M, 118 minutes
Netflix
3 Stars
Review by © Jane Freebury
The groundswell for civil rights was growing in 1972 but it took a Black American woman, a teacher from Brooklyn, to galvanise the mood for change when she pressed ahead with her campaign for president. This is a remarkable true story with much to offer the big screen. It also has a refreshing positivity that defies the gloom that can settle the moment this year’s US presidential election lumbers into view.
In this biopic written and directed by John Ridley, the story emerges of a woman ahead of her time. In the life of the remarkable American politician, Congresswoman Shirley Chisholm, there were lots of firsts. Including being the first Black woman to be elected to the US Congress, the first Black nominee to run for the presidency and the first woman to ever take part in a presidential debate. An actor with depth and brio is required for a role like this. Shirley is played with strength and conviction by Regina King.
With seven months to go until the Democratic convention, Shirley Chisholm began her run with a close team including campaign advisor Wesley McDonald ‘Mac’ Holder (the late Lance Reddick of The Wire) and Robert Gottlieb (Lucas Hedges), her student coordinator, and Terrence Howard as finance manager, Arthur Hardwick Jr. In 1972, the presidential election was open for the first time to 18-year-olds. No doubt, for some this contributed to a buoyant anticipation of change, but it isn’t what happened, of course, and the incumbent, President Nixon, won in a landslide.
A terrific public speaker, authoritative and down-to-earth, who always made time for a milkshake
Shirley’s election motto, ‘unbought and unbossed’, hints at everything that both helped and hindered her. There was uncompromising honesty alongside a propensity to want to call the shots. Her husband of 19 years, Conrad (Michael Cherrie), with whom there were no children, was willing to be her shadow, but the rigours of campaigning began to show their marriage was fraying.
It would have been painful for Chisholm that some members of her own family, including formidable sister Muriel, were resentful of her success. In an art-mirrors-life moment, Muriel is played by Regina King’s real-life sister, Reina, another name meaning queen. But Reina, who is also a co-producer on this project, is absolutely on board here.
With her independent frame of mind, the fascinating character of Congresswoman Chisholm, or ‘Mrs C.’ as she is known to her associates, has a bracing freshness today. Fifty years on, such frankness probably wouldn’t survive in today’s sceptical, cynical political arena. It is a tonic to watch King bring her to life, though, in a script that reflects many of her actual public statements. Shirley was a terrific public speaker, authoritative and down-to-earth, but she was never too busy to pause for strawberry milkshake.
Consistent with the film’s meticulous eye, the seventies come to life in fine detail in the fashions, the cars, the household décor, and the right to smoke on aeroplanes. King wears a tiny prosthetic irregularity among her front teeth. A clip of the real Shirley Chisholm later in the film confirms it was there. It is a minor detail, touchingly included, while it is King’s upbeat performance that carries the film.
The real Mrs C, one for smart, pithy statements, could have made the screenplay harder and sharper
In what today might look like reckless adherence to principle, she was fearless and outspoken, true as she saw it to the Christian faith that underpinned her life. It was a matter of principle above political nous, for instance, when she took the risk of paying a visit to an infamously racist state governor of the time, George Wallace, who had survived an assassination attempt.
The film’s run time is long, and it tends to sentimentality. The real Mrs C, who had a way with words and made smart, pithy statements, could have taken to it with her schoolteacher’s pencil and made it harder and sharper.
Ultimately, Shirley’s message at the end of her seven-month run for nomination was to remind people of what was possible. She would leave it to others to reach her goals tomorrow.
Although she had robust support among the minority communities in New York, it is easy to see that the electorate at large wasn’t quite ready for her. Even some prominent feminists weren’t. Chisholm claimed she met more opposition to her campaign for being a woman than for being Black, and that is worth reflecting on.
First published in the Canberra Times on 25 March 2024. Jane’s reviews are also published on Rotten Tomatoes