I've always been about talking about THE MOVIE. The substance, balance, purpose, and direction of any "analysis" has always been my concern. But lastly Nadia, I believe I've found the crux of your disdain for my comment. Take a look at this (in case you forgot) ---> "If it's not for you, keep it moving. I don't understand all this anti-intellectualism and where it's coming from. What are you scared of?". Please Nadia... Anti-intellectualism?! There it is! You probably consider yourself an intellectual... now I get it. So you felt as if I was attacking you! I get it now. Okay, let me tell you my opinion of the "intellectual" thang. I am by no means, anti-intellectualism (whatever in the hell that means), however, let me tell you, Ms. Nadia, what history has proven takes place, when "intellectuals" muddle the field. First, I wouldn't consider most individuals who visit this site as true "intellectuals". Btw, Nadia, I would not call you an intellectual. If you were, you would not have been offended by my words. You're more in the flavor of a wanna-be and/or an intellectual groupie. You appear to be one who simply wants to be in the wake of their flow. The distinctive quality of the intellectual person is that the mental skills he or she demonstrates are not simply intelligent, they focus on thinking about the abstract, philosophical and esoteric aspects of human inquiry and the value of their thinking. But let me get back to my position that you conveniently jacked. It has been said that "intellectuals" were instrumental in the decline of black films from the period of the 80's and 90's. It's also a fact that black "intellectuals" were the largest group of Oscar Micheaux's adversaries. In short Nadia, to answer your question "Why analyze or critique anything then", I would just like to see balance in any critique or analysis, and a clear purpose for said critique. Now of course those are my desires. You can do your thang, baby. But don't wag your finger at me when I don't agree with you or your way of thinking (on any given post). Btw, truth be told, you're the one who's living in fear. What is behind your fear that requires you to maintain a false self-image?

  • Nadia | June 23, 2012 8:18 AM

    Carey your argument is just silly. Do you speak for everyone who reads this blog? Just because you're the most vocal doesn't mean that you represent the thinking of the many, many other people who read but are silent. I don't know what the site's readership is, but I bet it's more than the 15 people who do the most commenting. The beauty of S&A is that it speaks to almost everyone. No matter where you fall or what your interests in black cinema are, or what your approach to black cinema is, you will probably find something here for you. So if analyzing a film isn't your cup of tea, then keep it moving. There are at least a dozen posts made on this blog every day. I'm sure at least one of them is for you. Don't make comments claiming to know how other people watch films or understand them because you don't know. Just speak for yourself. Maybe you haven't read film magazines like Senses Of Cinema, or Film Comment, or Black Camera which I know has been mentioned on this blog. Or even click over to some of the other sites on IndieWire and how thorough their film reviews usually are. You ever picked up any of bell hooks' books of essays especially Reel To Real? The fact that this even has to be explained to you is ridiculous. Aren't we always complaining about not being lumped into one group that all think the same way? And that black people come from all walks of life. As for the "average moviegoer" this site isn't for JUST one group of people or one kind of thinker. If someone isn't feeling these kinds of post, then move on. Go read something that's "lighter" then. Damn. This isn't Nazi Germany. There are many of us who appreciate looking deeper and beyond the surface of things. There are many of us who use both our hearts AND our brains when watching films. You keep returning to this same argument which is mind-numbing to me. Are you a masochist? How about we actually talk about the movie that's been analyzed instead of using up space arguing about whether the analysis should exist or not which is just silly. Why analyze or critique anything then? Let's only talk about the "nice" stuff, because there's nothing to be learned from looking at anything completely. Sigh. If it's not for you, keep it moving. I don't understand all this anti-intellectualism and where it's coming from. What are you scared of?

  • CareyCarey | June 23, 2012 1:53 AM

    "and have the training and experience to know what they're talking about". And therein lies the biggest problem, or at least my utmost concern. Now, I have no idea who you're referring to (that minority?), however, I doubt very seriously if they can speak about the inside of Spike's head, or the emotional response of others. Granted, it's nice to wax poetic and gives ones opinion on subtle nuances of a film, but I've yet to hear (from "that" group) what inspires people to remember the small nauces of one film over another (what keeps them coming back). I am suggesting that some groups of "film elitist" only speak in a language, or voice, that they engratiate. It's gibberish and Pig Latin to the average moviegoer. And in this case, ignorance IS golden. Now I have to say this, that "group" you're referring to will continue to produce niche films which will do poorly at the box office because with all their "training" and "experience" and "know how", they will fail to look beyond their crowd to see what move the common man. They will remain in denial and point fingers at directors like Quentin Terrintino, Lee Danials and Spike. They just don't get it. Remember what I said, we are moved by our emotions, not our mind. Anyway JMac, I've again used up my allotted time, so maybe tomorrow. But I don't want this to turn into me defending Spike. I'd rather talk about what I received ( positive) from the experience of watching the film. Then I 'll know what I'm talking about. I don't want to be involved in some quasi-intellectual psychoanalytic criticism of Spike and the film. What am I to gain by engaging in that form of ego stroking? Serioulsy, why do we have a propensity to criticize a film? I mean, why can't we talk about the good and leave the rest behind?

  • JMac | June 23, 2012 12:35 AM

    Questioning the wisdom of psychoanalyzing Spike Lee? Say whatttt?!! You've got to be kidding. I think this blog primarily attracts those "minority" blacks who appreciate going beyond the surface of a film (and have the training and experience to know what they're talking about) and those like me who enjoy getting a peak inside someone's head and discovering all the nuances I never would have looked for myself or would have even attempted. I have no idea what the age group is with S&A readers but that may also be a factor - some not being old enough to watch when it came out or too green in their movie education to really understand what was going. It's also beneficial to look back and get a better perspective... or consider other perspectives. An aside, I wonder if the DVD of Girl 6 has a director's commentary on it? Anyway, if no one else comes by, what are the issues you have with Tambay's dissection of the film?

  • LeonRaymond | June 22, 2012 8:22 PMReply

    TAMBAY, forget American Audiences on this one GIRL 6 was hailed in Europe as one his greatest works, they got what he was trying to do, they understand a lot more than a lot of American Audiences, much more than a lot of Black audiences, what you call experimental films they call an The Director being in the moment, being a true artist. Fellini, most of your readers won't have a clue, Fanny & Alexander, they won't get that one either. the film Z they more than likely never even heard of Costa Gravis films. The film DIVA with the Black Opera singer, they would be lost on what that was about and never seen it less heard about it. So dissect all you like, there are certain audiences for certain films. Most American Black audiences will select Do The Right Thing, cause most Black Americans will see racism in white sugar bowl.

  • Big Styles | June 26, 2012 10:52 PM

    hey leonraymond , cool story bro, and tell me why I need to have seen Fellini, Kurosawa or any of the other directors Spike Lee loves to appreciate his films? Absolutely a vast visual knowledge of film can make the pleasure deeper. Spike himself would tell you that a good filmmaker only needs you to suspend your disbelief. That's FILM 101, and in my 101 class we watched films by Costa Gavras. You might wanna get the names right or they will make you start using the colored entrance to the Ivory tower you seem to love so much. And please stop underestimating black people's tastes.

  • CareyCarey | June 22, 2012 5:45 PMReply

    Surely this is not TOMFU*KABILITY day? I mean, forget about Light “play too much” Anthony Mackie. Tambay has taken the time to write this 2100 word“thought provoking” post (and attach a 15 minute clip), so where all the good people at? Well, let me put it like this: Gonna tell aunt Mary, 'bout uncle John, he claim he has the misery, but he's havin' a lot of fun. Oh baby, yes baby, woo baby, havin' some fun tonight. Girl 6 is in town but no one's around. Well, long tall Sally, she's built for speed, she's got everything that Uncle John need. Oh baby, yes baby, woo baby, havin’'some fun tonight. Well, I saw uncle John with bald headed Sally, he saw aunt Mary coming and he ducked back in the alley. Oh baby, yes baby, woo baby, havin' some fun tonight. Now listen y'all, hold up, turn the music down. I'm trying to tell you guys (and gals) something. I am suggesting… LONG TALL SALLY'S where y'all at? I am more than sure yawls know something about Girl 6? Surely you have an opinion on one of Spikes lost treasures (I know I do). Huh - what black woman on this planet hasn’t seen that Spike Lee’s joint? So come on Lauren, JMac, Someone, Bondgirl, Kai, XI, Sandra, Nadine, Vanessa, Chrish, Misha, Geneva Girl, BLUTOPAZ, Akimbo, Nadell, BOHEMIAN PRINCESS, Priss, Michelletoo, CHGSISTA, Ava, DONELLA, Leggy Peggy, NICE NEZIAH, Saadiyah, Patti, JAI, Nemisis, Lady J, GIGI, SLB, Jai, and the rest of the usual suspects, talk about it. Somebody has to take the first leap. I mean, y'all don't want me to break out in my version of D'angelo's "Brown Sugar"! "Let CareyCarey tell you 'bout this girl... maybe I shoudn't, I met her in Philly and her name was Girl 6. Some know her as ********* (fill in the blank) from S&A. See, we be making love constantly, that's why.....

  • CareyCarey | June 23, 2012 12:42 PM

    And Charles Judson IS KILLING IT!

  • CareyCarey | June 23, 2012 12:37 PM

    YES Nadine, the post was thorough and thoughtful. That's why I tried to encourage others to jump in. Tambay covered a lot of ground and I thought it needed... begged for more conversation. I wanted to entertain the thought in which Adam Scott Thompson ushered to the floor. More importantly, as I said to Nadia, I love "balance" in critiques. If it (balance) is not present, said analysis/critique, tends to give the appearance of a self-serving agenda.

  • Nadine | June 23, 2012 9:15 AM

    ...also, the article was so thorough and thoughtful.

  • Nadine | June 23, 2012 9:10 AM

    I was waiting for this post on Girl6. I was in post for one project then pre- for another so I had a lot of freedom. Now we're filming so I'm outey for the summer. I had one last hurrah a couple of days ago, but that was it for me.

  • Donella | June 22, 2012 4:53 PMReply

    LOVE the soundtrack.

Follow Shadow and Act

Email Updates

Most "Liked"

  • Zimbabwean Director Of 'Pride' Heading ...
  • DFI Grants Expands Emerging Filmmaker ...
  • L.A. Rebellion Short Film Programs In ...
  • Get The Story Behind Ghostface Killah's ...
  • Cannes Market Previews: Controversial ...
  • A Month Of Tunisian Cinema At FIAF In ...
  • Submissions Now Open For 51st New York ...
  • Review - Egyptian Drama 'Cairo Exit' ...
  • Lionsgate Will Release Wesley Snipes' ...
  • Preview: 'The Art of Disappearing' (When ...