Clint Eastwood: Spike Lee Should "Shut His Face"

Wow Spike has gone off the deep end. Accusing Clint of racism just in the title of the film by saying "First of all, the man is not my father and we're not on a plantation either." How rude, how crass and how disrespectful to Clint Eastwood.

It was even better when Spike said "He sounds like an angry old man right there." Spike....is the angriest man in Hollywood and also the biggest joke there. I have more respect for Scientologists than Spike Lee. He's been angry for so long that.....he's an angry old man himself now.

He sat out to tell a story and he did just that. He told the story of a small group of men. Spike Lee wants to subvert the creative process of everyone else and force them to write around his paradigm of history and entertainment. BS! Spike Lee is an angry old man calling other people angry old men. Spike Lee is a racist calling other people racists.

Clint Eastwood my dude.

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

Spike Lee is wrong in this instance. Clint Eastwood is not a racist and has included many blacks in his long film career. Also, Clint's wife is part hispanic and black. So, Spike should have just kept his mouth shut.

I like Eastwood's films; been a fan for years. There's nothing about him that strikes me as a racist.

bappie wrote:

Spike Lee is wrong in this instance. Clint Eastwood is not a racist and has included many blacks in his long film career. Also, Clint's wife is part hispanic and black. So, Spike should have just kept his mouth shut.

stop making up stuff. And everone is a racist to a certain degree.

By this logic, Spike's a racist because he didn't include Texas redneck shitkickers in his film about race relations in New York City.

Seriously, Spike, if you want to make a film about black guys in the war, do it. It's not like you're an unknown in Hollywood. You'll get the backing. Go for it. I'd buy a ticket.

Ha ha ha that is funny. Don't mess with Clint Eastwood, he doesn't care what you look like he will mess you up.

Yeah! Well, Clint Eastwood should open his eyes, since he hasn't done so since 1969. This isn't Hollywood, Mr. Lee is real life... Don't get it twisted Mr. Eastwood.

I'm not saying I agree that Mr. Eastwood is racist.

Knottie wrote:

Yeah! Well, Clint Eastwood should open his eyes, since he hasn't done so since 1969. This isn't Hollywood, Mr. Lee is real life... Don't get it twisted Mr. Eastwood.
I'm not saying I agree that Mr. Eastwood is racist.

Spike Lee's movies are real life? Lol!

Eastwood made Flags of Our Fathers based off of the book that talked about the six soldiers that put up the flag at Iwo Jima...this famous picture: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raising_the_Flag... People would seriously think he was an idiot if he made one of them black for no reason. Spike Lee needs to get off the crack. Making one of them black would be like making George Washington Mexican.

bappie wrote:

Spike Lee is wrong in this instance. Clint Eastwood is not a racist and has included many blacks in his long film career. Also, Clint's wife is part hispanic and black. So, Spike should have just kept his mouth shut.

His wife's father is Black and Japanese and her mother is Irish. Her dad was adopted by the Ruiz family as a homeless teen and they gave him their last name. She is not of hispanic origin at all, but most people think that. And you're right Clint has given black actors a variety of roles in his movies even back when no one else was.

I don't think Clint is a racist. He actually admires black people. But he definitely is a good ole boy who probably wouldn't have said shut his face to some white man.

I think that when someone like Spike Lee attacks a person that is generally held in high regard by all races, such as Clint Eastwood, it reveals how little character Spike has. To complete his hat trick Spike will probably whine about Gandhi and Mother Theresa next.

Lee implied a fellow director was racist. He did it publicly in one of the most prestigious venues in the industry. In addition, he did it to one of the most racially sensitive directors in the industry, a director whose record for diversity far outshines anyone else's in the industry, including Lee's.

In addition, Eastwood's first Iwo Jima movie is arguably the most racially sensitive movie ever made in the U.S. How Lee missed this, is noting short of amazing.

It's an all Japanese cast IN ENGLISH SUBTITLES!
It's completely about the Japanese Imperial Army -- Iwo Jima from their perspective.

In other words, if the issue is "diversity" as it should be, Hispanics, Asian Americans, American Indians, et al, would have compelling reason to argue Lee's movies fail while Eastwood's are the most diverse out there.

Point being, Lee's narrow opinion of what diversity is -- always showing African Americans made whenever making a film -- is a bar set lower than Eastwood's who endeavors to make movies not just with whites and African Americans -- "Charlie Parker" -- but everyone.

Worse still, Lee's argument that African Americans "fought and died" on Iwo Jima is false in any event.

Lee repeats war stories not fact. The Montford Point Marines arrived at Iwo Jima AFTER the deadly first wave. Their role was that of common laborers, not combat marines. Of the 900 on Iwo Jima, two were. Meanwhile, 6800 non-black Marines were killed, most before they even got there to buy them.

That's the reality no matter the pumped-up war stories Lee heard growing up in Brooklyn.

ricland

The above was edited. Here's the corrected version:

Lee implied a fellow director was racist.

He did it publicly in one of the most prestigious venues in the industry. In addition, he did it to one of the most racially sensitive directors in the industry, a director whose record for diversity far outshines anyone else's including Lee's.

In addition, Eastwood's first Iwo Jima movie is arguably the most racially sensitive movie ever made in the U.S. How Lee missed this, is nothing short of amazing too.

It's an all Japanese cast IN ENGLISH SUBTITLES!
It's completely about the Japanese Imperial Army -- Iwo Jima from the Japanese perspective.

In other words, if the issue is "diversity" as it should be, Hispanics, Asian Americans, American Indians, et al, all have compelling reason to argue Lee's movies fail while Eastwood's are the most diverse out there.

Point being, Lee's narrow opinion of what diversity is -- showing African Americans as heroes whenever making a film -- is a bar set lower than Eastwood's who endeavors to make movies not just with African Americans -- "Charlie Parker" -- but everyone.

Worse still, Lee's argument that African Americans "fought and died" on Iwo Jima is false in any event.

Lee repeats war stories not fact. The Montford Point Marines arrived at Iwo Jima AFTER the deadly first wave. Their role was that of common laborers, not combat marines. Of the 900 on Iwo Jima, two died. Meanwhile, 6800 non-black Marines were killed.

That's the reality no matter the pumped-up war stories Lee heard in barbershops ("We Cut Heads") growing up in Brooklyn.

ricland

Let the lil chimp make his own WW2 film.

proud_ n _ white wrote:

<quoted text> amen to that ric and thanks for setting the record straight.

Thanks, bro.

Hey, is it alright if I date your sister now?

ricland

Yeah Spike, "Just Shut Your Face!" - you know what Clint really wanted to say, JSTFU!!!

http://www.amazon.com/White-Male-Privilege-Ra...