Selma

cloud493

Goddamn, that was one brilliant film, my first 10/10 for the year. Whats even better is I'd read the reviews and what not and saw how high it was scoring, and it exceeded by expectations significantly. Couple of things

The fact they actually used the N-word, and didn't shy away from the violence, was great, it was shocking, in a lot of places.

The actor playing King was incredible. Everyone go see this.

Turtyturd

Went into this blind but agree with the OP...absolutely blown away. Takes a while to get going but is engrossing once it does. There are several scenes where you are

in shock from the violence or almost jumping out of the seat in support of the protesters.

I wasn't overly familiar with the details of King's death so thought the finale was leading to his assassination, damn historical facts getting in the way of what would have been a brilliant ending.

The Gibzilla

I'm more of a Patti fan.


But seriously, looks like a great movie. Definitely on my radar.

ricero

Watched this last night and its the first film in years to bring out a tear. Wonderful and emotional film. Hope it gets the big one at this years Oscars, best film ive seen in years.

tunguska

I have to go against the grain a little here and say I didn't think it was great. I mean its a very worthy film with some amazing performances, but for me it just didn't have the same power that 12 years a slave had. There were a couple of things wrong and one of them was that the scenes went on way too long, there was just too much talking and I found myself being conscious of just how long scenes went on for. I think it could've been tighter while still retaining an emotional punch. The soundtrack was poor, there were so many great songs from that era they could've used but didn't. I just think that was an opportunity lost to lend a stronger sense of period.
Like I said, a very worthy film, with fine performances but for me it just came up short. When I saw 12 years a slave a remember sitting there stunned while the credits rolled, this just didn't have that kind of impact.

e_e

Agree with the above. A very very good film that could have been absolutely brilliant with stronger direction and tighter editing.


One thing that really stood out to me was how I wasn't all that shocked by the violence, not because it isn't horrific but because of the sad reality that it's still so prevalent today. Instead of the distance you get from the events that 12 Years a Slave shows this film really highlights that there's still some inroads to make in society. Despite my qualms this is still a really powerful and necessary film.

Looper007

I thought this was brilliant, with an amazing performance from David Oyelowo as Martin Luther King. How he isn't nominated for Best Actor at the Oscar or Bafta is a massive oversight. Tim Roth and Tom Wilkinson were great in smaller roles

Great scene between the two in the White house at the end.

. Oprah Winfrey in a smaller role and producer of the film even gives a great cameo. The Marches are some of the most intense scenes you likely to see this year. The scenes of violence are just as hard hitting as in 12 Year a Slave

The bombing of the church with the children was frightening

. A must see on the big screen. A great counterpoint with Spike Lee's amazing Malcolm X.

Although it's not quite 12 year a Slave and Malcolm X ballpark its still a great film.

Shiraz 4.99

Well this was a huge surprise, I saw this as being typical Oscar bait & expected a by the numbers biopic, I was so wrong.
The actor playing King (no idea who he was) gave a great performance, far stronger than any of the Oscar favorites this year.
Tom Wilkinson does a great LBJ.

A slow start & some needed editing were the only flaws I observed.
Engaging & rewarding, 8/10.

JonnyF

Have to say i wasn't overly impressed with this.

It was a good film and tells a very important story but having seen it I find it hard to agree with any of the hubbub about none of the actors being nominated for oscars. The film itself is good and well made but I didn't find any of the performances that impressive. The female characters in particular were very poorly developed and King is the only one with any depth.

GAAman

Good film, enjoyed it but was I the only one annoyed by

Oprah Winfrey's continual appearances?

Wasn't I shocked to see her production company were involved in the making of this! :pac:

johnny_ultimate

This is the type of film I've become pretty much hardwired to dislike. A straightforward historical biopic that seemed to have attracted more attention for its prestige performances than the film itself? Those are the sort of warning signs that set off my inner cynic.

Yet... I found myself deeply moved by Selma, despite a few slightly regrettable choices and adherence to conventions. When the film was tightly focused on King and the marches I genuinely felt incensed, shocked, inspired. On the surface it is not a subtle film, what with its heavy-lifting soundtrack and borderline cartoonish villains. But then the sheer righteous force of the civil rights movement is captured in devastating clarity, and the characterisation is consistently nuanced and deeper than a mere act of hagiography. Oyelowo's King is frequently a larger than life figure - as he was in reality - but where the film surprises is that it humanises him too. He is a man with family problems, crises of confidence, little vices. Perhaps the most memorable scene in the film for me was that little, almost throwaway scene where the group's leaders meet in a house for breakfast. That, beyond the fact that these people were true history makers, they were were above all people, and on screen that's far more revelatory than it should be.

Not to say the big moments don't pack a punch either. DuVernay's direction isn't always inspired, but she makes the key moments count, aided by dynamic cinematography and a soundtrack that peculiarly shifts between slightly overbearing and viscerally expressionistic.

Selma suffers a little from the pratfalls of biopic formula - a few Washington cutaways too many, for example, or a few 'wink wink nudge nudge' dialogue scenes overburdened with contemporary hindsight (although on the other hand hindsight also highlights how frighteningly relevant many of the social and political contexts still are). And it falls at the last hurdle - archive footage and superfluous 'what happened next...' epilogue text a frankly uncinematic note to cut to credits on (I confess that sort of text is a pet peeve of mine, though).

Flaws for sure, but above all I found Selma exceptionally stirring and passionate (although I do have a headcold, which may have contributed in part to the headrushes :pac:), even if the filmmaking itself was an uneven mixture of poetic and conventional.

donaghs

Surprised at how much I liked this film. I was expecting a fairly straightforward biopic, depicting MLK as a saintly figure, rather than a human being - e.g. they did actually tackle (briefly) the issue of his adultery.

I actually enjoyed this more than most of the other Oscar nominated films (American Sniper, Theory of Everything, Imitation Game, Boyhood, Hotel Budapest, Birdman, Gone Girl, Wild).

Some dialogue, MLKs particularly was a bit clunky and preachy. But very well acted. I'd heard the film treated LBJ unfairly, but that didn't come across in the film. You'd have to get into the minutia of the history to decide whether LBJ was against the timing of the march etc, and whether this differs that much from what's portrayed onscreen.

Shiraz 4.99

I've just realised that there's a more famous part 2 of this story just waiting to be told.
They could do worse than rehire the entire cast & scriptwriters for the March on Washington.

errlloyd

Shiraz 4.99 wrote: »

I've just realised that there's a more famous part 2 of this story just waiting to be told.
They could do worse than rehire the entire cast & scriptwriters for the March on Washington.

I actually liked that it focused on Selma, we got to see a mirco snapshot of the movement.

FloatingVoter

GAAman wrote: »

Good film, enjoyed it but was I the only one annoyed by

Oprah Winfrey's continual appearances?

Wasn't I shocked to see her production company were involved in the making of this! :pac:[/QUOTE

Oprah is not a bad actress. She was famous in these parts originally for her turn in The Colour Purple. Her being instrumental in the making of this may have been a factor in the weird Oscar nominations. Become that powerful and you make powerful enemies.
It still was nowhere near Best Picture but it did deserve the nod in the nominations.

Dirty Dingus McGee

Brilliant film.

David Oyeluwo was incredible you could really feel the rage burning inside him at times.

Am I the only one who though that Oprah Winfrey being given one of the leading actor roles on the DVD cover was a bit off .She barely spoke in the whole film and I can't understand why such an important film would cheapen itself by giving her a credit she didn't deserve in order to (I assume)get attention for itself.Although she was a producer on the film so that might explain it.

I liked the way it showed the Martin Luther King wasn't squeaky clean and showed him to be a schemer and a showman and that he understood that campaigning was as much about getting peoples attention than just simply being right.

When you look at some of the idiots in the film waving confederate flags I can kind of understand how they are so offensive to black people and why there is such controversy about them no.