Shirley

"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."

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.

Congresswoman Shirley Chisholm (Regina King), the first African-American woman elected to the House of Representatives, was an inspiring, trailblazing politician, particularly in the areas of race and gender politics. After winning her seat in Congress in 1968, she later went on to run for the Democratic Party nomination for President in 1972. And that impressive background, one would think, should provide the basis for an engaging, uplifting film biography. Unfortunately, writer-director John Ridley's take on this groundbreaking, often-unappreciated pioneer misses the mark in a number of ways. The biggest problem is a script that tries to cover too much ground in its 1:58:00 runtime, addressing an array of elements from Chisholm's personal and political life and not covering either area particularly well, most notably in the film's first half before settling down in the picture's back end. The narrative jumps around so much that the picture becomes choppy and unfocused - almost incoherent at times - primarily due to some inexplicably mystifying film editing and a lack of sufficient explanation and back story, especially for those who may not know much about the protagonist's life going in. The film also features some rather questionable casting choices, such as the selection of actor W. Earl Brown to portray Alabama Governor George Wallace, who neither looks nor sounds anything like the conservative Southern Democrat who also ran for President in 1972 and was subsequently shot during the campaign. Even King's performance is somewhat uncharacteristically lacking as she struggles mightily to definitively capture Chisholm's singular demeanor and vocal inflections, qualities that sometimes don't always resonate, despite the actress's strong physical resemblance to her character. The real standout here is Lance Reddick, who gives one of his career's best portrayals (as Chisholm's political mentor) in one of his last screen performances. It's disappointing that this inspirational social and political leader hasn't received the worthy cinematic tribute she truly deserves. Perhaps "Shirley" might have worked better as a miniseries than as a standalone vehicle, as that format likely would have provided a better option for more fully telling her story in all of the detail it seeks to depict here. Indeed, for someone who endeavored to rise up to the challenges she faced, it's disheartening that the film seeking to depict that effort doesn't match what she so earnestly sought to accomplish.

Far be it from me to cast aspersions on someone who looks at a life like Shirley Chisholm's and has to choose just enough for a two-hour biopic. But this Netflix film, produced by Regina King and written and directed by John Ridley (whose Oscar-winning "12 Years a Slave" was phenomenal), is a bit lackluster. I don't think it uses the best cross-section of an amazing life, with just the Wikipedia entry alone presenting so much possible material for a biopic.

Regina King is excellent in the title role and the movie is well-intentioned but ultimately lacking in what made her so memorable, focusing solely on her 1972 presidential run with nothing about her work on the ERA or even how she first made it to Congress. The script feels like it takes her quotations and builds a movie around them; you can almost see the pullquote on the screen. Her famous tagline "unbought and unbossed" went unmentioned and unexplored in the entire movie, aside from one sign in the background of a scene. I'd still recommend watching this serviceable film, but keep your expectations in check.

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.