Da Sweet Blood of Jesus

In this Independent, Kick-Starter Film there is much "Blackness", Typical of Spike Lee. From the Opening Non-Sequitur of Free-Style "Dancing' in the the Streets" to all of the Black Heritage with Culture Wall Hangings and "Revival Meeting" Church Whailings, there is "Blackness" Everywhere.

Even the Borderline Blasphemous (with context to the Film) Title is "Black Speak". The Film, a Remake of a 1972 "Blaxploitation" Called "Ganja and Hess", is the Story of an Upper-Class Blood Licker. It's a Beautifully Shot, Mess of a Story about, one Guesses, Addiction. But Who Knows? The Movie is so Everywhere the Message gets Lost somewhere between the Soft-Porn and the Awful Acting.

The Film's Ambiguity Sparks Over Analysis. Truth be Told the Movie is Visually Arresting and Not Much Else. It's Different, certainly Not for Everyone, and is somewhat Engaging, but the Pace and the Script are so Slow and Uninteresting that there is Never any real Connection Between the Audience and the Screen. It's Voyeuristic and Self-Indulegent, even more so than usual for the Director, to a Fault.

Overall, Recommended for Art-House Patrons, Spike Lee Check-Listers, and Seekers of Off-Beat and Midnight Type Movies.

There is an Artist at Work here, and like All Artists, Not Every Work is a Masterpiece.

A remake of a Blaxpolation film called Ganja & Hess, Dr. Green is a expert on African artifacts who after a botched murder, suicide begins a strange addiction to blood that makes him indestructible.

A very strange low key indi vampire (sort of) picture. Reminds me of last years, Only Lovers Left Alive by Jim Jarmusch, but Mr. Lee is asking me to have a far more opened mind than Mr. Jarmush did.

The premise of the movie is about an African tribe who drank blood like it was alcohol or drugs, and a doctor who begins to practice this particular custom, feeling that it's society that made this addiction stranger than all others. I did enjoy the premise of not using the Eastern European origins of what is a vampire, at the same time, Spike use this as a comp out for when people come up to him and say "your vampire film really sucks"(bad pun cause no biting went on in the movie).

For the most part, I got the Impression that the film is more about addiction and how it can drive you and the people around you. I saw a movie no different than Requiem for a Dream, but the drug of choice was blood.

It definitely had the feel of a Spike Lee film all over it. His signature style was all over This cheap independent production and reminded me of his recent film, Red Hook Summer and his first film She's Gotta have it. The Jazz composed score really help push the story along too.

So this is what that Kickstarter campaign was all about, huh? Overall, it showed that Spike still has a foot inside true independent cinema, and it was something truly different an unexpected from the maker of Do the Right Thing. I think it has the makings of a Midnight Movie cult following. Way better than Old Boy

Spike Lee is one of the premiere directors of my generation. With that said, I am still trying to figure out the focus and purpose of this movie. The actors, many of whom, we've seen in other Lee films, are so subdued and non significant. The movie seems to lack...well, life. His career has created valuable works that have symbolically and literally offered calls for self-awareness and offered insights into the social-political realities of African-Americans and America in general. I can't figure out what significance this movie has. There are some disturbing scenes that do not seem to add any insights or purpose to the movies story. The few things I gathered from this are: rich/poor exploitation, addiction, socio-sexual dynamic, and Sankofa. The story telling doesn't offer anything new or dynamic. So, with a heavy heart, I give this a thumbs down and not let this be representative of Spikes true genius!

I do wonder if arty films are just an excuse for film executives to see naked women,this is a tedious film with 4 naked actresses so if you so wish you can fast forward to the "good" parts

I have loved most of the Spike Lee joints I have seen, but this time I felt much disappointed with the remake of "Ganja & Hess". To start with I still do not fathom the cult following of the original: it is true that for its time it was an innovative approach to cinema dealing with paranormal activity, and quite different from most African-American motion pictures of the 1970s, but at the same time I found its central premise a bit pompous and wordy, and many viewers' reactions a bit exaggerated. The so admired "slickness" of both versions is too ornate for me, and quite distracting: it makes the plot look sillier than it is for all its pretension that we are witnessing an "awesome" psychological drama. I have to admit though that Bill Gunn had more control over his own material than Lee: the remake is amazingly disjointed and even longer than the original, with extensive stretches of "music videos" that could have been cut without affecting the drama. As a matter of fact Lee's film contains good elements that do no blend, as Bruce Hornsby's score and varied songs so omnipresent and badly dosed that the soundtrack becomes annoying, no matter how good the composition or the tune are. Then take the beautiful opening credits sequence or the great church scene featuring Valerie Simpson singing and playing the piano, mix them with the obligatory lesbian scene, the dispensable garden cocktail for white scholars, the unexplained trips to town (Hess must certainly be a hot specialist on the Ashanti culture, but we see little of that), the trivial little procession after the wedding... and you get something very bloody but hardly sweet. Your "cultural background" will not suffer much if you skip this.