Shirley

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.

This is a biopic of Shirley Chisholm (Regina King). In 1968, she became the first black woman to be elected to the United States Congress. The former school teacher is dismissed and told to wait her turn. She decides to run for President in 1972.

This is a straight biopic. I don't think that a failed run to a Democratic nominee who got destroyed by Nixon is actually that compelling of a story. The most compelling aspect is her marriage. That could be something there. The movie does something similar with the sister, but it's not set up well enough. Maybe a flashback with the father would help. The actors are great. The movie needs more imagination. It needs a better entry point. Barbara Lee could be that doorway. The movie could be told from her point of view.

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.

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's greatest strength is how it shines a light on an underappreciated and pivotal figure in American history whilst emphasising her perseverance. However, it remains frustrating to see these fact based stories told in such a conventional fashion as it would feel like a straight to TV film if it wasn't for the star studded cast.

Regina King gives it her all, embodying Shirley's resilience in a way that carries the film. Terrence Howard and Lucas Hedges do a fine job in their supporting roles and it's a gift to still get to see Lance Reddick being this good in films a year after he passed. It's a true testament to his commitment and work ethic.

John Ridley's direction is mostly fine. Nothing stands out and he's content to let the performances take centre stage. The only aspect that is noticeable is the lighting, which becomes really distracting as it goes along because so many scenes are overly exposed in a way that makes it feel cheap.