Spike Lee, Speaking to the Point

As soon as Spike Lee started angling to direct “Malcolm X,” the controversies began. There was carping about Lee’s ability to be true to the ideals of the slain African-American leader. When the film went over budget, it was news. And when a group of black superstars rallied to his cause with contributions, it was news again. There were headlines when Lee battled for the right to use the Rodney G. King beating footage in the film. And more when Lee allegedly said students should skip school to see his film on opening day. And more again when it came out he’d asked some publications for African-American interviewers.

Finally, the nearly 3 1/2-hour film starring Denzel Washington opens Wednesday.

Dressed casually in a turquoise “X” cap, a blazer, jeans and purple-and-gray Nike sneakers, the always outspoken Lee was direct and pointed but at times displayed a sense of humor as he spoke of Malcolm X, racism and the film industry in an interview at Manhattan’s Righa Hotel.

Question: How did Malcolm X affect your own political development?

Answer: It had a great effect. I read the book (“The Autobiography of Malcolm X”) in junior high school. It changed everything--the way I thought, the way I felt, the way I viewed the world. It made everything clear for me. The conditions of black people who live in this country, how it came to be that way, why it came to be that way, and what we must do as a people to deal with those things.

Q: Did you think one day you would be making a film about him?

A: It was probably subliminal. In each of my films, even “She’s Gotta Have It,” Malcolm X is mentioned. Nola Darling (the lead character in “She’s Gotta . . . “) was born on May 19, which is also Malcolm’s birthday. “School Daze,” he’s mentioned. He’s a big part of “Do the Right Thing.” But it wasn’t until “Mo’ Better Blues” that I began to really think about doing it. At that time, Norman Jewison was the director.

Q: You leveraged the film away from Jewison, claiming it needed a black director. Since the film you’ve made is a straight bio-pic, why was it so important that it have a black director?

A: White Americans will never know what it feels like to be an African-American in this country. This is a story of Malcolm X, whose life you might say is very symbolic of the whole African-American experience in this country. I’ve said this again and again, that Francis Ford Coppola being Italian-American definitely enhanced the “Godfather” films. Same thing with Martin Scorsese with “Mean Streets,” “Raging Bull.”

So why should those same things not enhance African-Americans doing films about the African-American struggle?

At the same time, that’s not saying that only white people can direct white films or black people can direct black films, but there are specific cases in which where you are from, your environment, will help.

Q: What, for instance, couldn’t have been done if there wasn’t a black director?

A: A tremendous amount of research had to be done for this film. Research meaning going to talk to people who knew Malcolm--relatives, people in the Nation (of Islam), the OAAU (Malcolm X’s Organization of Afro-American Unity), and they were not going to talk to no white man. They would never open up. Do you think (minister Louis) Farrakhan would have invited a white director into his house and told them that Malcolm was his mentor? Forget about it.

No white director could have gotten Nelson Mandela to be in his film. Hell, no. They probably wouldn’t even have thought about it or seen the connection between Malcolm and Mandela. Warner Bros. (the film’s distributor) definitely didn’t see the connection.

I don’t think a white director could have gotten access to shoot Mecca, the whole city of Mecca. Hell, no. To shoot the sacred rite of hajj. That’s never been done before. Ever, ever, ever. These are the same people who sentenced (author Salman) Rushdie to death--the Highest Islamic court. They’re the ones who gave us permission.

Q: So how did you get that?

A: Through Allah. (He smiles.)

Q: How did you decide which parts of the autobiography to use in the movie?

A: I relied on instinct and my gut feeling. I tried to get the essence of the man. There’s no way you can tell the man’s entire life in three hours--you can’t do it in eight hours.

This is not a documentary. The words that came out of Denzel’s mouth are not the same words Malcolm said. But you always have to ask yourself this question: Are you being true to Malcolm, are you being truthful? That’s all you can do.

Q: There was criticism on the part of (poet and playwright) Amiri Baraka about starting the film with Malcolm’s gangster days. Why was it so important to open with that and to devote nearly an hour to that period?

A: It’s not so much time; we devoted an adequate amount of time. That’s why the film is the length it is. I don’t think we can do a three-hour film on one Malcolm X. There’s the one Amiri Baraka wanted, and the one the black nationalists wanted, but he was not always at that place. He had to do a whole lot of things, he had to live a life, to get to that point. That’s what makes it interesting to see that evolution and change, to see Malcolm evolving, to see him get to the point where he got.

And he doesn’t start out as a gangster. In that first hour, 20 minutes of that is flashbacks as Malcolm as a young boy and his family.

Q: This is the first time you’ve done a film based on a factual story. Did this affect your style or approach?

A: Yeah, it had to. Malcolm X was a person who lived, breathed, walked on this Earth, so I could not just do anything I wanted to do. I didn’t feel constrained, I just felt I had to find a way to be respectful of Malcolm X, yet still make it a personal film. I think I found that. I think you can look at this film and tell that I did it. It has the flavoring of a Spike Lee film. The use of music, cinematography, the editing, the opening credits.

Q: Did you ever think when you started with “She’s Gotta Have It” that one day you would be directing a $34-million film?

A: Yeah. And $34 million isn’t that much money. That’s the average cost to make a movie. Dan Aykroyd never directed a film in his life (but) he got $45 million to direct his first film (“Nothing But Trouble”). Thirty-four million is chump change.

Q: Why do you think Hollywood decided to make this film now versus 10, 20 years ago?

A: Malcolm is not as feared as he was back then. Also, they can make some money, and there is nothing wrong with that. That’s why they make any movie.

Q: Don’t you think it’s a contradiction that the very institutions Malcolm X condemned--the media, Hollywood, big business--are going to make money because of this movie?

A: Well, there is a contradiction in it, but that’s the nature of the beast. Black people don’t own film companies, people don’t have $34 million to make a movie, they don’t have the distribution.

Q: But isn’t it ironic that a bunch of rich white folks are going to make money off Malcolm’s image?

A: It hasn’t made a dime yet.

Q: George Holliday (the man who shot the Rodney G. King beating video) will reportedly donate the money he receives for use of his footage in the film’s opening credits to a nonprofit group working toward rebuilding inner-city Los Angeles. Do you plan to do something similar?

A: Anything I do, I’ll do under the guise of (Rep.) Maxine Waters. I think that Rebuild L.A. thing is a scam. She’ll tell me what needs to be done. I’m not going with that Rebuild L.A. scam.

Q: I understand you went to the Nation of Islam before shooting the film. Why?

A: Yes, I went to see Minister Farrakhan to get their blessing, his blessing.

Q: In the film you seem to hit the Nation of Islam pretty hard. Elijah Muhammad comes across as a dirty old charlatan. . . .

A: That’s not the way I see it. I see Mr. Muhammad as a great man who was a human being who had flaws. You see him build a great nation, you see him reform convicts, get them off drugs, get them off alcohol, employ black people, talk about self-empowerment, own black businesses, love of self, that we’re taught to hate ourselves, all that stuff. He had the foresight to see what Malcolm could become, that he could help build the nation. There’s a lot of positive things in there. I don’t see him as a dirty old man. That was not our intention at all.

Q: The implication from the movie is that the Nation of Islam was behind the shooting. Do you think Elijah Muhammad ordered Malcolm’s killing?

A: They had a lot to do with it. If it wasn’t him, it was someone directly under him in Chicago.

Q: Will your relationship with the Nation of Islam be strained after this comes out?

A: We’ll have to wait and see what happens when they see the film.

Q: Does white suburban America have an understanding of what Malcolm X was about, or do you think he’s still seen as that militant black guy who talked about the white man as the devil?

A: Yeah, still today, but I think this film will help toward a better understanding--if one is open to it.

Q: Can white America embrace Malcolm X as an American leader versus a black leader?

A: Open-minded white America can.

Q: Do you think people will really understand Malcolm after seeing the movie?

A: I think there’s varying degrees of intelligence among the moviegoing audience. All you can do is make the best film that you can do.

Q: Did Warner Bros. in any way try to interfere or change your vision of how to portray Malcolm?

A: Interfere is too strong of a word, but they definitely had a film they wanted to make of Malcolm that I didn’t want to make. A film that would have appealed more to the white bourgeois audience. That dreaded word crossover .

Q: You don’t think you made a movie that will do that now--cross over?

A: Yes, but I didn’t do it the way they wanted to do it. They didn’t want the Rodney King footage, they didn’t want the American flag burning, they didn’t want that speech over the opening credits, they didn’t want the length.

Q: Did you have to compromise Malcolm’s image in any way to make it palatable to the average moviegoer?

A: Not whatsoever, not one iota.

Q: Would you do it over again with Warners?

A: Yeah, I would have to. They own the property.

Q: The Ice-T “Cop Killer” controversy rocked Time Warner while you were working on “Malcolm X.” Did that have any kind of ripple effect at all on your project?

A: Well, I think they were really worried that what happened to Ice-T would blow up again with the Rodney King footage and the American flag burning. But we stood pat.

Q: You’ve complained a lot about the inadequacy of the budget for “Malcolm X,” which started at $28 million and wound up at $34 million. But Warner executives have said that you originally promised to bring the film in for under $30 million.

A: Why am I going to say that? The first budget presented to Warner Bros. was $40 million. I don’t even know if they said that. I don’t even know if I should comment on that. The first budget Warner Bros. got was $40 million. How am I going to turn around and say I can do it cheap?

The very first meeting I ever had with (former Warner Bros. executive, now Columbia Pictures chairman) Mark Canton, (Warners executives) Terry Semel and Bob Daly I told them this film is going to cost over $30 million-plus, that it was an epic film. The very first meeting. I always saw this film as the scope of this size; I’ve always said that this is a David Lean picture, “Lawrence of Arabia,” “Bridge Over the River Kwai”--it’s that big. And what you attributed me saying I never said.

Q: At the end of the movie you have Nelson Mandela addressing children in a classroom, and various children stand up and say, “I am Malcolm X.” But there were no white children. Why not?

A: Look at the neighborhoods. It was two classrooms--a classroom in Harlem and a classroom in Soweto. We’re trying to show a connection among people of color--what Malcolm X was talking about. We’re showing a link between Malcolm X and Mandela. There is a link, a legacy going on there--they’re both doing the same thing. Why should white kids be in that scene?

Q: Well, ideally, in the future you would hope white children could embrace what Malcolm was about.

A: You’re talking about “We Are the World.” Why weren’t there any black people on the jury in Simi Valley? Answer that question. That’s the question to ask instead of why aren’t there any white kids in the classroom.

Q: Does it concern you in any way that some people wearing the hats and T-shirts have no idea what Malcolm stood for?

A: It doesn’t bother me that much, because I realize maybe that’s the first step for these kids on the way to being politicized. If it’ll make them want to pick up the book, that’s the first step. I realize that’s not the only thing; it’ll take more than just wearing the T-shirt. But it could be a start.

Q: Why hasn’t Martin Luther King achieved the popularity among young people that Malcolm X has?

A: You have to look at this in a historical context. It’s only very recently that we’ve had this flip-flop. There’s no Malcolm X day in America, no national holiday.

Malcolm X appeals more to young America today because of his militant, no-sellout stance and kids can’t get into that complete nonviolence stance. They know that the turn-the-other-cheek approach doesn’t work. They live in this world.

Q: What do you think he means to young people of color?

A: He’s a hero. Ossie Davis said it the best. He said Malcolm was our manhood, our shining black prince, and young black males don’t have any role models who are as strong as Malcolm.

Q: What is Malcolm’s message?

A: What Malcolm are you talking about? What people have to realize is that there were many different Malcolms. You have to specify which Malcolm you’re talking about because he was constantly redefining where he was politically.

The Malcolm before Mecca was not the same Malcolm who came back from Mecca. The one big misconception is that when Malcolm came back from Mecca he repudiated black self-defense; he never did that. Ever, ever did that. He felt that way to his grave. I don’t think we diluted his message.

Q: Is it true you asked the Los Angeles Times to assign an African-American writer to interview you?

A: That’s right. Why? Because I don’t get hatchet jobs done on me. African-American journalists aren’t going to ask me, “Spike, so do you have any white friends?” What kind of questions are those? Stupid. If I’m going to do interviews, the bulk of the interview should not be some white journalist trying to convince me how liberal they are.

That was the entire focus of the article (the Esquire cover story by Barbara Grizzuti Harrison)--oh, I had a black boyfriend. And we went to see Billie Holiday at Minton’s. I don’t give a (expletive) about that (expletive). She doesn’t even talk about the movie. And I think I even cooked cookies for your little brothers when we lived in Cobble Hill. Oh, and there used to be a time when I marched in the civil rights movement and all my friends were black. Egggh. You’re doing an article. You’re doing a job; I’m doing a job. Let’s do it. I mean don’t come in thinking you have to show me your credentials that you’re not a blue-eyed white devil. I mean, it’s not even about that.

We can go down the line of institutions, sports, white corporate America, the media--the white guys run it. I’m in the position, with the little weight that I have, to demand that.

Q: Most of your movies have been provocative and angry. How about “Malcolm X”?

A: I don’t know why I got this angry black man label. What reason would any black man in this country have to be angry about? (He smiles.)