Not Just A Movie
By Mareen Dowd in the New York Times
WASHINGTON — I WENT Friday morning
to see “Selma” and found myself watching it in a theater full of black
teenagers.
Thanks to donations, D.C. public
school kids got free tickets to the first Hollywood movie about the Rev. Dr.
Martin Luther King Jr. on his birthday weekend — an effort that was duplicated
for students around the country.
The kids did plenty of talking and
texting, and plenty of fighting over whether there was too much talking and
texting. Slowly but surely, though, the crowd was drawn in by the Scheherazade
skills of the “Selma” director, Ava DuVernay.
The horrific scene of the four
schoolgirls killed in the white supremacist bombing of a Birmingham, Ala.,
church stunned the audience. One young man next to me unleashed a string of
expletives and admitted that he was scared. When civil rights leaders are
clubbed, whipped and trampled by white lawmen as feral white onlookers cheer,
the youngsters seemed aghast.
In a delicately wrought scene in
which Coretta Scott King calls out her husband about his infidelities, some of
the teenage girls reacted with a chorus of “oooohs.”
DuVernay sets the tone for her
portrayal of Lyndon Johnson as patronizing and skittish on civil rights in the
first scene between the president and Dr. King. L.B.J. stands above a seated
M.L.K., pats him on the shoulder, and tells him “this voting thing is just
going to have to wait” while he works on “the eradication of poverty.”
Many of the teenagers by me bristled
at the power dynamic between the men. It was clear that a generation of young
moviegoers would now see L.B.J.’s role in civil rights through DuVernay’s lens.
And that’s a shame. I loved the
movie and find the Oscar snub of its dazzling actors repugnant. But the director’s
talent makes her distortion of L.B.J. more egregious. Artful falsehood is more
dangerous than artless falsehood, because fewer people see through it.
DuVernay told Rolling Stone that, originally, the script was more centered on the
L.B.J.-M.L.K. relationship and was “much more slanted to Johnson.”
“I wasn’t interested in making a
white-savior movie,” she said.
Hollywood has done that with films like
“Mississippi Burning,” which cast white F.B.I. agents as the heroes, or “Cry
Freedom,” which made a white journalist the focus rather Denzel Washington’s
anti-apartheid activist, Steve Biko.
Instead of painting L.B.J. and
M.L.K. as allies, employing different tactics but complementing each other, the
director made Johnson an obstacle.
Top Johnson aide Jack Valenti told
Michael Beschloss, the presidential historian, that L.B.J. aspired to pass a
Voting Rights Act from his first night as president. Valenti said that his boss
talked to him about it the night of J.F.K.’s assassination in the bedroom of
Johnson’s house in D.C., The Elms, before the newly sworn-in president went to
sleep.
On the tape of a phone conversation
between President Johnson and Dr. King the week of L.B.J.’s 1965 inauguration,
the president said that he indicated the time was yet ripe to ask Congress for
it, and he made it clear that they both needed to think of something that would
move public opinion more than a presidential speech.
“Johnson was probably thinking, at least in
part, of the spring of ’63, when J.F.K. was privately saying the public wasn’t
yet politically ready for a comprehensive civil rights bill,” Beschloss said.
“Then came the May 1963 photograph of Birmingham police setting dogs against
African-American demonstrators, which helped to move many white Americans who
were on the fence about the issue.
Thank you Maureen! Egregious is THE
word! An otherwise stunning and important film has been greatly diminished by
Ms. DuVernay's inaccurate...
Fearlessness He was the hero of my
youth From Bull Conner's Birmingham jails To the rock throwing racists in
Skokie He faced these oppressors...
Worse, this movie might give the
impression to young people of today that all it takes are protests, marching in
the streets, and chanting...
“Once Selma happened, L.B.J. was, of course,
horrified, but he knew that the atrocity would have an effect on white
Americans similar to Birmingham that would make it easier for him to get a
Voting Rights Act from Congress.”
In an interview with Gwen Ifill on
P.B.S., DuVernay dismissed the criticism by Joseph Califano Jr. and other
L.B.J. loyalists, who said that the president did not resist the Selma march or
let J. Edgar Hoover send a sex tape of her husband to Mrs. King. (Bobby
Kennedy, as J.F.K’s attorney general, is the one who allowed Hoover to tap Dr.
King.)
“This is art; this is a movie; this
is a film,” DuVernay said. “I’m not a historian. I’m not a documentarian.”
The “Hey, it’s just a movie” excuse
doesn’t wash. Filmmakers love to talk about their artistic license to distort
the truth, even as they bank on the authenticity of their films to boost them
at awards season.
John Lewis, the Georgia congressman
who was badly beaten in Selma, has said that bridge led to the Obama White
House. And, on Friday night, the president offset the Oscar dis by screening
“Selma” at the White House. Guests included DuVernay, Lewis and Oprah Winfrey,
who acts in the film and was one of its producers.
There was no need for DuVernay to
diminish L.B.J., given that the Civil Rights Movement would not have advanced
without him. Vietnam is enough of a pox on his legacy.
As I have written about “Lincoln,”
“Zero Dark Thirty,” and “Argo,” and as The New York Review of Books makes clear about “The Imitation Game,” the truth is dramatic and
fascinating enough. Why twist it? On matters of race — America’s original sin —
there is an even higher responsibility to be accurate.
DuVernay had plenty of vile white
villains — including one who kicks a priest to death in the street — and they
were no doubt shocking to the D.C. school kids. There was no need to create a
faux one.
No comments:
Post a Comment