Da Sweet Blood of Jesus

Spike Lee is one of my biggest favorite directors so I was interested in watching this regardless of the low rating

And I wanted to like it I really did, the opening shot is amazing it has some superb break-dancers break dancing outside to a smooth Bruce Hornsby piano score, looks beautiful

But that montage really has nothing to do with the movie itself, the movie is about an upper class arts collector who by some circumstances get a thirst for blood

Mind you, if you're expecting a typical vampire horror you will probably be let down it's not really that type of movie

What type of movie it is though I can't really describe, it's just a peculiar movie that I had a hard time figuring out what it was trying to be and what it was trying to say

The dialogue is not bad but more-part of it doesn't sound realistic to what a person would say, often sounding more like theatre monologues basically

Acting overall is pretty wooden (but that could be an intentional thing being that the people in it are very posh) and pace very slow

It has some above average scenes separately but together it just doesn't get it's right flow and your often sitting wondering why or wondering what the point of it all is, and by the end of the movie (at least I) still have no idea

For the record I have not seen the movie GANJA & HESS of which this movie is a remake on, perhaps I would understand this movie better if I'd do that but if one has to watch something else to understand the movie you were watching than that would mean that this movie failed IMO

Honestly it felt like Spike Lee didn't put his whole heart into this project which is a shame, since it was funded by his biggest fans via a Kickstarter campaign

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?

As an old fan of Ganja & Hess, i was very curious to see Spike Lee's take of this arty oddity.

Very few things changed from the script, except the part of minor characters : the slow pace, the theatrical acting and the general mood are scrupulously respected, so you must expect an art-et-essai movie rather than an usual vampire flick.

I didn't found it as bad as the other reviewers, even if I can express a few reserves : the score that sometimes looks like a sort of car play-list (the original was quite experimental), or the lack of twisted shots that made the first movie so unique.

However, I hope that it will encourage the new generation to rediscover the 73 version that still shines like a black diamond, with its strange mix of perversity and religious knick-knack.

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.

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?