Shirley

Shirley Chisholm shattered glass ceilings in Congress, but the film 'Shirley' doesn't quite move the needle in the biopic genre. It's an earnest, straight-forward film, buoyed by a stand-out performance by Academy Award-winner Regina King.

'Shirley' focuses almost entirely on Chisholm's campaign for the Democratic presidential nomination in 1972. There's a lot of organizing and political strategizing. But we don't get to know Shirley the person and the movie has zero backstory.

As important as Shirley Chisholm was in American politics, the film lacks a sense of drama; this can be attributed to limiting the narrative to Chisholm's campaign, which viewers know will fall way short of the finish line.

Chisholm had a long career in Congress, winning eight terms. We don't see any of that. Nor do we see much of Chisholm's personal life and none of her pre-Congressional career as a school teacher in Brooklyn. Her life might have made for an interesting mini-series on Netflix, which produced the film.

Surely, 'Shirley' does have its attributes. The period costumes, sets and soundtrack all transported me to back in the day. For me, the best scene in the film was a tense powwow between Chisholm and the California leader of the Black Panthers, hosted by actress Diahann Carroll. Who knew?

'Shirley' is an OK film, but I wanted to know more about Shirley the person.

Shirley Chisholm has been up there among my heroes. She was a small, thin woman with a distinctive voice and speech pattern. And when she spoke, one couldn't help but listen. Powerful, powerful leader.

I feel this film did not do her justice. Don't get me wrong, it was okay. But okay does not cut it for someone as important as Shirley Chisholm should be considered.

One thing for sure, she had no Island accent. I did not feel Regina King channeled her well. Not were the other actors very strong. Everything was surface. No introspection, no deep thinking exposed.

Perhaps it would have been more interesting to see how she got to Congress and her achievements there.

The movie chronicles the efforts of the first black US Congresswoman Shirley Chisholm to get a nomination to run for President of the United States. The incidents in her life in 1971-72 are in focus here and the movie is by no means a biopic. ( I am only focusing on the movie since I have no knowledge of real life incidents relating to her). One can see that an ordinary middle class black lady in US is able to pursue her dream to reach the highest office of the land with hardly any resources at her disposal and how she ruthlessly bulldozes her way in the face of adversities. Her husband doesn't think she has any chances and her sister is upset with the ridicule being heaped upon them by the public in general. She doesn't like her staff using the word " Can't " and she lovingly manipulates people to give in to her plans. She is confident and plucky while displaying a cool demeanor when facing issues .( She is described as 100 lbs of nuclear energy). Watch her in her " never say die" attitude even when she gets around 4% of the votes. She is happy making a beginning for others and considers herself as a catalyst for change.

With some good direction by John Ridley Regina King gives a spirited performance and does project the nuances of her complex character to near perfection. In a way she underplays the role convincingly. Regina's sister Reina plays the role of her on screen sister very effectively.

"Shirley" (2024) sets out to capture the groundbreaking, albeit unsuccessful, 1972 presidential run of Shirley Chisholm, the first Black woman elected to the United States Congress. The film straddles the line between historical homage and cinematic spectacle with the grace of a tightrope walker in a windstorm. It's commendable in its ambition, like attempting to solve a Rubik's Cube blindfolded - admirable, but you kind of wonder why.

The movie is ok, and by "ok," I mean it's like that lukewarm cup of coffee you forgot about but decide to drink anyway because, well, caffeine is caffeine. The narrative attempts to juggle Chisholm's political struggles, personal trials, and historical context, occasionally dropping the ball but mostly keeping it in the air. The performances are robust, channeling the essence of the 70s so convincingly you can almost smell the vintage cologne and see the questionable fashion choices off-screen. However, at times, it feels like the film is more of a spirited reenactment than a deep dive, skimming the surface like a stone over water, touching on depth but never fully plunging in.

Where "Shirley" shines, though, is in its unwavering commitment to reminding us of a story that deserves to be told, even if it does so with the finesse of a sledgehammer to a nail. It's like watching your dad use a smartphone; the effort is there, the process is painful, but the outcome is mostly what you hoped for. In a sea of historical dramas that take themselves too seriously, "Shirley" is refreshingly self-aware, winking at its audience from time to time with on-the-nose dialogue and scenes that feel like they were directed by someone who binge-watched every political drama on streaming services. In the end, "Shirley" is a decent watch, the kind you'd recommend to a friend with the caveat, "It's interesting, but keep your expectations in check - like, way in check."

As "Shirley" (2024 release; 118 min) opens, we are reminded that Brooklyn's Shirley Chisholm was the first Black woman elected to the US Congress, in 1966, among a sea of white males newcomers. We then go to "December, 1971" as Chisholm decides to run for the US presidency in a crowded field and with little chance of actually winning.... At this point we are 10 minutes into the movie.

Couple of comments: this is the latest from writer-director John Ridley (best known for his script for "12 Years A Slave"). Here he looks back at what basically amounts to a footnote in US political history. Question: who was the first Black woman elected to US Congress? Answer: Shirley Chisholm. Question: who was the first Black woman to run for president? Answer: Chisholm again. This film focuses solely on her 1972 presidential run, and hence this is NOT a biopic of Shirley Chisholm. We are given no background or context, none whatsoever, on how this woman got elected to Congress in the first place, or what she did in Congress. As to the movie itself, it struggles to get off the ground, although there are some good moments, in particular towards the end. The movie benefits enormously from the strong lead performance by Regina King ("If Beale Street Could Talk"). Lucas Hedges plays Robert, a national student representative. Bottom line is this: we all know the outcome of Chisholm's 1972 presidential run before we even watch this, so the assumption is that we watch this for the journey, rather than the end result. Turns out that journey isn't all that interesting, even if the concept itself (a Black woman running for president? In 1972? She is DEACDES ahead of her time) is momentous. I'd rather have watched and learned how Chisholm raised to prominence to begin with by getting elected to Congress in the first place. As a complete aside, I must point out that significant chunks of the movie were filmed in Cincinnati (where I live), standing in once again for New York of the 1960-70s (see also Todd Haynes' "Carole"). Also this: couldn't the film makers come up with a sharper movie title than the lame and generic "Shirley"?

"Shirley" received a one week limited theatrical run in Mid-March and then starting streaming on Netflix last week. "Shirley" is currently rated a respectable 70% Certified Fresh on Rotten Tomatoes. That feels a little high to me. "Shirley" is well-meant, for sure, but I'd rather have watched a biopic of this barrier breaking woman. If you have any interest in politics, I'd readily suggest you check this out, and draw your own conclusion.