Miracle at St. Anna

In every Spike Lee film there are moments or scenes of such brilliance that you are reminded how great a director he really is. Even his bad films (and there are quite a few) feature something to take out of it. This is no different with Miracle at St. Anna, there is brilliance here, unfortunately it never really adds up to anything.

It is obvious that Lee was swinging for the fences with this war film. He seems to throw everything he has at the screen and this turns what could have been a very focused story of four black G.I.s stuck behind enemy lines into a meandering mess, covering multiple plot lines and crossing back and forth between genres. Scenes last too long and other scenes seem better fit for the cutting room floor. There is good in here it, you just have to muddle through a lot to get to it.

But here is my dilemma: Lee is obviously one of the great working American directors, having made many, many a great film. He also has such a distinct style that you know the moment you turn it on that you are watching a Spike Lee joint. Should he really be blamed for giving everything he has for this story? Sure it's not everything it could be but at least he was attempting to make a great film. Better to reach for greatness and fail than to settle yourself down into making the same picture over and over again.

I guess what I am saying is that I can't fault Lee for making this and I can't really recommend it. There are scenes here and there (the opening and final war scene, a flashback to training, beautiful shots of the soldiers walking through the mountains of Italy) that make you lean forward, thinking the film is making a turn for the good. Only to find yourself settling back into your chair when all this is followed by something downright implausible or worse yet, boring.