Well done.

Hmmmm……

I'm not taking any sides on this. True. Blacks are usually left out of "historical films" (heck… we're left out of history books). But…. at the end of the day, it's Clint's film. If he wants to leave em out, he can. Spike needs to hold his comments (at least hold em from the media). Becuz everyone's gonna think he's one of those "whining negroes" who b**** about everything.

I agree with Ike. Clints films were about the 6 men you raised the flag at Iwo Jima and the same film from the Japanese side. Sorry if none of them were black. Lee sounds like a bitch! I mean people already think that black people complain about everythinhg!

From the clips I've read on Stereohyped (disclaimer since I haven't read the actual stories), it sounds like they're arguing over two different things. Spike Lee says that there were blacks fighting and Eastwood didn't have any blacks in the film. Eastwood is focusing specifically on the men who raised the flag and saying that none of those were black.

I don't feel like Eastwood answered Lee's question. He didn't address the lack of black representation among the non-flag raisers. And that seems to be Lee's point.

@summer, I got the same impression as well.

“First of all, the man is not my father and we’re not on a plantation either,” Spike Lee,/i>

Was that^^^necessary Spike.

“First of all, the man is not my father and we’re not on a plantation either,” Spike Lee,

Was that^^^necessary Spike.

Here's the story I've read.

http://news.aol.com/entertainm.....1200138337

Spike has a point, but at the same time Clint is under no obligation to throw a few random blacks into his films for historical accuracy. It's a Hollywood film, not a documentary.

I remember watching an old Clint Eastwood film in which he referred to a beautiful black female costar as "an Aunt Jemima." It totally changed my view of him. It's really easy for filmakers to ignore blackness of history with no consequence.

@ChicNoir: I agree. Both of them need to shut their faces.

Spike is perfectly able to do a film that's more historically accurate or focused solely on the black soldiers. Put up or shut up. Criticizing a film that's BEEN done is not going to do anything. If Clint were just planning the movie, then maybe suggest that but what exactly is the point? If an actor or pretty much any non-director made the same complaint, I would agree with them but when a fellow director is making the complaint, it's just b*tching and moaning instead of actually doing something.

This from the guy who co-wrote She Hate Me.

“One heterosexual male. 18 lesbians. His fee $10,000… each.”

Sperm-hungry lesbians are totally accurate!

With movies like the Great Debaters, sometimes we have to tell our own story. We have the resources now that we can tell our own history and not be at the mercy of someone else. I don't have a problem with Spike's criticism. They don't hold their tongues in their criticism. Why should we?

Eastwood's next movie is about Nelson Mandela (a black man).
The only racist in this equation is Spike. Spike exploits and perpetuates racism because it brings him attention he otherwise wouldn't receive due to his mediocrity. He's just a whiny little twit. He was critical when Eastwood did a movie on the great Charlie Bird starring Forest Whitaker. Censor that- Go ahead punk make my day!

Don't the majority of spike lee movies have mostly BLACK actors in them? I'm glad he watches other peoples movies just to see if their are any or an adequate number of black people in them. Because that's whats really important in a story line. Race. Clint is an Icon. And I applaud him for telling spike to "shut his face"!

tell that ignorant racist spike lee to stop hiding behind Obama's name. What will spike do when he can no longer play the 'race card' to get people to see his "films" ?

yes even bad publicity is better than no publicity when only about five people ever show up to your movies.

spike lee- the african american don imus

say goodnight gracie.

@kelly, patrice, jovetta and vonessa—people aren't racist for voicing their opinion about what they believe to be a rase-based injustice or ommission…whether you agree with them or not. i mean, i think spike lee is whiny too and i am a big fan of clint eastwood's films, but it's imprecise to call spike racist for pointing out a historical inaccuracy in a film. i think many white people (apparently, clint eastwood included), have little sympathy or patience for any minority expressing raced-based anger. and @ kwaina, the inside man, spike lee's last film, was a bonafide hit and grossed more money at the box office than any film clint eastwood has ever directed.

There is a real easy solution to this. Spike has enough money that he could have made a movie about ww2 for the last 20 years. It seems like Spike is jealous of all these other directors. He was mad at Tarantino a few years ago, he was mad a Norman Jewison for trying to make X and now this. Maybe his movies would be much better if he worried about them, more than other peoples work. These diectors never say anything about Spikes crappy movies. He always starts this junk.

I agree with summer, but spike did go to far with the Plantation thing. Clint Eastwood is the first director to put a black actor in a cowboy movie as a co-star!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

First of all, the man is not my father and we’re not on a plantation either

THIS is blatantly racist. Yes, Clint's statement is kinda below what I expect from a man of his standing, his reaction is the exact one I would probably good.

I don't think that Clint intentionally removed African-American soldiers to white wash history so to speak. I'm very aware of the contributions made by black soldiers but if told to draw a picture of even soldiers at Vietnam, it would be all white people. Why? Um, that's pretty much all I've ever seen on the History channel or anything else we watched in school.

I wish spike was consistant. Why didn't he complain when hollywood had the cuba gooden character from pearl harbor shoot down some japanese planes??? That never happened. The character did exist, but he didn't shoot any planes.

Clint should have put some blacks in his movie. To have an entire movie where none are present gives the impression that either weren't there or insignificant. People fail to recognize the power of the visual media.

Come on Clint…You're better than that!

"I’m very aware of the contributions made by black soldiers but if told to draw a picture of even soldiers at Vietnam, it would be all white people. Why? Um, that’s pretty much all I’ve ever seen on the History channel or anything else we watched in school."

@ daria…so doesn't that just mean that spike was right to speak up? b/c if that's all you ever see in school or in the history channel, then that's cause for concern, considering african-americans represented at least 13% of the soldiers in vietnam. just b/c you're aware of AA's contributions, you shouldn't assume that everyone is going to take time to educate themselves.

roxor- I saw She Hates Me , and I thought it was a good movie. I doubt if all of those women were truly lesbians as a number of them seem to like to "BDs" ability to work the middle.

comments 14-18 = Sybil?

Ralphus, Spike's beef with Tarantino centered around the repetition of the "N" word in the movie Pulp Fiction. When I watched Pulp Fiction, I found the constant use of the "N" word to be grating, annoying and troubling

@tigerr1978: No, Spike was not right. Clint Eastwood did not invent this automatic exclusion and I assume that even if he did his own primary research, it would be very natural to create a movie with only white soldiers. There are plenty of other works on US wars and very few feature non-whites with the exception of conflicts that occurred in the last 20 years. Since Clint was alive during WWII, I'm going to say it's safe to assume that he's aware of the fact that there were black people who fought in it. I'm looking at all the films he's directed that I've seen when I say this: the absence of black soldiers in this particular film was him having the same blind spot that we all do. It is a shame that probably the best film on the war fails to acknowledge the contributions of black soldiers. Clint isn't whitewashing history. He looked at it from the perspective of someone who has been exposed to whitewashed history. It's amazing to me that all the books and films involving US soldiers rescuing people in concentration camps fail to mention the black soldiers. Yet over and over again, Holocaust survivors have written that they were all in awe because they'd never seen black people before. I've met two Holocaust survivors and they both mentioned this. I guess this is the bit o' history that many choose to ignore.

Mainly, the reason Spike is not right is that he has the ability to make a more historically accurate film, whether about the battle in general or the experiences of black soldiers only in the battle. He has chosen not to. Oh well. Hope some superior director goes out and does this story justice. Maybe Forest. Beats the hell out of b-ing and moaning.

…oh, also, soldiers from other countries stated how disgusted they were by US's race issues that were evident during several wars, mainly with segregation.

Okay. He's made it so why in the world was criticizing a particular director necessary when there are MANY films on WWII. Nearly all of them do the same thing. I'm sure it's repeated. It was unnecessary and it makes it look like he's trying to stir up controversy with the highest profile actor-director he could find for the sake of getting press.

Someone who has already made his money is actually arguing for inclusion of more blacks in the movies, and black Americans are actually arguing against him! I see why Oprah spent all that money to start her school in South Africa.