Historical Fallacies In The Movie Selma

650 Words3 Pages
In the movie Selma, there were several historical fallacies which created controversial debates over how candid the movie industry must be to the the public. The film suggested that there was great skirmish about the bill of rights (which was officially signed and conceded into law on July 1964) between King and Johnson, it showed King continuously press an ostensibly resilient Johnson to proceed with the voting of the bill. But in fact, there was never any uncertainty that there would be a voting on the rights bill; the struggle was merely fictional and made no historical sense. King and Johnson had a remarkable relationship; two men from different backgrounds, responsibilities and constituencies, formed an alliance to pass the bill of rights. “This faux tension was clearly added to make the movie more dramatic” (‘Selma’ vs History, 2013). The clear insinuation of Johnson dissent towards the bill, and the need of persuasion, outraged the public and caused the viewers to frequently jeer at the sight of him.…show more content…
Although Jackson was violently shot twice in a restaurant, he survived and after being brutally assaulted on the streets; clung to life for a week before dying, and became a martyr for the Selma marches that followed. The movie also averted from the true reason why King was absent during the first Selma march ‘Bloody Sunday’. It suggested that he was delayed due to his marriage, however, it was proven that King had originally tried to postpone the protest till Monday, but to prevent altercation permitted the march to proceed due to the large turnout. Initially King had felt the march would not last, and would inevitably amount to imprisonment. There was no documented proof of Kings marital

More about Historical Fallacies In The Movie Selma

Open Document