Posted on 01/06/2015 9:41:34 AM PST by Brad from Tennessee
Before I came to dislike the movie “Selma,” I was deeply moved by it. Twice it brought me to tears. A crane shot of Martin Luther King Jr. leading thousands of demonstrators over the Edmund Pettus Bridge was one such moment, and so was the vicious attack on John Lewis — bravely, steadfastly walking into the beating he knew was coming. Today, Lewis is a member of Congress. Forever, he’ll be an American hero.
Too bad, though, that the movie had to go Hollywood on Lyndon Baines Johnson, who, as if from the grave, has bellowed his protest. In its need for some dramatic tension, “Selma” asserts that King had to persuade and pressure a recalcitrant Johnson to introduce the Voting Rights Act of 1965. The movie also depicts Johnson authorizing FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover to smear King and — as King himself suspected — try to drive him to suicide. It is a profoundly ugly moment.
But a bevy of historians say it never happened. It was Robert F. Kennedy, the former attorney general, who authorized the FBI’s bugging of King’s hotel rooms. Yet, for understandable reasons, Kennedy appears nowhere in the film. By 1965, he was no longer the AG and, anyway, he remains a liberal icon. But LBJ — Southern, obscene and, especially when compared to the lithe Kennedy, gross of speech and physique — was made the heavy. He should get a posthumous SAG card. . . .
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Isn’t he the one hat supposedly heard the “n-word” by Tea Party people and Breitbart put up a 100K reward for the video (which mysteriously there was NONE)?
I believe evidence when it is produced. EVIDENCE. Not something somebody said or maybe saw 50 years ago. Especially when that someone (an Alabama State Trooper) is trying to cover his own ass by making the other side look bad.
Jesse Jackson is a race hustler. Al Sharpton is a race hustler. John Lewis is a present day race hustler. But those marching back in the 60’s had legitimate grievances. And anyone who doesn’t see that is living in denial.
Can you please explain how a person can be held in slavery and not be abused?
Saint Bobby? Say it ain’t so!!!!! LOLOLOL
What isn’t in dispute is that events of generations ago are being used for not only political advantage, not only to dismantle our society and its liberties today, but by a few to foment violent race hatred on a scale not dreamed of by some Alabama state trooper back in 1965.
I couldn’t disagree more. The events of “generations ago” aren’t being used for that purpose. Whats being used is the whole Michael Brown / Trayvon Martin nonsense, and every similar instance of some black thug getting his due.
The civil rights movement had some genuine heroes back in the day. Rosa Parks was a brave lady. MLK Jr, for all of his flaws, had guts. The current crowd is a bunch of losers who can’t let go of the past.
I’m arguing for the status quo of fiction in general. And what it’s always been long before cinema was invented.
I couldn't disagree more. Its quite obviously the purpose of keeping them in the public eye. There can be no other reason.
Do me a favor...google ‘The King’s Speech’ and ‘inaccurate’.
LBJ understood very well. When the Pentagon was telling LBJ that the 1968 Tet Offensive was a U.S. victory, with North Vietnam suffering irreplaceable losses, Johnson said reality didn't matter as much as the CBS Evening News. “When I've lost Cronkite I've lost middle America.”
That’s not what I am talking about, I am saying they were deliberately upping the violence in this movie with the specific intention to inflame race relations today. Not only that, but also making every white person in the movie a sadistic psychopath. Now that I think about it, Brad Pitts character was the only one who was normal. EVERY single white person in that movie was made out to be an evil sadist, just completely over the top. Why? Because they are deliberately trying to inflame race relations.
What is the purpose of showing slaves being brutally beaten in movie after movie? Why is MLK’s message never conveyed to applied to obvious race hatred existing in the black community today - hatred not only of whites? Why is the message ALWAYS the same - that white racism is the sole definition of American society, historically and currently?
That’s not what I am talking about, I am saying they were deliberately upping the violence in this movie with the specific intention to inflame race relations today. Did you see that movie? All the whites in it were made out to be blood thirsty psychopathic animals. Do you think that is based on reality? I sure as hell don’t and I also stand my earlier comment that slave owners did not beat the crap out of their slaves 24/7 like that movie portrayed. Yes slavery was evil, yes it is great it was abolished and civil rights was enacted despite the attempts of Democrats fighting it every step of the way, but to distort history as an attempt to anger people is pathetic as it gets, and it seems to have worked too judging by all these nationwide protests we are having like this one last week, blacks charging into a restaurant accusing white people of genocide. Gee, genocide. Where would they ever get that idea?
And going after WW2 vets as well. ..
When has this kind of stuff ever happened before? It’s because liberals today starting at the very top with Obama, are deliberately inflaming race relations and that’s why they are making these movies.
“I’m not talking about now. I’m talking about 50 years ago.”
Fifty years ago I was THE most disinterested person about politics/freedom/culture/racial strife, or however you want to name it, on the planet. ;-) I was in the military at the time, totally disconnected from society/news and ‘out-of-sight’, too.
“Clearly the black community has not taken advantage of the additional freedoms given to them in the mid 60’s.”
Thank you for the admission. I coerced you into ‘bending’ just a little bit. ;-)
What the *&$^#@ do you think they were doing to slaves? Serving them tea and cookies? Yeah, they got beat. Maybe not to the extent you see in movies, but they are MOVIES. They exaggerate things. Movies always have.
And the message isn’t ALWAYS the same. You’re cherry picking a few movies and seeing what you want to see.
No bending here. The civil rights crowd from the 60’s had legitimate gripes. Today they’re just race hustlers.
There are historic inaccuracies, so I stand partially corrected. But I don't think the film distorted a sense of the era or the historic context.
Well I read over at HotAir this morning that Obama's new Cuba policy is going to open the door to a mass exodus from the island. So he may well out do Carter's Mariel Boat Lift and secure his place as the number one idiot president of the last century.
If only teddy had that car.
It depends on what the focus is. In this case it appears that LBJ was turned into a foil to illustrate other themes. It’s a very common dramatic device. I love ‘Amadeus’ but it really is a slander of Antonio Salieri - who was apparently a very decent and charitable man.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.