SELMA the movie; questions as to historicity?

There is a new movie coming out next week titled SELMA about the civil rights struggles of the 60s. I believe it is one of the first such movies dealing with this subject and therefore very important especially for our young people who were born after these events occurred; you might call it a dramatized history lesson which every child should be familiar with.

As important as I feel this movie is to our society, I was a little flabbergasted to read in the New York Times that the movie may have taken some liberties with historic facts. Some historians argued that the portrayal of Lyndon B. Johnson and what he actually did during those times was actually false. It is one thing to embellish the truth but it is another to flat out lie.

As a history nut, I am very concerned about history revisionists who try to portray what happened in a way that is closer to what they want to believe happened than what really (actually) happened.

This is something the Japanese, among others, have tried and continue to try to do as they revise the history of their behavior during WWII. They are trying to justify some of their actions during the war and shine a gentler light on the atrocities committed by their soldiers. This to me is reprehensible.

In the case of the SELMA movie which I have not seen yet, the critics who include people who were in the Johnson administration (Joseph Califano) during those times are adamant in defending what really happened especially when it came to what Johnson did or did not do.

It appears, at least at this early date that the movie tries to minimize the role of Johnson in this struggle and actually tries to portray him as an obstacle to the struggle which historians say is the opposite of the truth.

This is dangerous in the sense that many people seeing the movie and especially young people will take the movie as factual in all respects and that will temper their judgment of this particular time in history.

The director Ava DuVernay defends herself saying that she was not going to make a movie about a white savior but does herself a disservice by not defending her movie on historical grounds. Of course it is her picture to make but because I think this movie is so important to our society, it should be perfectly factual when depicting historical events.