Selma Shows the Man Behind the Myth of MLK

Selma Shows the Man Behind the Myth of MLK

Selma takes us to the promised land with a very human portrayal of Martin Luther King Jr.

Read Full Article

I think since Bob brought it up, I wanted to know what people thought of so-called 'respectability' politics, a.k.a. the perceived divide when it comes to, as Bob put it, the less than pristine image of the anti-establishment protesters and the upper class citizens that are pro-establishment but with nicer suits.

One thing I've always wanted to know is where do black or racially minority cops fall on the line?

In any case, Selma sounds like a good movie that I'll try to go see as soon as possible.

Gandhi is misspelt as "Ghandi" in this article.

Thanks for giving us this review, Bob. I tremendously enjoyed "Lincoln" so I'm eager to see this too. It sounds much in the same vein - men who were willing to use their talents for behind-the-scenes manipulation in service of the greater good.

Reding this actually gave me shivers. The theater might as well take my money now because this sounds amazing.

I think the problem with the Ferguson protests is that there was no central media personality or manipulator to set the narrative or even put it in a more palatable and understandable lens. At the end of the day, it might have been because it was the wrong thing to try and start the revolution over. By the time more legitimate cases like Eric Garner came around, the general public saw these cases as just overreactions.

After all, the thing that made Selma and the Civil Rights protests so effective wasn't just the media manipulation, it was the content of what was happening. Here was a bunch of peaceful black people in suits, linking arms with whites and religious officials, because they want to do something as simple as voting, which is an American treasure, and look at how southerners react to them.

No matter how one wants to romanticize it, it's simply not the same today. The goal is not as simple as the fundamental right to vote, it's the attainment of some kind of "Mama Bear's Porridge" of police reaction that few people seem to have a single opinion on what is most appropriate.

I believe that no matter what you're protesting for or against, trashing your own hometown and your neighbors' places of business is the wrong way to go about it. People who do that are mostly in it for attention and feeling like a big man. Definitely something the real MLK was not advocating. A couple of months ago, Oakland just erupted in rioting, and that city didn't have any national news making shootings happen. They even shut down a major freeway in the Bay Area to get across whatever point they were making.

Righteousness and moral dignity are all well and good, Selma argues, but at the end of the day controlling the narrative, crafting tableaus and tugging on heartstrings is often what gets the job done.

So, one may hope that one day they'll make an expansive biopic about Mother Jones too

Good to hear that it's great. Was this not chosen for an Escape to the Movies episode because the jokes or snark isn't as easy compared to Taken 3? I'm not the critic, but I wonder if giving the worse movie of the week more exposure over years now is worth it.

I'm not seeing the connection between the first part of this review and the movie's message. He's favorably comparing modern protesters to MLK, with the comparison that they both broke the rules and were not so clean around the edges. But while what he describes happening in the movie might be a little devious, it's still very much a Gandhi approach. We're literally talking about a group of people choosing a location because its most likely that violence will be enacted on them and they'll finally get the attention they need as a result. That is worlds away from inciting damage and violence (and murder) on people of a certain profession. No one is saying MLK wasn't strategic or that modern protests shouldn't be strategic. People are contrasting the two by saying that modern protests shouldn't be anger-driven, uninformed, violent and destructive mobs.

a particularly obnoxious set of memes were circulating juxtaposing photographs of protesters led by Martin Luther King (suits and ties, "Sunday best" dresses) and "under-dressed" present-day protesters; the point being made (sometimes with accompanying text) that the difference in attire was also a difference in the seriousness/effectiveness of the protests.

uggghh yeah this is bullshit (and a little racist) on so many levels, not to mention when people looooove to bring up MLK as a nice palatable non threatening form of protest compared to anything they consider too "agressive"

though I'm pretty sure he wasn't seen as nice and palatable at the time

Vault101:
though I'm pretty sure he wasn't seen as nice and palatable at the time

Did he flip any cars, burn/bomb any houses, or murder any police officers?

Scow2:

Vault101:
though I'm pretty sure he wasn't seen as nice and palatable at the time

Did he flip any cars, burn/bomb any houses, or murder any police officers?

Nope, and yet people were still threatened by him and what he stood for.

lithiumvocals:

Scow2:

Vault101:
though I'm pretty sure he wasn't seen as nice and palatable at the time

Did he flip any cars, burn/bomb any houses, or murder any police officers?

Nope, and yet people were still threatened by him and what he stood for.

Yep. Enough that he was occasionally roughed up by to police and arrested. And there is of course that whole assassination thing...

lithiumvocals:

Scow2:

Vault101:
though I'm pretty sure he wasn't seen as nice and palatable at the time

Did he flip any cars, burn/bomb any houses, or murder any police officers?

Nope, and yet people were still threatened by him and what he stood for.

Exactly. Having people feel threatened by you is fine. It may even be necessary, depending on the cause. Having people *be* threatened by you, because you are stealing and burning and killing, is not fine, no matter what your cause.

Moeez:
Good to hear that it's great. Was this not chosen for an Escape to the Movies episode because the jokes or snark isn't as easy compared to Taken 3? I'm not the critic, but I wonder if giving the worse movie of the week more exposure over years now is worth it.

Maybe The Escapist assumed that his audience would be more interested in Taken 3 than in Selma. In which case they were idiots.

...

Scow2:

Vault101:
though I'm pretty sure he wasn't seen as nice and palatable at the time

Did he flip any cars, burn/bomb any houses, or murder any police officers?

No, but they shot him anyway.

Seconding the question as to why Taken 3 got the video review considering both Bob and the viewers are far more interested in Selma. I mean Christ, was anyone actually expecting Taken 3 to be any good?

particularly as
Its a sequel
In genre it seems Bob resents the existence of
And would be an exallent contrast to the much dismissed American Sniper and so on.

Now, let's see someone make Jesus As A PR Man. I want to see a Last Supper that could easily slide right into Mad Men, because that's probably how it really went down in 33 AD. Oh wait, anyone remember The Passover Plot?

 

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here