View source for 329--Week 12 Questions/Comments

== 1 Movie as secondary source about the past (What did it get right? What did it get wrong?) ==


== a Right: ==

This movie got a lot of aspects of the 1950s South correct.  For instance, the movie showed in the beginning Odessa's sons bringing home from school fliers about the bus boycott, and how Selma had to pay her bus fare, and then get off to go through the back door of the bus.  ~Katherine Stinson~
As Dr. McClurken mentions, blacks had to pay in the front then get off only to get back on in the back of the bus. I believe that the filmmakers' choice to use that as part of the beginning scene sends a strong emotion through the audience, especially if they didn't know what was going on. -Lauren

The church has always played an integral role in the black community. I think the movie did a nice job of portraying black churches as the epicenters for the emotional and spiritual struggle through segregation. - Jason Ward

Dates and major events all happened at the right time, including the bombing of Dr. King's home. Through tear-fogged eyes, I was able to see that this was a heartbreakingly accurate depiction of a world where we referred to other human beings as dogs, and often worse names than that. The Citizen's Coalition seemed to be accurately depicted, down to the Confederate Flag as its logo. This wasn't an easy movie to get through, but that was the point. It wasn't an easy time to be black either. -Cash Nelson

I felt that the dissension between the groups was well depicted - Miriam and her husband disagreed on the issue, and the black family's daughter didn't get it either. I like that we could see all sides of the story through these two families. Blacks didn't all automatically think YEAH! Let's walk everywhere! It caught on through the meetings/rallies and some had to be convinced. And not all whites felt the same way about the situation either - and I also liked the progression that both Miriam and her husband went through - not affected, somewhat concerned, then taking action. Very powerful movie. - Elle

I found the depictions of the non-violent responses by the Montgomery black population to be very powerful. There is the scene where the middle son basically takes a whupping, resisting the urge to fight back, and the violent white mob at the end of the movie is met merely with song. Many civil rights leaders, like MLK, relied on non-violent resistance and this movie did well to exhibit the power inherent in non-violence.-Bryan Mull

I thought that the way the movie handled the black community's gender roles fairly well. Though in many cases it was the women out on the front lines protesting, earning, taking the long walks, in all the church scenes the authority figures were male.-Bryan Mull

Well it would be true that most of the leaders of black civil rights groups would be male although women played a very heavy role in the movement they were not given as much representation in leadership so I do not feel that was inaccurate. I also thought the bus scene at the beginning of the movie was particularly well done from an historic standpoint. I also felt this movie had a very good time progression you can see this especially as the actions of Whites against the boycott become progresively worse over the course of the movie. - Jonathan Bell

I was impressed with the overall accuracy, including the timing of events. I felt that the movie did a good job portraying what seemed to be accurate emotions and struggles of those involved.  They did a good job showing gender roles in both the white and black communities, however, i felt that they should have showed more men involved in the bus boycott.  It seemed that most of the male involvement was in the Church. -- Kellye Sorber

== b Inaccurate/issues: ==

I found Miriam's revelation  of the importance of Odessa and her desire to help out with the boycott more than slightly unlikely. True, Miriam has a good heart before her revelation, but the fact that she's willing to risk her safety and reputation to help out without too much thought is troubling. When I hear my older Southern relatives speak of blacks or watch their behavior around blacks, I hear the word "nigger" a few times or see them act differently around blacks. Old habits die hard. I don't doubt that some Southern white women did help, ''but'' that they were hesitant and a bit nervous in some layer of their being. Northern women would be more likely to be quicker to help than Southern white women. -Lauren

I am in no way doubting or disagreeing with your general interpretation Lauren, but I will say that according to the ''Rosa Parks and Virginia Durr'' reading from this week that it was likely for Southern women to help with the boycott. In that reading Durr said, "Then the policemen began giving tickets to the white women who were taking black women home."(225)Regardless of their motives, e.g. wanting their maids to be "fresh and alert" during work, or "I want my maid to be on time", Southern white women were helping with the boycott. As it pertains to the movie, although Miriam starts with the attitude of "I want you to be awake!", the directors give her a biography that explains her sympathy towards the boycotters. Miriam tells the story about traveling with her family to Portland in the 1930s and how the white children stayed in the pool even when the black boys had gotten in. What makes this story believable to me is that Miriam's character was given a broader array of experiences, but not a sanctimonious "I stayed in the pool" mentality. Miriam was definitely a take charge type, with a missionary's zeal, but her actions were sincere. - Jason Ward


Lauren, I didn't find what Miriam did to be very unlikely, as this was one opportunity for the caring housewives with no money of their own to make a difference for the blacks.  I don't think Miriam rushed into it, although we didn't see much hesitation on her part during the film.  First of all, she had always treated her maids well, although she also always knew her husband didn't agree with it.  She knew from the start that her husband didn't approve of her even driving Odessa, and she stopped when he found out and made her do so.  She didn't want to, but she did spend time thinking it over and finally determined that what her husband did was the final straw, the culmination of her long-held feelings that blacks deserved better treatment.  By making up her mind she was rebelling against her husband and the whites' sense of right or wrong, and she was aware of what consequences might be if the blacks won--she was in support of them. -Whitney Holcomb

Where were all of the real characters from the ''Rosa Parks'' reading?- Jason Ward

I agree Jason, I wish they had showed more of the real people instead of just making up characters. -- Kellye Sorber

Wow, sorry if I sound redundant there, but apparently Jason and I were apparently writing that at exactly the same time! -Whitney

--Whitney, you reminded me of another point that I wanted to say. I was so happy when Miriam stood up to her husband on her right to drive Odessa to work and told him that if he insists on running her household, that she'll involve herself in his business. After all, she does have a college degree. That defiance wasn't surprising coming from her, but suddenly  (thinking for what seemed like a day) she has a determination to get a job just so she can drive Odessa and have her own money. From what I can see, she never had a job before and she was wholly dependent on her husband for as long they've been married. I'm just questioning the likelihood that Miriam would change her career life dramatically. Helping with the boycott changes her and her family's life in any case, but going to work outside the home would impact her and her family even more directly. --Jason, I agree with you about her broad personality, but I viewed her as naive. She's had her husband take care of her for years and now she's taking large steps very quickly towards progression. Women in her place would have been more hesitant or taken smaller steps over a longer period of time, ''if'' they did anything. The behavior and views of Miriam's companions illustrate what many Southern women felt. With the time constraints on the movie, the filmmakers felt the need to speed the process of Miriam's change; but I felt it was too fast. Some Southern white women did help, like Virginia Durr; but she went to Wellesley College in Massachusetts. That experience in the North must've impacted her life in a positive way towards blacks (Source: http://www.wellesley.edu/Anniversary/durr.html). Unlike most Southern women, Virginia Durr had experience with black peers and got to understand them as more than inferior people who work for her. As far as I can see, Miriam has lived in the South all her life. -Lauren

The scene that I found most questionable was the end scene. Although I know Miriam decided to support the bus boycott I just find it unlikely that any women would go so far as to stand up to a mob especially when they had a daughter to worry about. I also found Miriam's change in atitude a little to sudden she never really talked heart to heart with Odessa before and after one conversation with her she suddenly becomes a fanatic to the cause even if she was sympathetic to the cause. - Jonathan Bell

I found the character of Norman Thompson (the husband) intriguing, specifically his attitudes towards the Citizen's Council.  At first, he seemed indifferent to the goals and values of the organization, but then he is influenced by his brother to regularly attend meetings as his views about blacks developed.  Furthermore, when his wife found out he was going to these meetings and asked why, he responded at one point "it's either that or the KKK."  In class, we discussed the uprising of the KKK again because of the bus boycotts.  What I want to know is how whites viewed the KKK during this time.  Did they undermine and de-value their purpose as Norman's comments implied? - David F.

When Odessa's daughter decides to ride the bus and the three white boys harass her would the bus driver really have stopped the bus and told them to get off. Telling them he would call the cops if they didn't and then telling them to never get on his bus again. Everything I have ever learned leads me to think that the bus driver would have asked Odessa's daughter to get off and let the boys alone. - Christine W.

== 2 Film's relationship to current scholarship or to primary sources from the time ==
This is an accuracy detail that I noticed:  When Odessa and Miriam are driving in town and Miriam they notice the policeman closely following them, Odessa says to just slow down some and they should leave her alone, which is what happened.  In Mrs. Durr's statements on page 224 she tells that police were cracking down on carpool drivers for going two miles over the speed limit.  Odessa was very aware that this was what was happening, not just that the police wee being suspicious. -Whitney Holcomb

I really liked the ''Testimony of Thomas Williams''. I felt the main idea of the testimony was to convey the ''de facto'' laws of the South, and how those laws were rooted in white supremacist tradition rather than American jurisprudence. It was the small but powerful phrase uttered by the bus driver that justified everything that happened to Williams and thousands of blacks in the Jim Crow era- "Your in the South now". Whites were able to get away with this behavior because they had the power to do so, and until the late 1950s no one made them do any differently. I think Williams exposed the crucial factor that would change life in the South- enforcement. "...Supreme Court decisions just are not enough. It is necessary to have a law to prevent them from doing these things." In the movie we see whites dominating and intimidating blacks because they could. The policemen were actively orchestrating that domination and intimidation. As was proven with the integration of schools in the decades to follow, enforcement of law would be the only way to ensure tangible change. - Jason Ward

This might be silly BUT... Why was there not even the slightest mention of the schools - Brown v. Board had already happened... how long did it take for the desegregation of schools to actually kick in? -Elle

If I remember from the readings correctly, the South continued with their segregation and Jim Crow laws even after Supreme Court decisions.  Much of the unconstitutional decisions did go in effect in the South until the federal government forcibly made the South listen to those decisions. --Ashley Wilkins

Jason, I,too, found Thomas Williams' account to be truly profound. In particular, when he discusses his experience in the jail. He said that he was treated peacefully, which to be honest I was surprised because as we see in the movie and from our knowledge of history this is an extremely hostile time for African Americans. He further explains how one of the deputies tells him he should consider him self lucky for being treated so kindly (... yeah, OK) and not getting his "head beat in" and in all "fairness" that is what would have happened if a white person stepped outside their bounds.  ''The Long Walk Home'' and Thomas Williams' account are both truly heartbreaking and it's sickening to know that a country who prides itself on democratic beliefs and equality for all citizens could have endured such an unfathomable period of history. --Mallory C.

I feel the movie does a good job at following the details given about the bus boycott in primary sources. The instances of the car speeding incidence and the attitude of the police was well shown in this movie by the scene where Odessa advices Miriam to drive slow because of tickets and the scene where Odessa is kicked out of the park by the police. - Jonathan Bell

== 3 Movie as primary source about makers/time/setting/genre ==

I don't know if this happened on purpose, but Long Walk Home was nestled in a chronology of MAJOR movies being made about growing up in America as a member of the black community. Others were Do The Right Thing (1989), Boyz N The Hood (1991), Malcolm X (1992), and Menace II Society (1993). Anyone know if this was coincidence or not? -Cash Nelson

I really wonder what the experience was like for the black actors making this movie.  So Whoppi only being born in 1955 would have not experience the bus boycott but would have experience other Civil Rights movements as a young child.  Was it hard for these actors to portray these roles? I cant imagine having to relive that kind of experience. -- Kellye Sorber

== 4 Public reaction/impact ==

By skimming through reviews on IMDB and going through Roger Ebert's website, the movie was generally well-received.  It did not get nominated for any major awards, and I don't think it made the money a blockbuster film would have, but its major themes are ones that are going to resonate with future audiences.  This film reminded me of ''Driving Miss Daisy'' because it focused on the relationship between one black person and one white person.  None of the characters were monumental to the effect of Rosa Parks or MLK, but it did show how important every single person was to the progression towards racial equality.  I thoroughly enjoyed this film and appreciate its message. - David F.

== 5 Other movies/questions of style/framing/storyline ==

The style of this movie was somewhat strange to me - the camera would focus on closer objects or people, or further objects and have the alternate distance one blurry. Also I remember a few rolling shots where it followed Miriam across the room, but she goes behind something and comes out on the other side. Another example - close up on the telephone. Strange to me, but artistic. - Elle

Did anyone have a problem with a movie about the Montgomery Bus Boycotts being told from a young affluent white girl's perspective? Was it just me, or did this movie seem to be a bit too focused on the evolution of Miriam into an activist, rather than the movement to organize a successful boycott? Granted, I still felt that this was a powerful depiction, I just thought that maybe the story of the black family should have been more clearly the "A" storyline.-Bryan Mull

I like this fact.  I think that even though you did not get the full picture you were able to get a better understanding of the confusion of the time.  The little girl didn't really understand what was going on so it give everything a naive sort of feel
to a hard and difficult time.  I think that by tell it though a young girl's perspective it allows the viewer to see the white perspective of what was going on, thereby allowing you to sympathize with the maid that raised the young child. -- Kellye Sorber

Also, I liked how they alluded to MLK without actually showing him. Is it just me or is there some unspoken Hollywood agreement that King will not be prominently depicted on screen? I was trying to think about this, and to my memory there aren't any movies where an actor portrays King. Why do you think this is the case? Is it because he was such an electrifying and dynamic person that no actor is comfortable risking their career depicting such an icon? Another thing I was wondering, how is it that there have not been any movies about the Freedom Rides (at least to my knowledge)? After reading James Farmer's autobiography ''Lay Bare the Heart'' last year I was struck at how compelling a narrative that the freedom rides would make for film. Certainly this would make for a better movie than Saw 38 or whatever number they are on.-Bryan Mull

Bryan, I have to say I agree, but unfortunately my answer is a bit cynical. Hollywood has, in addition to trying to re-define (read: stereotype!) gender roles, also fit racial roles into neat, little stereotypical boxes. Your cheeky inclusion of the Saw movies (they've greenlit Saw 8, by the way, even though only 5 have been made) is actually rather relevant, because no genre is more guilty of this than horror. After all, if any rule remains constant, it's that the black guy dies first. -Cash Nelson

The next point to make is that we have very few legendary black actors. Our most famous, Denzel Washington, has been typecast to an epic level. Man On Fire, Virtuosity, Out of Time and Inside Man are all the same movie, in a different setting, with different names. It's unfortunate, but as a culture, we are simply not ready to let our black actors shine the way we let our whites. -Cash Nelson

The movie seems to hold back a bit on showing the actual violence going on. The movie implies the violence is bad by mentioning the church bombings, but the couple of scenes of actual violence in the movie are relevantly tame. There is clearly an attitude of fear in the movie about the situation, but we never really see the real reason for the fear as all the characters in the movie get off ok. - Jonathan Bell

I found the filmmaker's choice to have this movie from the daughter's perspective very interesting and very beneficial to its achievement of historical accuracy.  At first, I couldn't help but chuckle at the fact that a young white girl was telling a story about one of the most influential movements in black civil rights history.  But when you think about it, you couldn't get a more objective point of view.  The daughter had no idea what was going on, she did not know the concept of race.  She only sees the care and protectiveness from both her parents and Odessa.  I think this made it easier for the audience to immerse themselves into the shoes of Odessa and other blacks during the bus boycotts, as well as Miriam, her husband, and especially her daughter. Furthermore, there are no biases attached to the daughter because of her attachment to her family and Odessa.  - David F.

== 6 Overall ==

I thought this movie was kind of short, seeing how much there was to the whole bus boycotts, and Civil Rights Movements.  However, I do think the movie was still good, and I was impressed with how much was fit into such a short movie.  ~Katherine Stinson~

I cried. -Jason Ward

No, seriously, Jason did cry. -Kelly Wuyscik

I sobbed. On more than one occasion, and loudly. I still don't have words to really articulate the way I felt after this one, other than to say I think it's the best movie we've watched so far. -Cash Nelson

I got teary-eyed, too, at some point, although I can't remember where.  Overall, I think this movie is an effective portrayal of this significant event in US history, since its details are often overlooked in classrooms.  It gets across the personal effects of racism to these particular families and how they had tolerated it but would no longer. -Whitney Holcomb

I liked that they didn't try to portray the monumental people of this movement in the film - there was no rosa parks or MLK Jr, which, to me made it better. Overall, very good film. - Elle

I have a bit of interesting information that I wanted to share with everyone. I was reading up on the movie just to get some more background information and I read that one of the buses used in the film was actually the Montgomery Bus Lines bus that Rosa Parks was riding on when she was arrested. --Mallory Cruise

After some of the films we've watched this semester, and comparing it to the length of next week's film, this one was rather short.  Not that I mind, it was nice to have a shorter film.  --Ashley Wilkins

I was amazed that such a short film (only 97 minutes) could have such a tremendous impact.  It was an incredible movie. -Kelly Wuyscik

I was amazed by this movie.  I was very impressed with Merriam's role in the movement and how she stood up to her husband, I could really see a push for equality for women as well.  There were definitely parts of the movie that almost made me cry. -- Kellye Sorber

I thought this movie was very well done. Yes it was short but I think it added to the movie in this case. There is no need to show the whole bus boycott. It would have made a really long really boring movie. It was just the right length to get involved with the boycott and subsequently the Civil Rights Movement that is growing and show how people were reacting without going overboard. - Christine W.