“The lack of diversity in today’s Oscar nominations is appalling ... With all of the talent in Selma and other Black movies this year, it is hard to believe that we have less diversity in the nominations today than in recent history."I dunno Al. Could there possibly be some other reason Selma didn't get the gold ring?
Should this movie be allowed to "Tawana Brawley" its way to the top? If race hustler Al Sharpton is on one side of an issue, surely any reasonable person should be planted firmly on the other.Is it just possible that members of the Academy objected to a fabricated fairy tale posing as an historical document?
There was no shortage of real white villains in the Selma controversy, but LBJ was not one of them. This portrayal depends upon a complete misrepresentation not only of the facts, but also of specific conversations that King and Johnson had during this period.And what about actual facts?
Selma shows LBJ in this period not only refusing to meet any of King’s demands, but also enlisting J. Edgar Hoover to try to discredit and destroy King. Hoover had in fact taken these steps months before, and LBJ had been appalled by them.
Like John and Robert Kennedy before him, he was terrified that Hoover would successfully discredit King and set back civil rights for years.
"In fact, Selma was LBJ's idea, he considered the Voting Rights Act his greatest legislative achievement, he viewed King as an essential partner in getting it enacted - and he didn't use the FBI to disparage him," Califano writes in an opinion piece for The Washington Post.
He says the movie is so far off the mark that it should be "ruled out this Christmas and during the ensuring awards season".
Mark K Updegrove, an author, historian and the director of the LBJ Presidential Library, agrees.
Writing for Politico, Updegrove says films based on true events often massage the truth in order to create a better narrative, but historians should step in when that narrative doesn't represent the spirit of what actually happened.
