By MATT GILBERT
It is easy to look at Selma and immediately dismiss it as a “white-guilt” picture. Any movie about Martin Luther King Jr. is undoubtedly going to have brutal depictions of racial violence aimed at casting the African-American community as oppressed and the white community as oppressors. Selma is no exception to this. But Ava DuVernay’s civil rights biopic makes no intent at invoking white-guilt, but instead uses the mistakes of America’s past to discuss and illuminate the dilemmas of the present.
Sadly, smear campaigns have torn this film from the podium it rightfully deserves as an Oscar frontrunner for Best Picture, Screenplay and Actor as it is overlooked by the Academy amidst controversial claims and attacks. Ultimately the movie suffered dearly, only receiving two nominations for Best Picture and Best Original Song (Common & John Legend “Glory”). The result of the campaign has become the whitest Oscars since 1988.
Selma has been silenced from communicating its powerful message amid accusations of historical inaccuracy. Some, like former aide to President Johnson, Joseph Califano believe that Hollywood pictures should only exist to produce historical facts exactly when and how they happened. That major motion pictures in the backdrop of history should only inform, not entertain or enlighten. But looking at a film like Selma in such a way counteracts it from making itself about more than only what’s on screen and connecting with its audience as an entertaining-yet profound statement on race and society as a whole. The fact of the matter is that the single best-reviewed movie of 2014 has been utterly castrated under a tidal wave of wrongful accusations and disputes strategically posited to draw Academy votes from it.
David Oyelowo’s portrayal of King is nothing short of awe-inspiring. The British-born actor is not only a near-perfect likeness of the iconic civil rights leader, but he simply becomes him. Everything from his speech patterns to physicality to the charisma he brings to every word, step and gesture offers a powerhouse lead performance that is quite simply the most moving portrayal of a real-life figure in years. King makes the problems of Selma, Alabama his own and can inspire an entire church of black citizens to protest for their rights. But he never becomes so charismatic that he alienates the people around him. Selma does not deify King but rather humanizes him, as a husband and father struggling under the pressure his leadership invites onto his wife and children.
Oyelowo’s powerful performance is made possible by Paul Webb’s phenomenal screenplay. The speeches written for King were paraphrased for the most part from his real speeches, but not once do they fail to inspire and move their audience. But Selma is also magnificent in the smaller scenes. In one of the best moments of the film, King speaks with President Johnson (Tom Wilkinson) of the challenges faced by the African-American community in the Southern states. He clearly and brilliantly outlines the paradoxes of the federal law and how said paradoxes make it systematically impossible for black citizens to stop the violence against them . This sets up the entire basis of the film’s story of how and why King organized a civil march through rural Alabama in the name of black citizens’ right to vote.
The Johnson aspect is where the bulk of Selma’s controversy stems from. And while Califano may be right that the march from Selma to Montgomery was actually Johnson’s idea and not King’s, this draws attention from the larger themes underlying the film. Selma does not take the easy way out when it comes to the President. Johnson is not King’s antagonist but he does not make the road to equality easier. Like the race-fueled controversy surrounding the killings of Michael Brown and Eric Gardner this past year the distinction between right and wrong is apparent. He genuinely wants to help the black community protect their rights as Americans but the daunting task of getting such a controversial bill passed gives him cold feet.
Giving King the decision to march on Selma illuminates another key point that makes Selma as relevant to the present as it is to the civil rights movement of the 60s. King understands that the battle for right and wrong is inconsequential when it comes to the battle of public opinion. He realizes that the only way to implement real change is by controlling the narrative. He chooses Selma as his staging ground to put the vitriolic bigotry of the South in the public eye, garnering sympathy and, more importantly, acquiring allies of all sorts to fight the good fight alongside him. It is through specific, direct plots like this that a movie like Selma speaks volumes and becomes a meaningful and important critique of American society.
Selma is not a story designed to invoke white guilt. It is not about how racism is bad, but rather it is a reminder of how there is still work to do. One person cannot fix the racism of a nation. For many like Johnson what is morally right is little to show for the difficulty faced to achieve it. At the end of the day, the controversy does not matter. Selma will miss out on the Oscars it rightfully merits, but this does not make it any less powerful or important. It’s a performance and story for the ages that earns the right to be remembered as one of the all time great biopics of American cinema.
This is a really good review of Selma. One thing I’d like to know is how was the movie represented in the Oscars?
This review was very well written. What I would like to know do you think the outrage of the Oscar snub is more discussed because the content of the film? There have been other movies staring black actors that have been snubbed by the Oscars such as Tina Turner by Angala Basset and Malcom X by Denzel Washington.