Chi-Raq

The newest joint from director Spike Lee, is a bizarre experiment for all to see.

Told in a brash tone, preaching with a megaphone, promising to make heads roll, And influenced by the writings of old Aristophanes.

Lysistrata (Parris) is the main squeeze of Chi-Raq (Cannon), A man with hopes to rap and plans attacks with and between two rival clans.

There's similarities between another two households alike in dignity, Down to the the colors worn during their mutiny.

So hopeless is their feud, no faction can collude to end, The violence penned and pent up in the hearts of these men.

So too does Lysistrata makes her nihilism known, Until an innocent is slain by a bullet in stray.

Plotting with Miss Helen (Bassett) and her sisters to atone, The ladies decide to keep their menfolk at bay.

Thus swayed with a solemn oath to end the specter of death, From the streets of the City with Big Shoulders, The women of Chicago swear with resounding shibboleth, To go on sex strike until the violence is over.

Much like this review, the film is in rhyme, which can grind, The gears of many not willing to meet it halfway, The characters imbue parody and are unable to find, Balance between the real and distorted morality play.

Overwrought with the thoughts and ersatz of bathetic farce, There's still something radical with which few can parse; Like when the gals take the armory, like Greeks to the treasury, The choruses of men and women can't help but find, A sincere quest for peace too abstruse for the blind.

Thus this film is a siren's call for peace that should be heard, Even if it is incredibly uneven in places.

The sui generis of such a movie bends to the absurd, Yet the message is true thus putting me in it's good graces.

There was much hullabaloo about it's offensive fantasy, Minimizing the tragedy of a besieged Windy City.

I for one stopped myself from attending a screening, As Chicago is second home thus this treatment is demeaning.

Yet firstly, this film is supposed to be skit and travesty, While the reasons for violence is complex, the act is absurdity! Why not have an expression that typifies the high camp of low brutality.

Why not revel in the message of love, that which comes from above, Below and inside the mourning, healing hearts and souls thereof.

There are many reasons to hate: revenge, opportunity, resource, religion, Politics, poverty, power, cash, race and competition.

Yet there is only one reason for love.

Secondly the source material is Greek in more ways than one, Comprehending the pathos of such a think piece maligned, Appropriates the fields of Thalia, Euterpe and Clio entwined.

It's not the who, what, where or when but why, when all is said and done.

And how strongly you feel by the tears and blood shed, When all players arrived, sheathed in white, bathed in the glory, Indemnified by a campaign ignited by Leymah Gbowee.

They end in the way a comedy should, in jubilation and ascension.

A better understanding made possible by an old form.

In modernity and convention we're given new dimension, With which to understand what's sadly a new norm.

Manipulative? Simplistic? Sexist? Maybe; Greek comedies are not exactly known for their subtlety.

Neither is Lee who hungrily experiments with novelty, Blusters with the voracity of his new expression, Not bothered or concerned with the asylum of discretion.

He's a maverick through and through, taking risks made bear, By a new form first fashioned by the surname Lumiere.

It tries, it fails, it gets back up again and fights the good fight, Using to make right the names of Jackson, Bassett and Snipes.

Is this movie acropolis or apocryphal? Watch and decide.

www.theyservepopcorninhell.blogspot.com

This one is definitely not without its flaws. The editing and pacing of it is messy, sometimes very uneven. I wasn't familiar with the source material from which this is inspired by, but I found it to be really addictive in its ability to grasp one's attention. I think the ensemble cast works well, even if the tone of the film requires them to be very loud and over-the-top, to the point that the film itself becomes a little exhausting. Some of the performers aren't as good as others, and sometimes it becomes very evident. However, it's also one of those films that is kind of difficult to resist. If you let it sort of wash over you, it will work in splendid, even magical ways, I just wish it was more consistent as a whole.

'CHI-RAQ': Three and a Half Stars (Out of Five)

Popular filmmaker Spike Lee's new comedy-drama musical; based on Aristophanes' ancient Greek comedy play 'Lysistrata' (but set in modern day Chicago). The story revolves around Chicago women, who withhold sex from their partners; until peace can be made. The title is a popular phrase, combining Chicago and Iraq, which is used to relate Chicago's Southside, to a war zone (it's also used as the nickname, of a character in the film). The movie stars Teyonah Parris, Nick Cannon, Wesley Snipes, Angela Bassett, John Cusack, Jennifer Hudson and Samuel L. Jackson (Snipes, Bassett and Jackson have all worked with Lee, multiple times before). The film didn't perform well, in limited release, at the Box Office; but it is one of the best reviewed movies of last year. I found it to be a bit of a 'mixed bag', but ultimately a good film.

The story takes place in South Side, Chicago; where deadly gang violence, is an everyday occurrence. A local woman, named Lysistrata (Parris), decides she's had enough; she also happens to be the lover of a popular rapper (in the area), and local gang leader, called Chi- Rag (Cannon). So Lysistrata decides to lead other female residents, in a revolt; by withholding physical affection, from their partners, until peace can be made. The movement becomes popular all around the world.

The movie is part satirical comedy, part musical, and part serious drama. It's also a political commentary; on the gang violence epidemic (in South Side, Chicago). The film definitely has a hard time balancing all these things; but it does have multiple well done (and memorable) moments, and a pretty good (positive) message. Spike Lee has made many better movies than this before; but it's definitely not a bad film, or a waste of time.

Watch our movie review show 'MOVIE TALK' at: https://youtu.be/j9uf6E4pnlw

While the movie touches on many problems that Chicago faces, in my opinion it misses the most important one: THE WAR on DRUGS. You can blame gun shows, the NRA, lack of education, etc, all you want, but the fact of the matter is and will remain that the violence isn't because of guns...the huge incarceration rate is not because of guns...it all stems back to the war on drugs. Guns don't kill people, violent gangs do and they do it because of the money associated with the black market drug trade.

Violence, gangs and turf wars are the direct result of the drug trade. Drug dealers rule the streets because the economic opportunities are terrible in the inner-city and because so much can be made from the drug trade. Poor youth see more opportunity in that criminal world than in going to school.

So will eliminating the war on drugs solve the problem? Probably not, but it would be a big step and do a lot to take the power away from the gangs and it would keep the police from arresting black males in epidemic rates.

I could go on and on about how terrible the War on Drugs is for the black community but this is simply a review and I wanted to convey my disappointment that this is not brought up as a substantial issue.

I knew little of this film when I sat to watch it, only that it was from Spike Lee, and I was open to whatever it chose to do. The opening credits suggest seriousness and grit; this is an impression that continues even at the same time as it adds theatrical presentation to the delivery, and rhyming couplets to the dialogue. At this point I was intrigued by the style as well as the content but as the ideas grew the film really gets out of control. I am really not sure what the vision for the film was, and what was told to the cast to draw in so many big names – but I'm guessing different things attracted them since so many of them appear to be in different films from the others.

The film touches on a lot of serious subjects, but at the same time it tries to involve comedy, musical numbers, sexual farce, and generally odd or misjudged attempts at comedy. The result is a film that feels so totally unfocused that it is really difficult to stay with it. Being kind, you could describe this wild energy as being enough to carry the viewer along, but I did not find this to be the case. Instead I wanted it to be better – to be worthy of its subject matter and its better elements; but this never came together, and I found it quite frustrating just how messy it was.

The starry cast doesn't help because even when they are really good, they are distracting by their fame, as well as the disjointed nature of their individual material. Parris is strong in the lead, but struggles to find a through-line across all her varying material. Cannon is wholly unconvincing throughout, while Snipes' comedy gangster undercuts the grit of this part of the film. Bassett and Hudson are excellent in their scenes – and it is not their fault that their scenes exist in a film different from the other scenes. The parade of familiar faces is distracting (Cusack, Jackson, Harris, Chappelle etc), although some are used well. I do always enjoy seeing people from The Wire and Oz, however getting Whitlock Jr. to deliver his most famous line (well, word) was just another misjudged moment.

Chi-Raq has a lot of ideas and energy, and it is an experience to watch it for these. However the film is wildly unfocused and messy, ultimately failing to hold it all together or to deliver a satisfying whole.