Spike Lee did Chicago a favor with Chiraq
Internets,
Spike Lee has somehow succeeded, despite himself, in creating one of the most buzzed-about movies of the holiday season, with Chiraq. I’d argue that this is already a win for him, regardless of how the movie comes out and whether or not it makes any money, although — let’s keep it real — there’s no way this movie’s not gonna suck balls.
I saw that Chiraq was trending on Twitter yesterday (i.e. Wednesday 11/4) when I was on my 15-minute break at work. I clicked through and saw that the trailer for the film had been released. Already this was a pretty good sign. I used to be on Twitter more than I am now, when I had that kind of time, and I was too lazy to do anything worthwhile, including taking a nap, and I don’t recall seeing the name of a Spike Lee film trending the day its trailer was released. I know there was some controversy surrounding Spike using crowdfunding to finance the making of Da Sweet Blood of Jesus, when he lives in a house that costs $30 million, but no one actually gave a shit about the film itself. I donated to the Kickstarter, and I didn’t even bother to watch the movie when he put it up on Vimeo. I finally did catch it a while later on Netflix, and I kinda wish I had that two hours of my life back. And I’m not the kind of person that needs a movie to be perfect (whatever that means) to not shit-talk it in an email newsletter. Movies, to me, are like white chicks on Instagram: if they has any positive quality at all, I’ll attempt to find it.
I approach “moviegoing” in general, and Spike Lee joints in particular (nullus), as a fan, is what I’m saying.
I share my thoughts on the past few Spike Lee joints in the excellent No Country for Black Men, so to spare you from me rambling on all day here, and on the outside chance that someone might actually cop, I’ll urge you to have a look, if interested.
Anyway, I took a look at Twitter again today (i.e. Thursday), and I saw that Chiraq was still trending, as was Spike Lee. I had to take a look at the Spike Lee topic just to make sure he hadn’t said anything even more offensive than usual, or died, for that matter, but it turned out to just be people bitching and moaning about the way Chicago is depicted in the film — from what they can tell based on the trailer. This might not be the case now, but at the time the only article linked was this terrible thing at the Huffington Post, written by someone who might still be learning how to read. If that guy’s a paid contributor, then that’s arguably a scandal in itself. I know anyone (or almost anyone?) can write for the Huffington Post, but surely there must be a system in place to ensure that “user-generated content” doesn’t end up atop one of the worldwide trending topics as if it were written by a paid staffer.
As far as complaints about how the Chi is depicted in the film are concerned, I say who gives a shit. The time for Chicago to be concerned with its image was back before upwards of 40 people were being shot any weekend it’s nice out. Comparing Chicago to Iraq would be unfair to Chicago if Iraq were significantly less safe than Chicago, but arguably it’s an insult to Iraq! As is the case with St. Louis, I’m sure there’s parts of Chicago where literally no one has ever been murdered (at least since we rescued this country from the Indians), but parts of Chicago (and also St. Louis), from what I understand, are just as dangerous as Iraq. Chicagites should be glad Spike Lee is making a movie about how fucked the fuck up their city is; it might lead the mayor to finally do something about it, if only to avoid a drop in tourism. CACs might stop showing up to the Pitchfork Music Festival, and Conde Nast needs to make back the $100 million or whatever they spent on that piece of shit site. I’m sure the Illuminati are already on the phone.
Meanwhile, if I’m Spike Lee, I’ve gotta be enjoying this attention. (He seems to enjoy attention… like a woman.) Directors’ names don’t trend on Twitter the week their movies come out, let alone a good month before the release date — even directors of the kind of garbage comic book movies that usually trend on Twitter. I think there was one time that JJ Abrams or someone along those lines made a comment about feminism, or girls being harassed on Twitter or some shit, and even that may have been during Gamergate. We’re in uncharted territory here. Will it lead to people actually going to see the movie? Probably not, but here’s the thing: If anyone at all goes to see this movie, that’ll make it his highest-grossing movie since Inside Man. It’s not gonna top Inside Man, because that movie had Denzel in it, and I think it may have purposely been marketed to not look like a Spike Lee movie, but if you don’t adjust for inflation, it could end up in the same ballpark as the movies from his late ’80s, early ’90s heyday. Those movies were the shit, but I don’t think they did huge box office.
Chiraq was produced by Amazon’s new film division, and I doubt they give a shit about making money anyway. (Why else would they be fuxxing with Spike Lee at this point in his career?) As was the case with their TV show about the transgender person, which I think recently won an Emmy (based solely on its merits, I’m sure), they just want to get people talking about the fact that Amazon now make movies. They’ve already succeeded in that regard, and if Chiraq doesn’t lead to more paying work for Spike Lee, he might consider trying to argue that he should receive some sort of bonus… lest his expensive-ass house fall into a state of disrepair.
Take it easy on yourself,
Bol
Originally published at tinyletter.com.
