In general, I've enjoyed Spike Lee's films over the years. So I'm happy to say that I was impressed and captivated by his new HBO documentary "When the Levees Broke: A requiem in four acts". Unfortunately, I had read local T-P columnist Dave Walker's pernicious review of the film prior to watching it. Walker said:

["Levees"] tells only half the story. Or, rather, 67.3 percent of it.

Frequently brilliantly, but still.

The tragic story of black New Orleans trapped in Katrina's path has found a supreme chronicler, but the flooded-out residents of Lakeview... will... wonder: Where am I in this?
...
Those who were here know that, in virtually every way, Katrina was an indiscriminate storm that killed and destroyed without regard to ethnicity or economic condition. That is not the impression that the nation received watching coverage of the immediate aftermath of the storm, nor the one viewers will take away from Lee's documentary.

In one of his future installments, perhaps, will be the stories of Lakeview families whose losses were every bit as tragic as the stories told so movingly in this film.

First off, the film DID have interviews with residents of Lakeview who discussed their tragic stories. (Two examples included Paris Ervin, who talked about discovering his drowned mother under a refrigerator, and Joseph Bruno, who talked about his boyhood on the Lakeshore.)

Second: why is it that when Spike Lee shows African-Americans touring their destroyed homes, and feuding with insurance companies, and complaining about the design of the levees and losing loved ones in a flood... why is that viewed by some as a separate, "black New Orleans" story? What about those experiences makes them count for only 67.3% of "the story"? (New Orleans was approximately two thirds "black" prior to the storm.) Precisely why does Walker think that white residents of Lakeview can't identify with those universal aspects of the Katrina aftermath? Is it merely because they are being recounted by a black face?

When the African-American Engineering Professor from Tulane was describing poorly designed floodwalls, was that a "black New Orleans" issue? When watching that segment, did Lakeview residents honestly ask themselves, "'where am I' in this discussion"?

Certainly the devastation in the Ninth Ward was the visual centerpiece of Lee's film. However, there were clips of devastated Lakeview mansions as well. As a former Broadmoor resident, I didn't see many pictures from my old neighborhood, but I was too engrossed in the film to keep score. When a black Lower Ninth Warder was shown standing in the street by a pile of moldy debris... you know what? I was able to identify with that person! Months ago, my belongings were also in a big pile in an empty, dusty street, and I had an uncertain, fatigued look in my eyes! But that's not a "white" story or a "black" story-- it's a Katrina story. And shame on anyone who can't see that!

Again: those interviewed in Lee's documentary were identified by neighborhood, not race. If Walker wants to whine about Lakeview (his code for "white New Orleans") getting short shrift, he might've also mentioned heavily-flooded Broadmoor. Oh, but "Whoops!" Broadmoor is a racially diverse neighborhood, and doesn't fit Walker's discrete view of the city. When I saw an African-American Broadmoor resident being interviewed in Lee's film, I felt like I was listening to a neighbor, not to someone with a darker pigmentation telling a strange, inaccessible story. We shared that flood in Broadmoor, dammit!

However, for those Dave Walkers out there who are keeping score, Lee's "unfinished" documentary contains 61 interviews with "black" people and 56 with "white" folk. (That's my unofficial count, derived from the credits.) I didn't pull out the stopwatch to see who spoke for how long. But I do know that, if anything, Lee made the Ninth Ward seem more racially diverse than it is.

Now, as far as the "bombing the levees" conspiracy goes... I think the documentary's refutations were solid and explanatory, as were the extended follow-up shots showing the barge that caused the sounds which were interpreted as explosions. Perhaps this could've been refuted more decisively, but Lee presented a persistent myth: there are many who wrongly believe the levees were bombed during Katrina and Betsy. Obviously Lee doesn't subscribe to this view, because he named the film "When the Levees Broke", not "When the Levees were bombed". If I were Lee I might've done the movie differently. For example, I would've featured less Al Sharpton and Belafonte, and more John Barry. Generally speaking, though, "Levees" is a strong, searing film that documents a tapestry of perspectives of the tragic Katrina aftermath.