The big flap regarding Selma was its failure to secure a slew of Oscar nominations, which it was expected to do. Selma is certainly the type of film — an historical drama addressing race relations, focusing on one particular historical personage — that is noticed at the Oscars, yet nabbing only two nominations, Picture and Song, is definitely considered a snub by pundits and fans of the film. I understand and can appreciate the outrage, but let’s look at the film itself.
Selma, directed by Ava DuVernay, introduces us to Dr. Martin Luther King (David Oyelowo) in the mid-1960s, as the cause for civil rights for all in America was catching fire. With president Lyndon B. Johnson (Tom Wilkinson) clearly sitting on the fence, King presses the issue with marches in the South, leading to the notion of walking from Selma, Alabama, to the state capitol in Montgomery. The film shows the development of the movement, why Selma was chosen as ground zero, social and political reaction to the march and, ultimately, the march itself.
As history, the film works pretty well. I was not aware there was more than one march; it took three tries to accomplish the fifty-mile peaceful demonstration, and people were hurt and even killed during and after all three attempts. Critics have taken aim at the film’s depiction of history, particularly at president Johnson’s alleged reluctance to address the issue when he was clearly in favor of civil rights, but the film isn’t, as some have suggested, making Johnson out to be a villain; it is simply showing that the president had other concerns and was hoping for more time before committing himself to the cause. King forced his hand, for better or worse, and the president ultimately supported the right thing to do. More troubling for me is the movie’s depiction of Coretta Scott King (Carmen Ejogo) as a wallflower when in fact she was at the forefront of the movement right next to her husband.
Even at 128 minutes, the film does not cover all of the specific incidents and people involved in the marches, although I believe its overview is pretty solid. The actual march itself — the third one, which succeeded — is shown largely in montage fashion, intercut with actual news footage of the marchers and some of the celebrities who accompanied the marchers to Montgomery. It’s an anticlimactic presentation of an important historical event; the danger to Martin Luther King in Montgomery is given more import in the film’s closing minutes. These issues, ultimately, are why I think the film did not gain more Oscar support. The film promises a detailed, heartfelt, passionate look at an imperative moment in American history, but what it delivers feels more like a well-intentioned history lesson.
Ava DuVernay’s film doesn’t gain any momentum at all until “Bloody Sunday,” the day of the first march, when violence explodes on the Edmund Pettus bridge. With that scene, sounds are suddenly twice as loud as before and the film finally feels real. Before that, as Dr. King considers strategy and the political implications in the region are established, the film is dull, even boring. The rest of the film isn’t, not after the Bloody Sunday outrage, but too much time is misspent at the beginning to make this the classic film it should have been.
Personally, I would like to see a film made consisting solely of the third march, which took almost a week to cover the 54 miles from Selma to Montgomery, during which the crowd shrank from some 8000 down to 300 before growing to more than 25,000 as Montgomery was entered. Selma hints at some of the drama of the situation, including marching through driving rain and forced protection by the National Guard, as well as the murder of a woman afterward, but I think a dramatization of that third march would really be something to see.
Selma, at least for me, is a good film but not a great one. It provides a solid, fairly nuanced overview of the political and social situation and boasts a great performance by David Oyelowo as Dr. Martin Luther King. Oyelowo should have been nominated, but I can say the same thing about several other leading male performances of 2014 as well. There are only five slots. I wish the film had further developed its large cast of supporting characters and taken the time to deliver its message with more force. Less at the beginning and more in the middle and the end. It is certainly worth seeing, regardless. ☆ ☆ ☆. 24 January 2015.