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

