The Selma-to-Montgomery marches depicted in “Selma” happened nine years before I was even born. Martin Luther King Jr. was assassinated six years before I was born. Lyndon B. Johnson died a year before I was born.
In other words, I’m not going to devote much time to the controversy over how historically accurate the new movie “Selma” is – for I feel I’m not really qualified.
Suffice it to say, the movie follows the history books in its depiction of real people and real, historical events, but its nuances and dialogue have raised a hornet’s nest among those looking to preserve the memories of some of those depicted in the film.
What I can do, however, is ask what this film communicates to today’s culture, which – sadly – likely knows even less about Selma, Alabama, than I do.
The film’s key themes are both admirable and questionable, but they’re pretty easy to identify, so I’ll start there.
“Selma” is first and foremost a character piece on civil rights activist Martin Luther King Jr., following his perspective and struggles almost exclusively. It depicts King as a pained and wounded hero, a man who wore heavy the mantle of leadership, who wept with those who wept and called to the carpet those who didn’t.
It’s clearly a glowing treatment, and even though “Selma” depicts the fallout of King’s alleged extramarital affairs, it’s hard to come away from the film with anything less than a profound appreciation for the civil rights leader (and the brilliant performance of the man who portrayed him, David Oyelowo).
The movie itself is blessed with some powerful performances, excellent writing and a few, truly startling and gripping scenes. The Oscar buzz surrounding this movie is understandable.
My biggest criticism is that by focusing so intently on King, “Selma” gives audiences long, lingering shots of him thinking and struggling and hurting – which in turn makes long stretches of the film long and slow and even a bit boring. And did I mention it gets a bit long? There’s a lot of gravitas in this movie without much levity, a film made more for movie art critics than popcorn devourers.
I also want to raise some questions about some of the secondary messages in the movie.
“Selma” dwells consistently on the FBI surveillance of King, often opening or closing scenes with the ominous words of wiretap reports typed across the screen. FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover is depicted as an unscrupulous dictator determined to do anything to discredit King. President Johnson comes off as patronizing and political, perceiving King as little more than a pest.
The net result is a pervasive feeling that “the man” is keeping King down, that the government can’t be trusted, that’s there’s a conspiracy out there working against civil rights. And while it’s hard to argue those realities in the 1960s, I question whether today’s audiences – where young black men are rioting over allegations of police brutality and a legal system supposedly stacked against them – won’t take the film as confirmation of some of the fallacies Al Sharpton and other race hustlers are peddling.
My concerns seem all the more justified by a rap song during the credits that proclaims, “That’s why we walk through Ferguson with our hands up.”
Relating King’s legacy to what happened in Ferguson, Missouri, is problematic at best, propaganda at worst. If “Selma” fudges the facts some, the “hands up” mantra has tossed them completely out the window.
The rap line also brings into question just how much the filmmakers – including producer and actress Oprah Winfrey – are attempting to politicize the story.
I had some serious qualms, for example, about the portrayal of Alabama Gov. George Wallace – not because he’s clearly the racist villain of the film, but because the racist villain’s speeches seem edited to make him sound, unfairly, like a modern-day conservative.
Wallace, for example, rails against “progressives” and “liberals,” while expostulating on our “Founding Fathers” and the problem with “the distribution of wealth without work.” While Wallace may very well have shared these same concerns with modern conservatives, it’s more than suspicious that he isn’t heard in “Selma” trumpeting segregation, or some other time-appropriate rant, but modern conservative issues instead.
I’m concerned “Selma” not only perpetuates the race-baiting rhetoric surrounding Ferguson, but it also perpetuates the outright lie that the tea-party brand of conservativism is inherently racist. George Wallace may have used some of the same words, but he would in no way be welcome at any tea-party rally I’ve attended.
Am I nitpicking? Maybe. Or maybe the leftist worldview of Oprah and friends just seeps through what is otherwise a well-intentioned and very well-made film.
Given the anachronistic “Ferguson” line in a movie about Martin Luther King Jr., is it any wonder I’m suspicious?
Content advisory:
- “Selma,” rated PG-13, contains just over 30 obscenities and profanities.
- The film has some minor sexuality, including some painted nudes in the background of a shot and an FBI sound recording of a man and woman having sex.
- The movie contains a few, deliberate scenes of extreme violence, including a deadly explosion, a man being punched, a couple of scenes of police roughing up protesters, a far more intense scene of police attacking and even killing protesters and the brutal confrontation on the first march, where officers and men on horseback tear gassed, beat and charged through a crowd. The scene, familiar to many because it was actually broadcast on television in real life, is stunning and brutal. The movie doesn’t, however, linger on bloodiness and injury.
- “Selma” contains several references to the Christian faith, including prayer, singing, sermons, Scripture quotations and discussions of faith. Christianity is treated respectfully throughout, and its truths proclaimed unapologetically. There is no significant occult content in the film.
