You've got to be kidding me with this post. You're one of those undercover Grand Wizards like bigtexxx.
I know right. Those Damn historians bickering during the screenings is horrible. The fact that they think the screen can hear them shows the lack of social skills they have attained over the years. No one cares about how LBJ was represented. They just won't shut up
Yeah, the screening I attended was fairly full and very quiet, especially when compared to the audiences at shlock like GotG. Anyway, for anyone interested in the history, Bill Moyers had an interesting set of recollections, and he worked directly for Johnson during the time of the Selma marches. http://billmoyers.com/2015/01/15/bill-moyers-selma-lbj/ (warning: SPOILERS, and Moyers is a lefty. But he supports those who have criticized the treatment of Johnson in the film, and to my reading, he has an accurate view of what actually happened in the film, unlike some of the other reviewers.)
Liberals and their interpretation of a statement being "racist". Did you think he was referring to black people in a theater talking because that is the stereotype? This makes you just as much of a douchebag as you are accusing this guy of being.
Thursday is a rain day here, so I'll head to the theatre. Time it out so I can catch Selma and then maybe Am Sniper or Unbroken or Imitation Game. I am deficient with my pre-oscar movie watching. Thanks for the links above, Bill Moyers is one of the greatest people I've ever had the pleasure of bull****ting with. National Treasure, that guy.
We saw "Selma" on Saturday and I have to say the audience was reverentially quiet. You could have heard a mouse fart. Then we saw "To Kill a Mockingbird" on Turner Classics the next night, which dovetailed nicely with "Selma". THAT'S why they marched in Selma. That jury would've looked different in TKAM if African-Americans hadn't been disenfranchised in Alabama.
I didn't know this was the only MLK movie ever released in theaters. There are several made for tv movies based on him but I think this is the only one that made it to theaters if I'm mistaken?
This was a great Movie. One of the best I have seen in some time when dealing with a historical figure IMO LBJ came across as a political pragmatist more than anything Many of those want to cry historical accuracy as the same ones that think Exodus is a great movie . . . . . . 300 . . . .etc etc . . . *shrug* Rocket River
Oh come on. The Civil Rights Act push had a lot of players (of which LBJ was one of them). The funny thing is that the way they portrayed LBJ is the way Kennedy came off during Civil Rights. Kennedy was almost a reluctant participant during the beginning of the Civil Rights Act debate. His original bill proposal was slammed by moderate/liberal Republicans and liberal Democrats alike for being too weak. This coming in the wake of the Eisenhower civil rights legislation that was also called too weak since they really didn't do anything to change the South. LBJ on the other hand was a god damn political genius with the way he managed the Senate proceedings on the Civil Rights Act. There was a reason why a real Civil Rights bill had never made it through the Senate. Every bill had been watered down to the point of irrelevance to break a filibuster. LBJ was even complicit in this as majority leader of the Senate. However, in this particular case, much of the strategy around breaking the Senate filibuster was a product of LBJ, Mike Mansfield and Hubert Humphrey. Additionally after passing the Civil Rights Act, everyone told him to stop there. Not to mention, unlike the Civil Rights Act which was a jointly written bill between Rep. Bill McCulloch (R), the Justice Department and House Democrats, the Voting Rights Act came straight from LBJ. That was LBJ's bill that he rammed down the throats of the House and Senate. The Voting Rights Act was 100% LBJ willing a bill through the House in cooperation with MLK and Black leaders. Additionally it was Johnson who really solidified the civil rights coalition between Everett Dirksen, Mike Mansfield and himself in the Senate to overcome a Senate filibuster. Passing important legislation is all about leveraging relationships and coalitions. Johnson was one of the best the country has ever seen. I do think that tarnishing Johnson to create a villain was wrong. LBJ had tons of faults. Vietnam will continue to be a black mark on his presidency forever. But I'm convinced that no other president could have gotten the Civil Rights Act through the Senate. (and the House for that matter since House Republicans said that they would withdraw support for the bill if Kennedy let Southern Democrats water it down once again)
Have you seen it? I don't think Johnson is tarnished in the film. He came off as pragmatic politician, entirely sympathetic to King and the cause, stressed out, and effective at his job. To me, the feedback from Moyers made the most sense. He said Johnson was definitely more active and even more collaborative with King than the movie portrayed. But that's far from a villain. Cheers!
you're right, poor choice of words. But I do think LBJ came off the way I feel Kennedy actually acted during civil rights. Kennedy collaborated with MLK as well (to the point where he went out of his way to secretly ensure that the march on Washington went off without a problem) With that said, Kennedy was the pragmatic and slightly reluctant participant that LBJ came off as. And I think that's a disservice to LBJ.
I've got my fingers crossed that we'll get to read Robert Caro's telling of the Voting Rights Act's passage someday.
That's a fair take, IMO. One way the director could have gotten out of this is to cut back on Washington DC scenes and stay more in Selma and with MLK Jr. Then she could just have Johnson's speech on a voting rights act that, allegedly, moved MLK Jr. to tears. Heck she then could have used the actual speech as shown on the TV MLK Jr. was watching (from Selma, I believe). Still think it's a great film.
