It can be tricky to critically evaluate a film where it is
about a morally or politically charged topic, and this is particularly so where
the subject at hand is race. How far does the imperative to be (or at least sound)
politically correct affect one’s judgment? To what extent are public assessments
influenced by what one is supposed to feel, by social expectations rather than
an honest emotional response to the motion picture in question? With Selma, given its
particular historical subject - the 1965 civil rights/voting rights protests in
Selma, Alabama - the task is harder still, because the events have taken on such
a hallowed quality – the nobility and righteousness of the cause, the triumph
of freedom, and the defeat of racism, all of which tie into our national belief
in the inevitability of social progress. The protagonists of this particular
story, most particularly Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr, who led the protests
and marches in Selma, have become secular American saints.
I know that I am susceptible to the pressure of such
expectations. That said, measuring Selma solely on its cinematic merits, I can fairly
say that this is a well made, wonderfully acted, absorbing and sometimes
heart-rending and stirring dramatic film. In its depiction of the deep South
in the mid-1960’s, the movie accurately captures a time, a place, and a culture
of racism so starkly different from our own that it’s hard to believe it
existed a mere half century ago in our country.
But let’s not kid ourselves, a film such as this can’t and
shouldn’t be evaluated in a cultural, political
or historical vacuum. Selma is
intended, I think, to be an “Important” film, as well as an entertaining one; and
although time will tell, it seems to me to be worthy of such a mantel. It is
certainly timely, arriving nearly fifty years after passage of the 1965 Voting
Rights Act, which the events in Selma helped to spawn and pass; and just a
couple of years after SCOTUS eviscerated major portions of that law, on the ground
that racially motivated laws impeding voting rights in the deep South were no
longer a constitutionally justifiable problem. (Really?)
I was fifteen years old when the events portrayed in Selma
were occurring, at that time of life when I was uniquely susceptible to outrage
at social injustice. The Civil Rights movement had been in full swing for a
number of years. Two years earlier, in 1962, James Meredith became the first
black student to enroll in the University of Mississippi, amidst such massive
and violent protests by the white community that federal troops had to be
brought in. In the spring of 1963, massive anti-segregation protests in
Alabama, brought the infamous “Bull” Connor, Birmingham’s racist police
commissioner, to our consciousness and brought images of peaceable black
protestors being washed down Birmingham streets by powerful fire hoses and
attacked by police dogs to our TV screens. A couple months later, in Jackson,
Mississippi, NAACP leader Medgar Evers was shot down in front of his home. [Two
separate all white Mississippi juries refused to convict his killer the
following year.] Then in August 1963, there was the powerful March on
Washington attended by upwards of a quarter million people, during which MLK
rang it out his “I Have A Dream” speech. In September 1963, four young girls
were killed while at Sunday school by a terrorist bomb at a black Baptist
church in Birmingham, shocking the nation (again).
Protest songs were stirring young people on college
campuses, some of which even made their way down to high school freshman like
me: If I Had a Hammer (“I’d hammer out justice, I’d hammer out freedom”),
Blowin’ in the Wind, We Shall Overcome, and the like. From my Pennsylvania
vantage point, I watched, appalled as this stuff was happening. Now, from my
comfortable twenty-first century vantage point, it’s hard for me to believe
that these things occurred and that these attitudes obtained in my lifetime,
though I know it to be true. It must be harder still for younger generations,
for which these events are mere history, to understand. That’s one reason a
film like Selma is important.
By 1964, the focus of civil rights activists was on
obtaining and securing voting rights for the millions of black Americans who
had systematically been excluded from the franchise in the South by poll taxes,
literacy tests, and other “legal” impediments, as well as by equally effective
but less formal abuse, including violence, intimidation, loss of employment,
and so forth. That summer, thousands of Northern college students, mostly
white, descended on Mississippi, in an initiative known as Freedom Summer, to
register black voters. At the start of
that campaign, three young volunteers, James Chaney, Andrew Goodman, and Michael
Schwerner, two white and one black, were abducted and murdered by the Ku Klux
Klan, garnering national headlines. During the course of that summer, more than
1000 of their compatriots were arrested, many of them beaten, and nearly
seventy homes and churches were burned by, shall we say, advocates of the
status quo. At the end of 1964, with
this context, the Southern Christian Leadership Conference (SCLC) and its leader Martin Luther King Jr,
were invited to Selma by local organizers, to help press for voting rights
there.
One of the major merits of the movie, Selma, is that
it realistically brings this history to life, makes it tangible and real. It captures the look, the tone, the mood and
the attitudes of the time perfectly, I think.
As to the events themselves, Selma seems to be historically
accurate, at least generally. The events were certainly dramatic and the movie renders
that drama realistically and movingly.
King and his group knew that so long as the state and local
authorities were in charge, they would never allow African Americans to register to vote. Without black voters, those authorities would remain in power indefinitely.If change was to come, it
would have to come from outside Alabama. The (virtually all white) Congress had
just passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and could be expected to be complacent
if not hostile to passing further civil rights laws at this point The SCLC leadership
determined that the only way to procure a national voting rights bill was to
galvanize American public opinion. This meant pressing the issue locally,
forcing the local officials to react and show their true colors in front of a
national audience. It had worked before. King banked on its working in
Selma. They would march from Selma to
the state capital. They anticipated a
confrontation and they got one.
Selma doesn’t approach its subject from the outside.
It takes us into the experience of black citizens who bravely made the effort
to register, only to be threatened, humiliated
and rebuffed, time and again. It
takes us into the strategy sessions of the protest movement, its internal
arguments, personality clashes, moral quandaries.
Most of all, Selma shows us Martin Luther King the
man. Like Spielberg’s Lincoln (2012), the film accomplishes this by focusing
on one dramatic, pivotal and illustrative event. In 1965, we find Dr. King in
his prime, a strategist balancing the risks and rewards of provocative action,
a tough politician willing to go toe-to-toe with President Johnson, and a
powerful orator able to galvanize his team and inspire the community. It also gives us the flesh-and-blood Martin, struggling
to overcome opposition, struggling with inner doubts, and struggling with the
conflict between his calling and his personal life: with a wife concerned –
reasonably under the circumstances – about his safety and the safety of their
children, concerned about his frequent absences, his fidelity to their marriage,
and an unfulfilled desire for a little quiet domesticity.
David Oyelowo is just terrific as MLK, in a nuanced
performance that I found quite believable. Most amazing is how he captures the
cadences and intonations of King’s oratory; his speeches were truly
stirring. Regrettably, Oyelowo was
snubbed in 2015’s Oscar nominations (although the “best actor” field was
particularly strong that year). In a much smaller, yet effective role, newcomer
Carmen Ejogo, plays Coretta Scott King, touchingly and convincingly. Plus she
bears a striking resemblance to the real-life Coretta. Tom Wilkerson is
persuasive as LBJ, using his body to evince the man’s character, even though he
does not truly resemble him. Interestingly, all of these actors are English,
but carry off their respective American accents without a trace of Britishness.
The other actors are also fine. Oprah Winfrey has a smallish
role as Annie Lee Cooper, Wendell Pierce is Hosea Williams, Stephan James plays
John Lewis, Colman Domingo is Ralph Abernathy, Andre Holland inhabits the young
Andrew Young, and the singer Common plays James Bevel. Dylan Baker plays a
brittle and reactionary J. Edgar Hoover, while Tim Roth presents a nasty,
racist Governor George Wallace.
This is director Ava DuVernay’s first feature film, but you
wouldn’t know it. She has a sure hand throughout, drawing excellent
performances from her cast, and keeping us interested from the first shocking
racial terrorism through to the triumphant conclusion. She gives a nice balance
to the picture, moving from the streets of Selma to King’s private discussions
with his colleagues or with Coretta, to meetings at the White House, and back
to the streets. The humiliation and powerlessness of local African Americans is
demonstrated poignantly; as is the movement’s commitment to justice. At two and
a half hours, the pacing is slow, but in my view appropriately so. Rome wasn’t
built in a day, and voting rights were not achieved through a couple of quick
speeches.
There has been criticism from some quarters of the movie’s portrayal of
President Lyndon Johnson as an adversary to King and his demand
that Johnson fast track federal voting rights legislation. I don’t know all the
facts, and doubt that there is one objective truth to be found. However, from
what I do know, it seems to me that the criticism is overblown. Understand that
Selma has a point of view: that of the voting rights activists. Yet the
film never portrays Johnson as anything but a civil rights partner and an ally
of King. King meets with him and speaks
to him repeatedly, and while they don’t agree on tactics, the president is
never depicted as a villain. In the specific circumstance of Selma, and King’s
push for immediate action from the White House on voting rights, the president
is shown urging patience, saying that he does not believe the time is
propitious, and that he wants to move first on what eventually came to be
called his “War on Poverty”. To the civil rights activists, patience in the
face of injustice was not an option. So yes, in this sense LBJ’s position was
an impediment. But they also believed Johnson would come around once public
outrage was aroused; and King’s strategy was, in fact, to provoke that public
response. The activists were correct. Once
public opinion was in fact aroused, LBJ jumped in with both feet to get the
Voting Rights Act passed.
As I have said, this movie is important and timely. Racial
injustice is far from a thing of the past.
Recent killings of unarmed black men (Eric Garner, Michael Brown, Oscar Grant, Trayvon Martin) by white police officers or wannabe cops have gone uncharged or resulted in acquittals. Educational and economic inequality based on color and ethnicity remains inexcusably high. The ability of minorities to register and vote is subject to ongoing and increasing impediments in many jurisdictions. Racially suspect gerrymandering aimed at limiting the political power of African American voters in the South and of Latino voters elsewhere is still common, notwithstanding the naïve contrary conclusions of our Supreme Court.
Selma is engaging, inspiring and emotionally resonant as a
historical drama. Here’s hoping that some of that resonance inspires the
present.
In wide release when this review was written, Selma is now widely available from streaming services, such as Amazon [free with Amazon Prime.] and on DVD from Netflix.
BTW, for a terrific movie about 1964's Freedom Summer initiative, I strongly recommend the PBS American Experience documentary 'Freedom Summer" - free on Youtube, and available from other streaming services.
This is a very thoughtful and perceptive review - I especially appreciate your providing the historical context and personal memories of that time. I can't wait to see the movie. Thank you.
ReplyDeleteAgain, an excellent review. For a similar view point coming from an African American scholar and teacher, check out a beat-down of Maureen Dowd's review at the following link:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.salon.com/2015/01/21/maureen_dowds_clueless_white_gaze_whats_really_behind_the_selma_backlash/