Selma: A Review In Tweets
I've been studying the Civil Rights Movement for nine years. Yes, I'm young, but since high school, I've been fascinated with the movement. Selma, a film that highlights events that led to the passing of the Voting Rights Act of 1965, helped me see the movement in a real way from the view of an artist, which I really appreciated. I enjoying walking through a small part of the movement as if I've never studied it before this time. Going through each step and analyzing all the moving pieces revitalized my passion for the beauty and struggle of the movement. The performances captured the humanity of the people, and the screenplay depicted the reality of the story. There were slow moments and weird editing decisions, but I enjoyed the experience. It's an accessible history for the masses.
Two problems I do have with film (per the advice of bell hooks, I have to be a critical viewer) are the depiction of women and the narrative of the charismatic leader. Women didn't play a large enough role in the film. There are several reasons for this issue: a. historical accounts are mostly written by men in favor of men and their role in society; b. it's a film about Dr. King and his inner circle; and c. we haven't been largely introduced to women in the movement through film. However, with all the research about women, we know enough to place them in a better and more dynamic position than the film allows. It repeats this idea of women as docile beings who serve in secondary roles. In reality, these women are innovators who set the tone for the movement and trailblazers who create paths for celebrated leaders of the movement. Women are critical to the progression of movement and play a pivotal role in events depicted in the film. It's our responsibility to work to find and develop and present these histories. About the charismatic leader movement bit. I do appreciate how they broke down Dr. King and made him a human because we've been learning that he's superman of the movement since I was in pre-K (which is complex and difficult but necessary for that time). However, the narrative that somehow he did everything is wrong. The film really explored that by showing conversation and debates and using the council (SCLC) to serve as the base of human interaction and relationship. However, there is a sense of power given to King and his council that overlooks the moving parts of the movement at a local/grassroots (for lack of other words) level. The movement is about ordinary people and should empower these same types of people to do the work. The problem with presenting a narrative that overlooks this piece of the movement is that people of the present-day feel like that they cannot identify with Dr. King or have his power to influence change.
Anyway, this supposed to be in tweets so here you go. These are my first reactions to the film (p.s. Ledisi followed me on twitter. :) )
