Review: Da 5 Bloods
Sunday, June 14, 2020 at 4:00PM by Lynn Lee
Perfectly timed. The right voice for this precise moment. Spike Lee’s never been more necessary than he is now.
If you’ve read one variation of the “timeliness” reaction to Spike Lee’s latest joint by way of Netflix, Da 5 Bloods, you’ve read them all. It’s a truth so self-evident it practically amounts to a truism. Except the fact is that Spike Lee never went anywhere – he’s been here the last 30 plus years, educating us on the ugly persistence of systemic racism in the U.S. His movies have always been timely; it’s our fault if we’ve failed to heed their underlying admonitions or give them the sustained attention they deserve. It makes little sense, then, to accord his newest release any extra expectations that it will “speak to the moment.”
Still, given that it's Spike Lee, it does speak to the moment, if less directly – or less crisply – than some of his previous films...
Da 5 Bloods follows four black Vietnam veterans (played by Delroy Lindo, Clarke Peters, Isaiah Whitlock, Jr., and Norm Lewis) who travel to present-day Vietnam to search for the remains of their former squad leader, “Stormin’ Norman” (Chadwick Boseman, not to be confused with Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf) and a cache of gold buried in the same area. Unsurprisingly, things do not go as planned, beginning with the unexpected appearance of the son (Jonathan Majors) of one of the “bloods” and continuing as the group journeys up the Mekong. Unity gives way to dissent and division, exacerbated by misunderstandings and old injuries (both physical and psychological), while outside forces intrude to mostly destructive effect. Overlaying all of these conflicts is the historical legacy of using black Americans to fight morally compromised wars for a country that treated them as lesser beings—an irony hammered home at the outset with a montage of archival footage of black GIs and famous figures (including Muhammad Ali, Angela Davis, and Kwame Ture) commenting on the hypocrisy of their conscription. The point is further underscored by historical factoids embedded in flashbacks of Stormin’ Norman’s expostulations and radio broadcasts by “Hanoi Hannah” (Veronica Ngo) interpolated throughout the film, along with a smartly curated selection of songs by Marvin Gaye.
Lee’s plainly got a lot on his mind – maybe too much. Da Bloods is handsomely filmed, well acted, and intermittently compelling, but it's also a sprawling, scattershot mashup of multiple genres and themes, its 2 hr 35 min run time at once too long and too short for the amount of ground it’s trying to cover. Its heaviest cinematic debts, as Lee has acknowledged, are to Apocalypse Now (1979) and The Treasure of the Sierra Madre (1948), both of which it openly, almost cheekily, quotes; there are elements, as well, of Rambo and Platoon, and a few echoes of Three Kings and Richard Linklater’s Last Flag Flying. The film takes on, for good measure, interracial romance, family secrets, strained father-son relationships, white postcolonial guilt, and Vietnam’s revival and reckoning with its own wartime scars.
It all hangs together tenuously at best, and Bloods practically screams for the hard edit Netflix clearly never demanded. Major plot turns come out of nowhere and lack the intended impact because the underlying characters or dynamics haven’t been developed sufficiently. The tonal shifts, too, are head-spinning, as the film moves from the sharp polemic of the opening montage to the warm, delightful chemistry of the four living “bloods”’ reunion in Hanoi (honestly, I could have just watched those guys dancing the funky chicken for the rest of the movie) to the mounting tensions and pops of unexpectedly gruesome violence during the middle stretch of their journey inland, to an improbable shoot-em-up third act that feels like it’s out of a Tarantino movie. The score, by the great Terence Blanchard, also feels off at times, too often inflating moments that should be underplayed.
Despite its messiness, Da 5 Bloods is well worth watching for two primary reasons: Lindo and Peters, whose portrayals of the group’s resident hair trigger and cool head, respectively, provide the heart and soul of the film. Lindo’s the one that’s garnered the most critical recognition, and for good reason: as Paul, the most tormented of the four surviving “bloods,” he projects with great power the festering burden of anger, trauma, and guilt the character’s been carrying for decades, and his increasing paranoia as he journeys closer and closer to the place that fucked him up for life. (As his long-suffering son, Majors plays off this constant tension poignantly.) Yet Paul’s climactic moment isn’t one of explosion but of expiation, as piercing in its tenderness as any of his prior Lear-like rage against the world. It’s been a while since Lindo’s had a big-screen role this meaty, and he makes the most of it.
Delroy Lindo already garnering awards buzz for "Da 5 Bloods"
Meanwhile, Peters, better known for his TV work (though he had memorable turns in Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, MO and Harriet), is equally strong in the less showy role of Otis, the de facto leader of the expedition. While his calm self-possession and quiet intelligence seem best equipped to guide the team out of their deepening quagmire, as we watch him struggling to keep pace and bent over under his burdens – both literal and metaphorical – we see from the pain in his eyes that he’s just as haunted by his past as any of the other vets. Although Otis’s Vietnam back story is underwritten (and had me scratching my head over timelines and character ages), Peters easily transcends these limitations.
All in all, Da 5 Bloods is far from being Lee’s best or most cohesive work, and suffers especially in comparison with its predecessor, BlacKkKlansman. But as with virtually all his movies, it will make you stop and think about difficult questions even as it entertains you. There aren’t many filmmakers who can do both of those things at once. We’re lucky to have one in Spike Lee.
Reader Comments (18)
I’m looking forward to hopefully watching this tonight. My opinion of Lee is that he’s incredibly messy and ultimately powerful film maker. The good usually outweighs the bad (or inconsistent). I’d rather a messy film maker than a boring one.
I found this film to be as urgent, powerful, and compelling as it was messy and heavy-handed - it's a Spike Lee Joint, after-all.
Delroy Lindo is beyond deserving of the praise he's getting, but the entire principal cast is outstanding and they really sell the bond between these men (even if they're all a bit too young for their roles). Johnathan Majors is also really effective as Lindo's son.
What I loved most was Lee's decision to have the same actors play their roles in the present and in flashback. I didn't find it distracting at all and I thought it beautifully illustrated the point of how the experience of war has effected them.
thefilmjunkie: Delroy Lindo is 67. Clarke Peters is 68. Isiah Whitlock Jr. is 65. I could see an argument for Norm Lewis, who is 57, and definitely felt slightly young for this, but the rest are FINE.
There are like four different movies in this one and they're all too long.
I've always thought that Spike had a mind of his own but see how quickly he has apologized for his comments on Woody. Fearing the rage of twitter at his age and status.
The movie is a mess.
I'm in love, I'm in love, I'm in love with...Chadwick Boseman!
Film twitter is losing its shit over this one and quite frankly...
The tone of this movie is all over the place. Some of the editing is disjointed. Cinematography is just okay and better in some places. The score is horrible and tries too hard to tell you what you should be feeling. Great acting, especially by Delroy Lindo. Depending on his competition, I could see him getting a best supporting actor Oscar nomination. The film may get a best picture and best director nominations based on the current times, not for merit.
You killed it this week Shea!
"The score, by the great Terence Blanchard, also feels off at times, too often inflating moments that should be underplayed." I can't agree with this more! This is what I found most problematic about a timely, well-acted, but ultimately bloated movie.
A single artist cannot do everything. While their observations may be acute and timely and necessary on one aspect, other aspects do not exist for them.
For Spike Lee, women only exist as a muted noise on the periphery.
Academy Award winner Delroy Lindo. Let's make it happen.
@Hermann maybe in his last few films, but not all of his filmography. She's Gotta Have It; Chi-Raq; Crooklyn; Girl 6. And a lot of his films explore the treatment of women, particularly black women, like in Mo' Better Blues and School Daze.
While he certainly could do better and I hope he does, it's also not like he's in Nolan or Scorsese territory.
I have been find out this type of website many days ago and still now finally find it it's look great and very valuable information provide by the author i appreciated him/her for this outstanding performance and hope to connect in future for more updates.
Like many a film by an "auteur", boy did this one need an editor. I actually thought the scenery chewing by Delroy Lindo needed to be reined in -- but I can see the Academy rewarding him, as they like "more is more" acting. And I agree with the overreliance on the bombastic score. Still, Spike Lee has more interesting things to say in his films than any given half dozen other directors combined, so this is worth seeing -- it nonetheless felt like a missed opportunity for a masterpiece.
Big disappointment. It seemed to me like Spike Lee trying to copy Tarantino, but lacked the humour and the mastery. The script was at times laughable and badly needed editing. I also noticed that the music seemed to be written for another film, heavier one. Lindo was good but his was a borderline "chewing the scenery" performance. Chadwick Boseman was wasted.
Thanks for this engaging piece -- I want to watch this now, but need to see Blackkklansman first.
My main probleme with Da 5 Blood is the last hour when i couldn't stop thinking about "Tropic Thunder".... especially when the first "bomb surprise" happens.
Delroy Lindo keeps overacting as the improbable story goes along, and the final "twist" about his character is soooo predictable.
Peters is really really good because he always underplays his character, even when everybody around him acts hysterical, and Blanchard's score emphasizes everything in a terrible way.
But just as it is written in this very good review : this is a Spike Lee joint and many very good things in it nearly balance some terrible choices all over the place.
This is good, bad, passionnate, messy, too much, not enough ... but necessary and ambitious moviemaking.