I can't remember how this ended up on my Netflix (I must have read about it in a book or magazine), but I was incredibly surprised. In my mind this rivals "Do the Right Thing"--without the polish. I've seen numerous "blaxploitation" films (not my favorite term), but this 1) doesn't pull any punches and 2) doesn't degenerate into demeaning sex and violence. Unlike films like "Shaft" that just made a white hero black, "The Spook Who Sat by the Door" probably gave the establishment a severe case of heartburn--I mean, can you consider this with white characters?! No. It's a black film through and through. The establishment can tolerate a "Superfly" or a "Shaft," but a film like this (more akin to "The Battle of Algiers") is borderline dangerous. I used to teach a film class, and if I still did, I may very well have considered showing this. An important film.

This film is what it is because of its story (which it owes to the novel) and overall good acting, especially by the main character. In addition, there are some great lines in he movie that display and respond to the racism of the times. In so many ways this film is still relevant today. The plot, more than anything else makes this movie a classic. Few films of that era, or any other, captured any meaningful part of the essence of a black revolutionary struggle. Most were full of 'getting the man' or 'paying back whitey' and that really isn't much a political agenda. One of my favorite parts is when the main character says: "this ain't about hating white folks, because its gonna take way more than hating to sustain you. This is about wanting to be free..." and I can't remember the rest, but it was an important thing to put inside the movie.Lastly, one of my favorite things about the movie is the ignorance of the white mayor, which is mirrored in real life today. They are so absorbed in their upper-class, ultra-white view of the world, they can never see an alternative view of things especially as it relates to how people of color see themselves, their lives and their respective governments. Regardless of your political stance on things, you'd have to admit: Iraqi's did not greet us as liberators. The Vietnamese largely did not want American politics or interference. Cubans have not largely rebelled against Fidel Castro in spite of all of the pr4ssures placed on them by the US. Part of it is, that the US gov't is oblivious to what people really want and the other part is that they really don't care what people want, they care about their own interests.This was shown throughout the film when the CIA director and the mayor made any number of condescending and overtly racist remarks about and directly to black people. lots of great sound-bites in this. I love this film, its one for the collection.And I was told when I viewed it in college, that it was played to all CIA recruits, I guess as a deterrent.

This is one of the undiscovered treasures of cinema people, if you haven't seen it you need to. They never paid for one permit and they did this movie for about $90,000USD, but they don't skip a beat. Same editor as Schindler's List; if you watch the movie you can tell why Spielberg uses this guy, he is a master.Even if you don't agree with the films message you have to agree that this is one of thee finest made independent films in existence, and considering the subject matter it is a surprise this film was ever shot, because the book had a pretty hard time getting published too.I think this film is everything Melvin Van Peebles wanted SweetBack to be.

I have to join the dissenting side. "Spook" starts out like a satire of early-70s race relations, with all sorts of possibilities as the protagonist becomes the first black CIA agent. The first half-hour or so is great, funny, different. It had me thinking that "Spook" was going to turn into a kind of Watermelon Man Joins the CIA. There are all sorts of interesting ways the story could've developed from this wonderful set-up, but the writers lose heart and fall back on a very typical blaxploitation plot. For the last hour the movie trudges sluggishly through a bog of genre clichés and stereotypes, to a most unexciting and unsatisfying climax. It has its moments--the blackface-on-a-bicycle scene is very funny--but they're lost in all the so-so usual business you can find in most any other blaxploitation flick. "Spook" is probably the best *title* for a blaxploitation movie ever, but its cult reputation as "the greatest blaxploitation film ever" is highly exaggerated. It's good, but it coulda been so much better if it had been more adventurous and playful. Too bad Melvin Van Peebles didn't direct it. He woulda kicked it up a few hundred notches.