It’s no secret that Spike Lee is widely regarded as one of the most significant and influential filmmakers in the history of cinema, particularly in the context of African American cinematography. He’s well-known for tackling social, political, and racial issues in his work, and many of his movies, like 1989’s Do the Right Thing and 1992’s Malcolm X, have received critical acclaim. However, despite a successful and lucrative career in Hollywood, some of his movies have been underrated and misunderstood.
One of those misunderstood films is 2014’s Da Sweet Blood of Jesus, Spike Lee’s cinematic tribute to the pioneering actor, novelist, and playwright Bill Gunn. It’s well known that Lee is a student of film history and African American culture, and Da Sweet Blood of Jesus is actually a remake of 1973’s Ganja & Hess, a movie that Gunn wrote and directed nearly four decades earlier. Da Sweet Blood of Jesus is also Spike Lee’s first foray into the realm of horror, and his experimental approach to the narrative has polarized fans and critics alike.
Da Sweet Blood of Jesus follows Dr. Hess Green (Stephen Tyrone Williams), a wealthy African American art collector and anthropologist who acquires an ornate dagger originating in the ancient Ashanti Empire, whose people have become addicted to blood transfusion. After sharing a couple of drinks with his colleagues at his mansion on Martha’s Vineyard, Green ends up stabbed with the very same dagger he acquired and wakes to discover that he’s become a vampire suffering from an insatiable need for human blood. He later feeds on those same colleagues.
Soon after, the colleague’s ex-wife Ganja (Zaraah Abrahms) arrives at Hess’s house in search of her ex-husband, and Ganja and Hess quickly become lovers. Soon after, Hess turns Ganja into a vampire so that the two may share immortality.
However, after a while Green becomes tired of his vampiric life and decides to end it. Ganja, though saddened by his death, presumably continues her vampiric un-life. The narrative is basically the same as that of the 1973 original, but the subtleties are vastly different.
For example, the original Ganja & Hess had a psychedelic and dreamlike expansiveness, whereas Lee’s remake alternates between sleepy exchanges and unhinged, earthy wallows in gore and eroticism. The remake is sprinkled with the usual social, political, and racial themes Lee’s known for. Another example is the vampiric couple’s behavior towards others, which is often marked by intentional and inadvertent shows of classism and cruelty. Green goes out into the night and feeds on a prostitute, only to later discover that her blood is HIV-positive, while Ganja treats their house staff like dirt and even feeds on Green’s loyal domestic servant.
These added subtleties bring forth Lee’s usual symbolism, but much of the original narrative remains. The movie uses so much of the original dialogue that Lee actually credits Bill Gunn as a co-writer of Da Sweet Blood of Jesus. Critically, the movie received a mixed reception, with many praising Lee’s willingness to experiment with different genres and themes, while others finding the movie confusing and incoherent. Perhaps therein lies the explanation as to why Da Blood of Jesus remains one of Lee’s most misunderstood films.
A lot of that reception comes from genre and audience expectations. As stated at the beginning, Lee is known for his socially and politically charged movies, and Da Sweet Blood of Jesus most certainly doesn’t lack any of that charge. However, one must scratch a bit deeper to find all the hallmarks of a Spike Lee Joint. On the other hand, Da Sweet Blood of Jesus isn’t a typical vampire flick. In fact, neither Hess nor Ganja sprout fangs, nor do they sleep in separate or even co-joined coffins. They’re not actually afraid of or affected by sunlight.
The lack of these traditional horror elements, as well as the lack of suspense and jump scares, didn’t sit well with the horror-loving fans who might’ve expected more from a movie made by one of the greatest names in cinema. Instead, it focuses on thematic exploration and moral dilemmas, which ultimately leads to a mismatch for viewers expecting a more traditional horror experience. Finally, being a remake of the 1973 original, Da Sweet Blood of Jesus invited comparisons with its source material.
Both movies have basically the same narrative, and both Gunn and Lee have woven cultural and socio-political themes surrounding race and identity in symbolic and abstract ways. The critics, as well as the fans of the original movie, felt like Lee’s offering didn’t really capture the depth or the complexity of Ganja & Hess. Ultimately, the misunderstanding of Da Sweet Blood of Jesus seemingly stems from the fact that the movie is trying to be three things at once: a horror movie, a Bill Gunn tribute movie, and a Spike Lee Joint.
Instead, Da Sweet Blood of Jesus ended up being a mess, but a mess that can be attributed only to one of the greatest filmmakers in cinematography.