Spike Lee criticizes Clint Eastwood for not casting black soldiers in the movie "The Flags of Our Fathers" though 900 of them fought along the US forces.

Absent from history: the black soldiers at Iwo Jima

Then,

Clint Eastwood and Spike Lee Go to War!

If anybody has read American History ,they would know that African American soldiers were not there when raising the flag at Iwo Jima .

History can be made my anyone but actually is recorded by the victors (the ones with power).

Read inside the first link and you will come across the interview with a black soldier who participated in that battle.

Clearly, history was deliberately mis-recorded to play down contribution by the black.

Mr Hyde, you are living in a country which gives federal holiday on a birthday of only one person, Dr. Martin Luther King.

Go figure. 

What does that have anything to do with facts being not portrayed correctly in history books or historical movies?

America is a great country but it can definitely do better with the sands of time.

How could Clint show in his movie black people raising flags when white men were the one raising the flags.

Based on what I have read so far, it seems only the white soldiers happened to be involved in raising the flag which is not  the case of dispute here. It's not just about raising the flag which captured that iconic soldiers' poses but about showing the soldiers of different ethnicity as well who fought together as Americans in that battle.

This is nothing but Spike Lee being a cry baby. Bottom line this is nothing but Reverse Racism. Spike is just looking for publicity for his next movie AHEM !! which also happens to be about 2nd world war. NOW WHY DOES SPIKE LEE ONLY MAKE MOVIES ABOUT BLACK PEOPLE, WHY DOESN"T HE MAKE MOVIES ABOUT WHITE PEOPLE, OR ASIAN PEOPLE ? C'mon Spike we live in US of A too not just Black People!!

Spike Lee should stop groaning, moaning and whining about other people's movies and instead try to make better movies himself - of the type he thinks other people should be making. Good luck to him.

"Reverse Racism" is a huge problem that people hardly talk about, nor the media. What next? The first person to land on the moon was BLACK?
"C" grade director trying to gain attention going after "A" grade directors using the same old excuse "Racism". He needs to get a life and make some better movies instead.

They say "Ignorance is a bliss" but doesn't it startle any one of you when you discover what you have been deprived of  i.e.accurate information?

Spike Lee, who notoriously has had been branded as a Reverse Racist, evokes a stir whenever he makes such kind of remarks no matter whether these is substance to it or not.

Some filmmakers people are obsessed with making movie with subject matter dealing with their own people or identity like Scorsese' movies deals with Italian-Americans, Manoj Kumar deals with Bharata and so forth.
But I think that is legit as long as no truth is distorted. Of course, it goes without saying their choice of subject is a matter of their own personal preference.

Oh yes of course, "there is no such thing as a bad publicity", this one could boost his next movie release if there is one coming out shortly.

There's an Indian and lots of Japanese, what makes you think he didn't want to put Blacks in the movie? Simply they weren't there. Cheap publicity for his next movie. Calling out "Racism" for everything is a joke nowadays. I'm definetly NOT going to watch his movie, anyway his taste and quality are CHEAP.

Rewire!
It was a war against the Japanese so it's not easy to miss them. If you read from the first link I think you will get the answer to your question. The article defends the director indicating the movie is true to the historical records. But the problem arises when the historical records themselves are not accurate.
You can ask yourself "When undertaking a movie project of historical significance, is it also prudent to interview the surviving actual characters and reflect that in the script?"

No doubt, Clint Eastwood is a filmmaker whom most of us probably thought is done with cinema when he churns out mega-hit movie after another as a director looking past "Unforgiven". He is a true movie legend who might have already overshadowed John Wayne by now.

mr hyde,
If the history has been distorted, then how does that make Clint responsible, let alone be criticized at at public place. He made with the material he had. If you and Spike are so concern about the history, take those facts(proofs) and submit it to the historical society of US and the Congress. And please do not say he will not be taken seriously or discriminated. Two words for you, Barack Obama. Blaming Clint is like barking at the wrong dog.
On that note, Spike's new movie is about WWII which was the allied nations against the Germans and the Japs. We can bring out version of Racism saying Spike didn't portrait Asians, which I'm pretty sure he has none in his movie. There's not end to this. Admit it, Spike is a piece of shit.

You might have read my response but you have not analyzed it.
Clinton lost the primaries because more American people have better faith in Obama than in Clinton.
The argument boils down to (for the n^th time) the black soldiers who put their lives on the line during that battle have not been represented in the movie. That's where this argument arises.
I wrote on the immediate previous post.
"The article defends the director indicating the movie is true to the historical records."
Mr. Rewire, you are being too aggressive when you write I and Spike Lee should take the matter to the Congress.

Spike lee is using this propaganda to promote his next film, it’s that simple.  I’ve watched flags of our father twice and the movie is about the soldiers who raised the flag at Iowa Jima that time, not about others.  Now if no black soldiers raised the flag than he can’t change history just to please some racists thug like lee. 

my hyde
You should read all the posting on the website that you've put the link at the beginning of this thread. See what majority of them has to say. They're calling him "Fool". Black people were portrait in every single of movies related to Vietnam, which was a historical fact. Go check them out if you have forgotten, you'll find at least one black guy in every god damn Vietnam movie, some don't even show a single Vietnamese. How the hell can they say they were not portrait in movies?
If they were not in Iwo Jima, then the blatant call of racism doesn't change the fact they WERE NOT there.

Rewire!
So there is more truth in the consensus than in the facts? What a joke!


Jonny, if it's about only about raising the flag then the movie would have been only two minutes long instead of an epic.

my hyde,
"Fact"? How do you know it's a fact and not a made up story by a whinny ass "C" grade director.
It appears you've been influenced heavily by "rap & hip/hop" propaganda. Spread your wings and embrace friends from other circles, you'll get a very different views.
I know somewhere down this posting, you'll call me a "Racist", which is normal defense mechanism for this sort of issue.

Mr Hyde,"The argument boils down to (for the n^th time) the black soldiers who put their lives on the line during that battle have not been represented in the movie. That's where this argument arises."

Well the question I ask Mr hyde is..was Clint present there in IIworld war ? Nope. Was Spike present there during raising of the flag ? Nope. So both are going by the historical account of what happened by people who wrote it. Mind you US was a racist country back then(no voting rights for blacks, Japanese Americans were sent to prison camps). Now if the historical accounts show that there were only white folks there then you cannot really go and blame Clint for that can you ? So if he wants to chage it then as Rewire mentioned ..he needs to present those black survivors to historians and establish the facts before running his mouth for publicity and personal gain(promoting his own movie). Vietnam war came after the whole civil rights movement so of course they were forced to mention black soldiers on the same page as white folks.

Besides film making is an art, so if Mr. Eastwood want to portray only white soldiers then that is his choice. Just like nobody goes and questions why Mr. Lee only picks black subjects for his movies and not others. If this is not reverse racism then I dun know what is.