VALUTAZIONE IMDb
4,5/10
2029
LA TUA VALUTAZIONE
Un antropologo si sveglia con sete di sangue dopo che un assistente lo pugnala con un pugnale maledetto.Un antropologo si sveglia con sete di sangue dopo che un assistente lo pugnala con un pugnale maledetto.Un antropologo si sveglia con sete di sangue dopo che un assistente lo pugnala con un pugnale maledetto.
- Regia
- Sceneggiatura
- Star
Felicia Pearson
- Lucky Mays
- (as Felicia 'Snoop' Pearson)
Stephen McKinley Henderson
- Deacon Yancy
- (as Stephen Henderson)
Recensioni in evidenza
Spike Lee's brilliant horror deconstruction.
The director skillfully mixes horror cinematography with some of his antitheses, as in the use of an extremely realistic photography, and constantly lit up scenes.
The drama of Dr. Green's life teaches us that violence is inherent to man, necessary for his survival, but ultimately harmful and capable of killing ourselves. The themes dear to the director, such as the criticism of American society and of racism towards African Americans that is overturned in an wealthy African American character, who is both victim and executioner of his own destiny, remain topical.
Da Sweet Blood of Jesus it is certainly not a masterpiece, but a decidedly enjoyable film and that together with "Only Lovers Left Alive" by Jim Jarmusch offers a new, modern and contemporary vision of the cinematographically harassed figure of "vampire".
The drama of Dr. Green's life teaches us that violence is inherent to man, necessary for his survival, but ultimately harmful and capable of killing ourselves. The themes dear to the director, such as the criticism of American society and of racism towards African Americans that is overturned in an wealthy African American character, who is both victim and executioner of his own destiny, remain topical.
Da Sweet Blood of Jesus it is certainly not a masterpiece, but a decidedly enjoyable film and that together with "Only Lovers Left Alive" by Jim Jarmusch offers a new, modern and contemporary vision of the cinematographically harassed figure of "vampire".
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.
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.
Dr. Hess Green becomes cursed by a mysterious ancient African artifact and is overwhelmed with a new-found thirst for blood.
Spike Lee has made a very strange film here. Maybe because it was based on another film that happens to be rather strange ("Ganja and Hess") or maybe because it was filmed with a low budget and short on time, with relatively unknown actors... but there is something decidedly off about the picture.
Like the original, there is an ongoing metaphor about addiction. The main character is not a vampire in the traditional sense, despite an unquenchable thirst for blood. He expresses that many (perhaps most) people have addictions... drugs, money, alcohol, women... his is just different.
The Jesus parallel is played up from the original. There is indeed something strange about a man (Jesus) who asks his followers to eat his flesh and drink his blood. Christians, of course, do not find it strange. And that makes the parallel interesting... why do we recoil at one man's thirst for blood and yet look forward to drinking blood each Sunday without thinking anything of it?
Spike Lee has made a very strange film here. Maybe because it was based on another film that happens to be rather strange ("Ganja and Hess") or maybe because it was filmed with a low budget and short on time, with relatively unknown actors... but there is something decidedly off about the picture.
Like the original, there is an ongoing metaphor about addiction. The main character is not a vampire in the traditional sense, despite an unquenchable thirst for blood. He expresses that many (perhaps most) people have addictions... drugs, money, alcohol, women... his is just different.
The Jesus parallel is played up from the original. There is indeed something strange about a man (Jesus) who asks his followers to eat his flesh and drink his blood. Christians, of course, do not find it strange. And that makes the parallel interesting... why do we recoil at one man's thirst for blood and yet look forward to drinking blood each Sunday without thinking anything of it?
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.
Many people have said that an actor has played a character in at least one bad movie and this proves it. Jesus, I can't believe Rami Malek is in this horrible movie. Oh gosh, I wish I could go back in time and tell him please no. What is he doing here? Plots, Dr. Hess Green becomes cursed by a mysterious ancient African artifact and is overwhelmed with a newfound thirst for blood. Soon after his transformation he enters into a dangerous romance with Ganja Hightower that questions the very nature of love, addiction, sex, and status. For the supernatural side, okay in my opinion. But on the romance side, its very unreal. How come after her husband died then she find her husband's body in the basement and she are still attracted to the protagonist?
Lo sapevi?
- QuizFilming was completed in 16 days.
- ConnessioniReferenced in Harmontown: Explain Your World View (2017)
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How long is Da Sweet Blood of Jesus?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paese di origine
- Sito ufficiale
- Lingua
- Celebre anche come
- Da Sweet Blood of Jesus
- Luoghi delle riprese
- Azienda produttrice
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
Botteghino
- Budget
- 1.420.000 USD (previsto)
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti
Divario superiore
By what name was Il sangue di Cristo (2014) officially released in India in English?
Rispondi