Why did you give "Selma" a rating of 1? - Selma (2015) Discussion

[–] fudbot-137-204912 10 years ago

This movie does make LBJ look like a villain. It even see suggests that LBJ had something to do with with killing MLK! That's just wrong. The actor playing MLK doesn't have enough gravitas to play such a role.

reply

[–] Red-125 10 years ago

Dear fudbot, Thanks for writing. I can see it from your perspective, although I didn't see it that way. I thought LBJ came across as a pragmatist, rather than a villain. I thought J Edgar Hoover was the villain, which reflects reality as I see it. I also thought the MLK actor was good, but that's a matter of opinion. In any event, I respect your thoughts, which are clearly genuine. Red-125

reply

[–] MaDJiK 9 years ago

Story is good but no merits for the movie, a bit boring, so I would have rated it 6 without camera shaking. Only 4 because of this bad director.

--
Web dev and computer news http://azure-dev.kiao.net/

reply

[–] Red-125 9 years ago

Dear MaDJiK, Thanks for writing. Well, at least you didn't give it a 1. It's hard for me to understand the "boring" comment. To me it was riveting. And, given the events portrayed, the hand-held camera worked for me. However, I respect your views. If we all liked the same movies, we wouldn't need ratings! Red-125

reply

[–] Michael71 9 years ago

I gave it a 10 I was blown away by it, and if I really like and appreciate a film and I think it is well done I give it a 10.

I imagine people give a 1 because they are trolls and are trying to get the general vote down and/or help other movies surpass this film ratings wise.

reply

[–] Red-125 9 years ago

Dear Michael,

Thanks for your thoughts. I learned quite a bit after I began this thread. For years I would think hard before I rated a film--should it be a 7 or an 8? Then I learned that for some people they will give a vote of 10 when they like the movie, and 1 when they don't. This weakens the system, but I don't see any solution to it. Some people replied that they give the movie a 1, although they hadn't seen it! My guess is that most of the IMBd raters rate the film honestly. When there are enough ratings, a few unwarranted 1's and 10's won't make much of a difference. When I go to a festival, however, and I see only 58 ratings for an independent film, I always look at the details to see the rating distribution.

And, for the record, I also gave it a 10, and was blown away by it. Red-125

reply

[–] Steamboy 9 years ago

I gave it an 8, but maybe I'll change it to a 7. I thought it was a good film on an important subject, with solid performances from the black cast and Tom Wilkinson, but maybe it lacked something, I don't know, "the master's touch". It wasn't exactly great cinema. That's how I feel about all modern films these days, they look like HBO productions, and I guess I'm also tired of all those real life stories, biopics, etc.

Anyway, people who rate a lot of films 1 are... not to be trusted (euphemism). Everyone has popular movies they hate for a particular reason, though.

PS: The Annie remake has a LOT more 1s than Selma! Undeserved in both cases.

edit: The racists are easy to spot, they post insults on this thread and rate all the films with a majority of black actors 1. You hope these "people" have gone extinct, that they're just a figment of nightmare, but no, they're real. Scary.

__________________________
www.1up-games.com Last seen:

reply

[–] Red-125 9 years ago

Dear Steamboy: Thanks for writing. Giving "Selma" a 6,7,8,9, or 10 makes sense. Giving it a one, as I've learned, means one of three things for this film: you loved LBJ, and the film depicted him in a bad light, or you are a bigot, or you are strange. For example of strange, "I gave the film a 1, although I haven't seen it. I often do that."

Yes, there are trolls out there, and anonymity means they are absolutely safe. However, for IMDb, most people appear to be doing an accurate job. I gave Selma a 10, so when I saw the number of 1's at that time, I decided to start my thread. When you start a thread, you can delete responses, and I had to do that for statements from two or three horribly bigoted people. Otherwise, I just let things ride along to see what would happen. Sincerely, Red-125

reply

[–] Xator_Nova 9 years ago

I gave it an 8, but I am very tempted to increase its rating after a revision and lots of recent thinking about the film.

People who gave it a 1 are really ignorant of what makes a 1/10. Dont worry, time will put Selma on its place.

"Citizen Kane" fan, "Frozen" fan, and "Boyhood" fan. ;)

reply

[–] Red-125 9 years ago

Dear Xator, Thanks very much for sharing your thoughts. 6,7,8,9,10 would make sense to me. 1 wouldn't. Some people wrote that they didn't like the editing. OK--give it a 6, but not a 1. Red-125

reply

[–] kenny-164 9 years ago

I was all set to love this film. I loved the way it started, with the Nobel Prize going to a very deserving Dr. King.

Then I realized the actor playing him was not convincing, and the way they portrayed LBJ was gratuitous and not accurate. I found those made the film unwatchable. Sad. 3/10.

reply

[–] lincicinci 9 years ago

Simple answer - this movie is very, very bad and unwatchable. I didn't hear about this film, until I read that is was act of rasicm because main actor wasn't nominated for Oscar.

Person like Dr. King, who was one of the most influental person of 21st century deserve a movie that is iconic. For me, this is blasphemy. Why?

Main actor - so not having a inch of harisma Dr King had. In the end that resulted in bad acting IMHO. I didn't felt tension, personal struggle "should I continue with this fight or not?!", I didn't see some human reaction... and my GOD the SPEACH - IMHO he ruined it.
Also, director, screenwriter and rest of the crew - they were below average. Only one actor did he job good - it was actor who played George Willis. But Tim Roth is mentionable for acting a bit of psycho character.

BOTTOM LINE: I would love to see a 3-and-a-half movie epic about Dr King life - whole life. From birth to the death. This guy deserve this. Anything else would be again blasphemy. :)

reply

[–] Red-125 9 years ago

Dear lincicinci, Thank you for your detailed and clearly honest answer. I disagree with almost every point you make--except for Dr. King's greatness--but good-faith disagreement isn't a bad thing. Sincerely, Red-125

reply

[–] lincicinci 9 years ago

Could you be so kind to give me your perspective, in short notice of course?

I would really like to get a second opinnion on this matter :) I'm asking you directly because it is obvious that you liked this film so much.

reply

[–] Red-125 9 years ago

Dear lincicinci, The movie was called "Selma," not "Martin Luther King." So I think it made sense to avoid a three-hour epic like "Gandhi," and just tell about Selma. I thought the acting was excellent. I thought the sense of fear and terror caused by the police was almost palpable. The movie displayed the courage it must have taken to walk alongside Dr. King, and to be nonviolent in the face of such horrible violence. So, although not everyone would think "Selma" rated a 10, as I did, I don't think it rated a "1" either. As I wrote before, both of us are sincere in our beliefs. Some of the people who gave Selma a "1" were bigots, and some were just strange--they hadn't seen the movie, but they knew they would't like it. However, it's obvious that you thought about it, and felt it deserved a low rating. No problem--an honest rating is an honest rating. Red-125

reply

[–] redmo_2003 9 years ago

Red-125,

I was moved to tears, for most of this movie. To see people act that way, and think that it's all right, they're only black. I only use that term because I can't bring myself to describe another human being by colour. The thing is, it's just a tool of hatred... I hate "insert religion/colour/sexuality here" because "insert hatred here" and it's justified??? humanity really baffles me :(

Before the trolls jump on my post, and devour me for breakfast, I don't give a crap. I'm Irish, and I care little for your country... Greatest nation in the earth is a title you give yourself, but you do little to earn it, your fighting men and women are great, but your citizens do little to promote your country, I'd work on that, I'd also like to share with you a secret.... Your not...

Ireland is...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_diaspora

reply

[–] Red-125 9 years ago

Dear Redmo,

Thanks for writing. I gave "Selma" a 10. I started the thread to understand why people would dislike the movie so much that they would give it a 1. It isn't clear to me whether you thought this movie was good or bad.

Many people around the world are angry at the U.S., but I had no intention of setting off a discussion about U.S. foreign policy. I think we should stick to "Selma."

Did you give the movie a rating of 1? If not, the question really wasn't for you.

Sincerely, Red-125

P.S. Not that many people are following this thread, so I don't think trolls will devour you.

reply

[–] tom245-32-153383 9 years ago

Wow, you replied to every comment on this thread, that's dedication 😀

I rated it low because I'm sick of movie producers using rights/illnesses to try and make their film "important", when they are actually using rights/illnesses to get some Oscar nominations and gain money. They don't care about what their film is about (a la Theory of Everything, Still Alice, Imitation Game, Suffragette), they're just out to make a profit.

Another thing... There is nothing in Selma that the 'film' format furthers the subject. Film adds nothing to the story. Its told as generically as possible. They get fantastic actors, expensive equipment and well-trained crew together and create something average that will be forgotten in 10 years time. It's a waste. Make something creative, non-generic and full of new ideas like Paul Thomas Anderson or Alejandro G Inarritu.

The documentary footage from the march is far more interesting than the film.

Selma is made so an idiot could understand it. There is nothing more in the film to think about or to take away from it. It's told really straight forwardly and it's the sort of film which you can't write an essay about because there is so little there.

The last thing wrong with Selma, is that it wasn't made for me. As a white guy, I don't care about black rights. I've always treated everyone as equal, and films like Selma and 12 Years a Slave, just make black people more angry. They're bringing up the past into mainstream conciousness. Its unnecessary. If they look to the future instead of the past, it will be infinitely better for black rights and society in general.

EDIT: I should point out that I didn't rate it a 1/10. I gave Selma a 5/10. The only film I've given a 1 to is Nightmare on Elm Street 2.

reply

[–] Red-125 9 years ago

Dear Tom,

My thought is that if you post a question, and someone answers it, that person should get a reply.

Even though the question was aimed at people who gave Selma a "1," a "5" is low enough, as you suggested.

I'll just answer some of your main points. Neither you nor I know why filmmakers make a film. Of course, they always want to make a profit, but I'm sure that in some cases there's more than that.

The film doesn't teach you anything if you know everything that's in it. Most people don't know everything that's in it, including me.

Films about our historical past *do* make people angry, but, the facts are the facts. I think that you really do care about black rights, as well as white rights, yellow rights, and red rights. Unless all of us have the same rights, none of us is free.

I think you can't really know about the future if you don't know about the past. This may be painful, but I think it's better to get these historical facts out into the mainstream. If for no other reason, it's that we don't want them to happen again.

All that being said, I respect your opinion, just as you respect mine. We can have a good-faith discussion, and agree to disagree!

Red-125

reply