The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com Arts Wednesday, January 21, 2015 — 5A P ARAMOUNT PICTURES Bad things happen when acronyms fight. Important story in flawed ‘Selma’ Historical drama doesn’t add much to the history books By ZAK WITUS Daily Arts Writer In “Selma,” writer and direc- tor Ava DuVernay (“This is the Life”) lifts a page from your high school his- tory textbook, breathing life into a single episode that tells a larger story. The film chronicles the events from Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s life, from his acceptance of the Noble Peace Prize in 1964 to his speech at the steps of the Alabama State Capitol, which led to the five-day Civil Rights march from Selma to Montgom- ery. “Selma” presents this inspi- rational man as a representative of the Civil Rights Movement as a whole. However, despite its social and political value, “Selma” is not a great film. While some people might learn something new about his- tory from this film, the story doesn’t extend much beyond the history one might find in the pages of a high school history textbook. The film does a fine job representing what will probably be familiar material for most of us. What’s more, “Selma” does, at least to some to some extent, subvert the outmoded “great man theory” of history that we saw in Steven Speilberg’s “Lin- coln.” Though the film focuses primarily on King and his influ- ence, it also gives credit to what in the “great man theory” are considered negligible sideshow characters. “Selma” emphasizes the importance of the people who we’re accustomed to see- ing as just “faces in the crowd.” The film recognizes the fact that though leaders like King are important, it’s ultimately what we call “ordinary people” who form the basis of popular move- ments. Critics who call out “Selma” for historical revisionism have aimed their attacks at the film’s Oscar aspirations. But many wonder why it’s even a contend- er in the first place — except for the fact that Oprah Winfrey and Brad Pitt produced it. “Selma” is not a bad film; it’s just mediocre. The violence in the film — the police brutality in particular — hits hard, provoking disgust and anger that galvanizes the activist within us. David Oyelowo repro- duces King’s resounding rhetoric and sandpiper suave magnifi- cently. We’d have to be more cal- lous than Michael Jordan’s feet to not feel the film’s triumphant glory resonating from our toes on up. Unfortunately, the story doesn’t expand much on the familiar historical material (perhaps its greatest shortcom- ing). For example, the film tells us that Dr. King and Coretta Scott King suffered from marital strife, but it doesn’t show exactly why, and only vaguely alludes to it (perhaps to preserve the respectability of the film’s pro- tagonist). What’s more, much of the dialogue feels inconsequen- tial, as if we already knew what the characters were going to say. Granted, this is a historical film, so anybody who read their high school history textbook would obviously know what the char- acters were going to say. But that only prompts us to see the film go beyond the elementary version of this historical moment. Every movie, whether histori- cal or not, falsifies to some extent; that’s part of what it is to be art. The question is: What kind of fal- sification and how much of it are we willing to abide? In a recent op-ed in The Washington Post, Joseph A. Cali- fano Jr., one of President Lyn- don Johnson’s top assistants for domestic affairs, wrote, “The film falsely portrays President Lyndon B. Johnson as being at odds with Martin Luther King Jr. and even using the FBI to dis- credit him, as only reluctantly behind the Voting Rights Act of 1965 and as opposed to the Selma march itself.” It’s clear from Cali- fano’s evidence (which can be found in his piece and in the tran- script of the phone conversation between King and Johnson) that “Selma” exaggerates the extent to which Johnson and King were at odds with one another. Listen to the phone conversation or read the transcript and try to deny that Johnson sounds like he’s enthusiastically supportive of a Voting Rights Act. Understand- ably, the film would lack a major antagonism without the conflict between Johnson and King, but this is, of course, no ground for historical revisionism. People who support the film’s social and political mes- sage probably want to say it’s a better film than it really is, and people who oppose its message will probably want to hyper-focus on the misrepre- sentation of Johnson to say it’s a worse film than it really is. As Califano wrote in his criticism, “Selma” didn’t need to falsify history as it did to create a great film. By that same token, we can still enjoy the film despite its historical inaccuracies. The misrepresentation of Johnson should deter no one from see- ing the film because “Selma” is nonetheless a provocative rep- resentation of a well-known and centrally important event from the Civil Rights Movement that deserves to be remembered. Turnley reflects on inspirational career By FRANCESCA KIELB Daily Arts Writer A girl behind me loudly whis- pers, “This guy is like … a huge deal.” David Turnley, a Pulitzer Prize winning photographer, is a name often heard throughout the halls of the University’s Penny Stamps School of Art & Design. I heard whispers from students in his class on his eccentric genius, his passion, his exper- tise and even his anger. Rumors of students fleeing his class in tears from harsh critiques cre- ated mixed associations of fear and awe. I welcomed covering the Penny Stamps Lecture as a chance to see for myself what made him tick, hoping to see the man beneath the layers of mys- tique. Turnley is a storyteller. While his medium is photography, he is also incredibly eloquent. His stories flow seamlessly from one unbelievable destination to the next. He does not spare any details when speaking about his accomplishments, yet any hubris feels justified for a man who has accomplished so much. It doesn’t seem physically possible for a man to witness so much, much less capture it on film. Turnley starts his story in Johannesburg in 1990, where he was covering the Apartheid for the Detroit Free Press. He then gets a call from the Free Press’s Director of Photography, telling him that Sadam Hussein invaded Kuwait and asking him to fly to Baghdad to cover the impend- ing war with America. There’s just one problem: no Ameri- can photographers were to be granted visas. While photogra- phers stayed close to the airports awaiting permission, Turnley found another way in. He bought a ticket for a flight with journal- ists who were granted visas, and snuck through security amid the chaos. Once on the plane, how- ever, the officer went around collecting passports and check- ing credentials. He was ques- tioned by the officer, expecting to be kicked off the plane. How- ever, when the photographer explained that he was working out of Detroit, the officer perked up. The officer had family in Dearborn and allowed Turnley to enter. He was the first photog- rapher to arrive in Baghdad since the beginning of the war. Once there, he faced yet anoth- er obstacle. American photogra- phers had to be escorted by Public Affairs Officers, who attempt- ed to control what the media exposed regarding the war. No images of violence or suffering were permitted. Turnley was not one to play by the rules, though. He sought out an elite mash unit of the American Medical Corps and asked if he could join them to document the war. This unit did not have a Public Affairs Officer, but he convinced them to let him join regardless. This freedom gave him the ability to take pic- tures of the war that ended up on the cover of every major publica- tion nationwide. To the crowd, Turnley explained, “to allow for serendipity you can’t force things to happen, you have to have the stamina to really be in people’s lives in a full immersion.” He was later awarded a Pulit- zer Prize for a series of 19 photo- graphs at Check Point Charlie as the Berlin Wall fell. He explained how he had hired a motorcyclist to weave between traffic to get him to the point in time. Again and again, a combination of fate and his pragmatic approach put him in direct contact with moments that defined the 20th and 21st centuries. “I have never felt comfort- able with the notion of calling myself a journalist. I have never felt myself to be objective. I see through my eyes, my heart and my life experience. It is a priority to try to be fair, which is why I’m trying to touch your hearts with the common threads of human- ity,” Turnley said. So, who is David Turnley? David Turnley is: -The first American photog- rapher to arrive in Baghdad to cover the first Gulf War. -The only American photog- rapher in Iraq traveling without a Public Affairs Officer — allow- ing him to document the tragedy without governmental restric- tions. -One of the first western jour- nalists to receive visas to 13 coun- tries in the Soviet Union. -A witness to the Rwandan genocide in the mid-’90s. -A witness to the fall of the Berlin Wall. -A witness to 9/11, document- ing the Twin Towers’ fall from a block-and-a-half away. -A family friend and compan- ion of the Mandela family for over 20 years. But much of his talk was not spent on his coverage of memo- rable events, rather, on his expe- riences with people all around the world, both witnessing and joining their walks of life. From a homeless man to an aging farming couple and professional dancers, Turnley stresses the importance of building relation- ships with a diverse swath of people. He summarizes the mantra of his life and work by saying sim- ply, “It’s not a job assignment or a vocation. It’s a way of life, a camaraderie, a sense of heritage — seeing what you can do with your camera to make a differ- ence.” As the event drew to a close, the lights dimmed and he con- cluded with a slideshow of his photographs. The veil had been lifted, he had been humanized. Yet my feelings of fear and awe not only remained — they were amplified. ‘Parks’ prepares to close on a high note By DREW MARON Daily Arts Writer With last season’s incred- ible, series finale-worthy end- ing “Moving Up,” it would be easy for showrunners Dan Goor and Michael Schur (“Brooklyn Nine-Nine”) to play it safe for the final season. But that’s not what makes “Parks and Recre- ation” one of the greatest television comedies of the last 20 years. The joy of watching “Parks and Rec” doesn’t come from the humor alone, but from seeing people who love one another help each other reach their goals. Season seven begins by taking all of that love and putting it through the grinder. It has been three years since the promotion of Leslie Knope (Amy Poehler, “Saturday Night Live”) to Midwest Region- al Director of the National Parks Service, and Pawnee has changed a great deal. The Newport family — antagonists throughout the series — are selling a huge plot of land, and Leslie hopes to convince them to turn it into a National Park. Unfortunately, there’s someone standing in her way whom she hates so much as to not even mention his name: Ron Swan- son (Nick Offerman, “22 Jump Street”). After an unexplained event ominously referred to as “Morningstar,” Swanson has left the Parks Department and created a new company named Very Good Building and Development. His client is tech startup company Gryzzl, that plans on using the land to build the “Gryzzl Campus.” Seeing the hearing where Leslie turns around to see Ron Swanson greet her with a cold, “Hello, Ms. Knope,” felt like a stab in the heart. Their dif- ferent stances on government have always been a source of tension but it’s never gotten in the way of their friendship. With season seven, Goor and Schur make the viewer feel what it’s like for politics to divide a family. The tension is amplified by the fact that we understand the principles that have led both Ron and Leslie to this point in time. For such a surprising twist, the Ron and Leslie face- off feels almost inevitable as the underlying question of the show: What is the role of gov- ernment? It’s almost absurd that such a pressing question is more intelligently posed by a sitcom than journalists, Nancy Grace and politicians. How- DAVID TURNLEY But first he took a selfie. ever, “Parks and Recreation” isn’t a soapbox, and showrun- ners Goor and Schur open this final season with gusto and wit. Guest stars Jon Hamm (“Mad Men”) and Werner Herzog (“On Death Row”) make great use of their small roles and real-life person- alities. Recurring characters like Joan Callamezzo (Mo Collins, “MAD TV”), Tammy Two (Megan Mullally, “Will and Grace”) and Councilman Jamm (University alum Jon Glaser, “Delocated”) are also excellent, with the latter two’s new relationship taking center stage for the second episode “Ron and Jammy.” Mullally, Glaser, and Collins have pro- vided some of the series’ most memorable laughs and it’s great seeing them get a last minute spotlight as we enter the home stretch. “Parks and Recreation” has provided some of the funniest and most human moments of television of any genre in the last 20 years. It has made us laugh and cry — often at the same time — and it will be hard to say goodbye later this year. However, it’s also comforting to know that the beginning of the end was just as special as all that came before. NBC Just close your eyes and think about breakfast. WHAT’S NEW ON B Selma Rave, State Theater and Quality 16 Paramount Pictures A Parks and Recreation Season 7 Premiere Tuesdays at 8 p.m. NBC FILM REVIEW EVENT REVIEW TV REVIEW