“Selma” is not a Martin Luther King, Jr. biopic.
Or, I should say, “Selma” is not just a Martin Luther King, Jr. biopic. It is so much more than just the story of one man.
Director Ava DuVernay and writer Paul Webb create their “Lincoln,” a film concerning the premier orator of his era set in the twentieth century’s ’65. This man, standing with little more than ideology and conscience, must work against a political establishment stacked against them. What is right, in the minds of these officials, must take a backseat to what the voting public is ready to accept.
But DuVernay, thankfully, disposes of Spielberg’s hagiography of Honest Abe that reeked of cinematic mothballs. She opts for a portrayal of Dr. King that focuses on who he was and what that allowed him to accomplish. In a way, not receiving the rights to use King’s actual speeches makes “Selma” a stronger movie. Whether organically or out of necessity, he becomes so much more than a collection of recognizable catchphrases that trigger memories of a high school civics class.
“Selma” certainly does not shy away from some character details that the history books often elide, such as his vehement opposition to the Vietnam War and his marital infidelities. Dr. King, as portrayed by David Oyelowo, does not always don his shining armor, either. The film’s most powerful display of racially motivated violence takes place when hundreds of protesters attempt to cross Selma’s Edmund Pettus Bridge, only to be brutally attacked by a cabal of police and townsmen alike. King is not there with them. He is at home, trying to smooth over a marital rough patch with his wife Coretta (Carmen Ejogo).
Based on the trailer for Lee Daniels’ “
Marshall and the Movies 
Recent Comments