Bad blood(s)

I recently posted a favourable review of Spike Lee's BlacKkKlansman, so I was pretty keen to watch his Netflix film Da 5 Bloods, especially seeing it seemed to be getting very strong reviews.

It doesn't deserve them.

A four word description kept coming to mind while watching it - way too heavy handed.  Practically everything in the movie can be so categorised:  the history lessons (although no doubt worthy); the score (you'd swear it was a Spielberg-esque John Williams one at times); the amount of blood spray any bullet wound seems to cause (I still suspect gaming culture has caused Hollywood to go over the top in blood sprays); the other bits of violent dismembering (hard to speak more of that without being a bit of a spoiler); the dialogue which often feels less than naturalistic.  Even the portrayal of the Vietnamese (and French!) felt a bit off to me.

It also feels as if the movie has been made 10 or 20 years too late.   As one reviewer has noted, it would have made a lot more sense (in terms of how hard the guys must have expected their task to be) if they were doing it as younger men than the 70-odd year olds that they must be to have the movie set in the present day.  Is it a screenplay that has been around 20 years waiting to be produced?  That could explain it.

Having said it all this, it's one of those movies that is obviously so well intentioned that it feels mean giving it a strongly negative review.   And I can say it never bored me;  it is well filmed and looks like it had a significant budget; and I liked the aspect ratio changes to reflect different eras.  But I just kept thinking - this is so heavy handed.   And imitative in ways that seemed unnecessary and more distracting than useful.  

It's very clear to me that the movie is getting strong reviews more for its (extremely) topical politics than its intrinsic success as a movie.   And (even allowing for racists and contrarians giving it a zero), the audience reviews on websites I have seen are reflecting this, as they are on average well below the marks given by professional reviewers.  I expect that this will continue, as more viewers rate the film on line.  I've noted on Rotten Tomatoes that one reviewer predicts that it will not age well, and I strongly suspect that's right.

I don't agree with this bad review's complaint about how slow it is - as I have indicated, that didn't bother me - but overall, it still rings closer to my perceptions than the glowing reviews.

And you know why I have some confidence in my assessment - my son seemed to agree with any critical comment I made while watching it.   

One final point - I often complain about violence in movies, but it isn't really at the heart of my dissatisfaction here, partly because I often felt it looked so overdone as to not be realistic.  I do wish, however, that Lee did not put in the full clip of that famous Saigon street execution at the start of the film.   He initially cuts away from it, but then goes back to show the full aftermath.  My son seems to think that if that can be used in a movie or documentary, then no one ever has any reason to complain about movie violence of any kind.   In a way he is almost right - but the answer is, no, it should not be used in movies.