You'll hate this unless you - like Spike - think we deserved 9/11.

First, you probably are right about the use of WTC site and Monte's incarceration, being used by Lee as metaphor for America reaping what it sows. In fact, it really makes a lot of sense. Didn't notice it, but yeah, your totally on point. Thanks for that...

But, Mr. Lee is totally entitled to his opinion, just as you are yours. That is what free-speech is all about. Right? We can't close the doors to free-speech just because we don't like what is being said! Because then this wouldn't be America, it would just be any other backwater country that jails everyone that doesn't go along with what the ruling party says, does or thinks. Funny though, for some reason that does sort of sound like what is going on in this country. Say anything negative about Iraq and suddenly you, "hate the troops," or "want the terrorists to win." All phony arguments, but whatever.

The, "F YOU diatribe," as you put it, was harkening back to a similar scene Lee did in, Do The Right Thing. But unlike, DTRT, Lee(or the author, this was novel before Lee got his hands on it)makes the character, Monte accept responsibility and not pass the buck, onto a slowing eroding concrete jungle. Monte, himself, says that his anger is just an attempt at excusing his own mis-deeds. You missed the point, yo. And it is one of my favorite sequences ever in film.

And am I to understand that you only watched forty-five minutes of the movie? It is 150 minute film, yeah ya missed the majority of the film and your precious character development.

Finally, I respect your opinion, as you are certainly entitled to it. But the most positive and American thing, to do for America is to point out her flaws. That is what PATRIOTS do. They say, "Hey this is wrong. I love this place and don't want it to disappear." The least patriotic thing you can do is plug your ears, scream heresy and then bury your head in the sand. That's what we have been doing for the last thirty years and really hasn't gotten us anywhere!



"Master your high or die under the staff!"

reply share

add reply

formatting help

This is a film with an universal message about low times. When you're down, don't panic, be an optimist. That is what America after 9/11 (before Obama) was not. The Edward Norton character gets some different advices during the film. The worst of them was given to him by the criminals. They told him to snatch the least protected, the weakest, and beat him in order to prove the strength. He refuses to do it, even there on the spot. But sadly, that is what America under the Cheney administration actually did.
25th Hour is one of the most patriotic American films of all times.

------------------------------------
I don't read private messages.

reply share

add reply

formatting help

If America were to reap what it sowed then on 9/11 the Arab World ought to have cut us a check for some ungodly sum and present to us with a thank you card. The oil revenues from the global economy is the only thing keeping them out of the red and adding economic misery to their already long list of self-imposed pathologies.

And if the dictators America supports in the ME were oppressing the sort of people who would perpetrate 9/11 then I think the wisdom of successive generations of US foreign policy planners should be applauded. In the ME there are few good options, we're trying to carve one out right now in Iraq [no thanks to Mr. Lee and his fellow travelers], and the autocrats and royal families the US supports are for the time being the least bad option for those countries.

I marvel at the "whatever US foreign policy is, it's wrong..." crowd- would you rather AQ run Saudi Arabia or Egypt? They're the people waiting in the wings- not Jeffersonian small "r" republicans who have really great ideas about how to foster liberal democratic societies.

Anyways, a very good film even with this director's predictable politics. If I were to only take in media that matches my ideology I'd listen to nothing but Country/Western music and talk radio in between NASCAR viewings [shudder]...

reply share

add reply

formatting help

I am a really big fan of this movie and of spike lee, but im really dissapointed with this scene. I never really thought about it as a sick commentary on 9/11, but it all makes sense. Has US foreign policy really been that bad over the last 50 years? What of the half of europe who got to live in freedom instead of under totalitarian rule because of the US? How about the millions in south korea? There was a time when the world needed a benevolent bully.

reply share

add reply

formatting help

wow- thank you dr. strangelove and others for insight as to what spike lee's use of the wtc in this film is all about. I have wondered what it was all about since i saw the movie in the theaters and just now was interested enough to look it up.
However, despite the fact it seems to fit, i don't know if this assessment is 100 percent accurate. An admittingly cursory search on the internet does not shore up any real support for the theory... and no im not saying that proves you wrong.
first you have to consider the book does not make ref. to 9/11 at all. Second, consider the director; spike lee is the de facto pop-umentarian of NYC of our time and interviews i have read with him about the movie suggest he felt a need to include this so called "momentous occasion" in our history in his movie. Really, its silly to think that Spike Lee would make any movie in this time period and not incorporate 9/11 imagery and symbolism into it.
Again, this does not go so far as to disprove your theory. but considering spike lee's evident (given past work) feelings towards NYC and the usamerica it is unlikely he is saying "america [or nyc] deserved 9/11. perhaps the director is suggesting a "chickens coming home to roost" theme, but in the same sense as used (interestingly) by malcom x; that is to say that history is both predictable and unchangeable. That is to say, america does not deserve 9/11 but should not think it unpredictable nor can it change the past (just as monty should have predicted this end and cannot change what has been done). This is supported by the protagonist's (monty) constant bemoaning of how he "f'ed it all up" throughout the movie and his final decision to accept the circumstances.
don't consider me an unrelenting fan of spike lee, though i will admit i find his movies provocative and intriguing. also, i hope that the difference in what dr.strangelove and i say is clear, though i agree that spike lee is drawing parallels bt monty and america, not just throwing in 9/11 imagery on screen. i don't think that 25th hour is spike lee saying "f you nyc" or "america deserved 9/11;". Im not trying to instigate a political argument, just attempting to interpret the movie and the statement. thanks for a stimulating argument, don't find any reason why this conversation should be debased by name calling.

reply share

add reply

formatting help

"But even after 45 minutes, this awful excuse for a story still had ZERO character development, ZERO direction and gave me ZERO reason to care about anything happening onscreen. What a waste of time. "

you were making sense until your very last paragraph there. i love it when people get on a message boards and throw out phrases like "this movie had zero direction and zero character development! what a waste" without actually, you know, SUPPORTING their claims with the why's and how's. makes you sound totally ignorant.

is it possible that just maybe, you had a hard time caring about any of the characters and what happened to them because you were still reeling from the "evil intent" of Spike Lee? any person who can't watch a film like this without getting on their high horse about how horrible the movie is because the directors intent "wasn't for entertainment purposes" [which is a laugh in itself], and therefore talking yourself into not being able to enjoy the rest of the film, all the while thinking up excuses for it [zero character development!!!!!!!]. you would have sounded much more respectable had you tried harder to explain what was actually bad about the movie. one subliminal message in one single scene simply can't ruin the whole movie, unless you're a self-righteous twit. if you really do love movies, then you would be able to explain in a competent manner about the character development and direction, [or lack thereof]. but you WOULDN'T say "i hate this movie because Spike Lee hates America and this movie proves that YEA"

sigh.

reply share

add reply

formatting help

[deleted]

I don't hate 25th Hour, and I don't think we deserved 9/11.

I think you are imposing your own ideas of Spike Lee and the left onto your interpretation of this film, incorrectly. The use of the backdrop of Ground Zero in that conversation is not meant as some sort of political commentary as much as it's meant to evoke an elegaic atmosphere. Lee uses other touches, such as the shot of the twin blue lights where the towers used to stand at the beginning, to remind the viewer that this is New York in the wake of 9/11 and what happened is still fresh in people's minds.

Being a New Yorker, I fully understood Lee's intentions here and took them at face value. Lee's films always have a subtext of a love letter to New York City, however subverted, and no matter what you might think of his politics, at the time the film came out, people looked to Lee for guidance as a prominent New Yorker. 25th Hour was one of the very first films to be filmed in NYC after 9/11 and Lee has said he thought it would be "criminal" to ignore it. He also said he wanted to bring it in organically and not make it the crux of the film. I think he did that.

You can believe him or not I suppose, but from the point of view of someone who was in lower Manhattan on 9/11 and who was ready to join the CIA to find bin Laden herself to kill him with her bare hands, I can tell you with total certainty that the inclusion of Ground Zero as a backdrop was very evocative and meaningful to me and others who witnessed that day firsthand. Putting images of the Towers and Ground Zero in the film served to lend the film a sense of tragedy, uncertainty, sadness, and devastation that fit with how Monty must have been feeling on his last day of freedom.

I think it's a real shame you didn't finish out the film, because the final third of 25th Hour shifts into a completely different tone, for both the film, and for Lee himself, and is one of the most beautiful and aching portraits of what could have been I've ever seen on film. I too had issues with the first part of the film, but the finish stays with me even today. I don't think it's fair for you to judge a film without having seen it in its entirety, but that fits in with the fallacious reasoning of your OP, so I guess that's just how you roll.

I must address a comment you made to someone else above:

My opinion, shared by most professional critics, is that a film is not worthwhile if the filmmaker is unable to capture your attention - and cause you to invest emotionally in its characters - early on.

That is also a false statement, as your opinion is not shared by most professional critics. First and foremost, there is absolutely no consensus, among professional critics, or anyone else, as to what makes a film "worthwhile." Second, there is no timeline as to when a filmmaker should "capture your attention" or "cause you to invest emotionally in its characters" in any film--especially considering a filmmaker does not have to cause the viewer to invest emotionally in his characters to make his film worthwhile.

Have you ever heard of a film called Jeanne Dielman? This three + hour seventies Belgian film tells the story of a Belgian housewife over several days of her life in real time. Nothing really happens in this film outside of Jeanne preparing dinner for her son, etc, until the final reel, when something occurs that turns her life upside down and shocks the viewer. This film is considered one of the great masterpieces of modern film, although I'm sure you wouldn't have made it through the first twenty minutes, and is standard viewing in film schools around the world.

25th Hour is currently at 77% on Rotten Tomatoes and 69% on Metacritic, so it would seem that "most" professional critics would disagree with you on the "abominable" nature of this film as well. A piece of advice: forcing your personal politics onto films that aren't political can't be a very enjoyable or entertaining experience for you. Refraining from judgement until the film is over might be a more fruitful approach. Who knows, a film you thought you wouldn't like might surprise you.

The thing is, Bob, it's not that I'm lazy, it's that I just don't care.

reply share

add reply

formatting help