Discussing the Diaspora as seen through an internal Black lens
January 1st, 2008
First of all, Resolve: This is an excellent film – go see it.
Now I will support my above thesis with an affirmative argument.
If you see the film you’ll understand why I’m putting things into these terms [resolve/affirmative]. It’s the formal debate format displayed in the movie.
But don’t get it twisted; you are not in a movie theatre watching 2 hours of intellectual jacking-off. Great Debaters is not a series of debates. Certainly there are debates in the movie. The movie centers around a debate team; and that’s the thing, a debate team is who the stories in the movie center around, but debating is not the story.

The use of the debate team in this film is akin to how sports teams are often used in movies – as a microcosm of society or a backdrop to tell a larger story of team work, self-belief, overcoming and triumph.
I think naming the movie The Great Debaters does it a bit of a disservice; as most people can’t find a reason why’d they want to go see a movie about debate, and neither the title nor the previews give you much of any hint of the other great story lines of the film. I had a bit of an interest in seeing the movie when I first heard of it, but didn’t become excited about seeing it until I read up on it for this preview post. I could see some meat in there and thought it would be pretty good.
To my surprise though, the Golden Globe Nominee for best picture ended up being even better than I thought it might be.
The Great Debaters is an engaging film that entertains as well as inspires; holding your interest throughout – there’s never a dull moment. That latter point is particularly important to me; there’s nothing I hate worst than a movie that drags. There are even movies that have the potential of being really good, that are drug down by long portions of dull dreary in action – over exaggerated long dramatic pauses that aren’t dramatic.
None of that here - the dialogue is excellent, often with passionate and or witty exchanges between the characters, each scene builds to the next and forwards the multiple story lines in the movie.
So, what’s beyond the debates in this film that I keep referencing? The Great Debaters explores many social issues that provide obstacles which require personal triumph: from Jim Crow racism, to female empowerment, to class warfare. The latter actually provided a bit of action to the movie, as the authorities use violence to attempt to stop black and white farmers from forming into a union.
The passionate flirtation between debaters Henry and Samantha provide another line of entertainment, along with the fantasy crush of 14 year old college wiz kid, James, on the unattainable older Samantha.

Speaking of Samantha Booke, this character was played by Jurnee Smollette; best known as Eve in the critically acclaimed Eve’s Bayou. In her first significant film appearance as an adult, Jurnee turns in a magnetic and inspired performance as the young lawyer to be.
Just as how she as a precocious 10 year old little girl stole the show while on the screen with co-stars the like of Megan Good, Samuel L. Jackson and Diahann Carroll; she again charms away much of the light even from academy award best actors Denzel Washington and Forest Whitaker; with her undeniable charisma and authentic flair.
Her stunningly sculpted face with deep dimpled smile; and feisty, sultry attitude probably doesn’t hurt from a male perspective either; but I almost feel dirty noticing, like I’m jonesing on my little cousin who grew up or something. Anway, back to the acting…
The acting across the board was right on point. Denzel Washington gave us a little something different to where too much of his normal self didin’t project through the character for the first time in awhile. I also think he intentionally played his character down to allow for a better ensemble performance rather than a tour de force of one actor. If so, it worked.
Forest Whitaker was well, Forest Whitaker again. In a relatively small role he was stunningly authentic as the high-achieving, very astute professor and preacher. He gave great balance to his characters somewhat frosty detached exterior, that seems to be a tool to manage his meticulous passion for education and his family.
Nate Parker and Denzel Whitaker (no relation to Washington or Forest; though his parents did name him after Washington as fans) did excellent jobs in their pivotal rolls as well. Parker, who previously appeared in Pride with Terrence Howard, is someone who I think you’ll see a lot of in the future; including leading the pack as the next generation of leading man in Black film. Whitaker, who previously worked with Denzel Washington as Macy Gray’s character’s nephew in Training Day, looks to make a great character actor.
Kimberly Elise surprisingly makes a small apparence in the film, as I did not know from any ads or critiques that she was in it. She plays Forest Whitakers wife and does a fine job as usual. She previously played Denzel Washington’s wife in John Q.
The Great Debaters is a triumph. Go see it.
Popularity: 27% [?]
posted in Cultural, Thoughts | | | View blog reactions | Print This Post
Related Posts:
19 Responses to “The Great Debaters, A Great Triumph”
Leave a Reply
test
Hi Yobachi!
I haven’t been by in awhile, my apologies! Happy Happy blogging and all other endeavors in 2008!
God bless you bro!
Bria
Thanks for this review. Every single person I’ve run into who has seen this movie uplifted it as much as you have.
This is one I’ll purchase for my personal video library.
Lynn
That’s great! Everyone at the movie seemed to enjoy it. The clapped and stayed afetr to watch the video montage while the credits roll. I left like 3 or 4 minutes after, and more than half the folks were still there.
Jurnee is a natural!! She stole the show for me… it’s amazing when you can go to a movie starring Denzel and he’s the worst actor in the film.
But I hope that this movies shows people how fun debating really is, I was on the debate team in high school and all i can say is WOW!!
The movie is wonderful and their code of ethics is one to live by
Who is the Judge?
The Judge is GOD
Why is he God?
Because he decides who wins or Loses not my opponent.
Who is Your Opponent?
He Doesn’t Exist!!
Why doesn’t he Exist?
He’s a mere descending voice to the TRUTH I speak…
I now live by that code.
Thanks for the review: you gave me a better feel for the movie than the New York Times, which kept saying that even though it was sentimental, it worked. The suggestions from the critic to temper “sentimentality” were, I thought, silly. (He thought the debaters should have to debate at least once against human rights! Did college debate teams propose an argument that blatantly racist even then? Even anti-affirmative action, going for a Pro Black College position would sound contrived rather than “unsentimental.”)
But I haven’t seen the movie yet. It’s on my list, though, and has been since I first read about it. It’s great to see Denzel Washington working as a great director (The Times said that much) as well as an actor.
Xilla, Jurnee definitely has a natural charisma, which you can see going back to when she was a child actor; and she know’s how to use it well.
I love that creed too, the most striking part being “He’s a mere descending voice to the TRUTH I speak…”! When you speak truth, isn’t that the way it is?
Kathleen: “which kept saying that even though it was sentimental, it worked”
It wasn’t even that sentimental. I meant to put this in my review, but in writing so much it got left out; but their were dark themes dealt with this in this movie. I don’t want to give it away; but it was the Jim Crow south, and they showed Jim Crow stuff; even vividly at a couple of points.
I also wanted to talk more about Denzel’s directing at the end, but again, the piece was already long enough. I plan to do an addendum piece though.
Bria, I forgot to respond to you. Thanks for coming by and checking me out
again. You contributions are always appreciated here.
Thanks for the great review, bro! I look forward to seeing this soon.
Calm down, Yobachi! Chris Hansen’s gonna be knockin’ on your any minute!
Glad you enjoyed my review Kev. Spread the word, I hope our people will get out and support this film so we can have more of this sort of thing to balance out the scales.
LOL, whatever Ms. Invisible; that chick will legal drinking age this year.
test 4
Thanks for posting this. I wasn’t interested in seeing it but your review has intrigued me.
Great, I did my job then
It really is a good movie, I’m going to see it again
Yobachi,
You made an excellent point on my blog. I also really like your website. You have done a fantastic job reviewing this movie whereas my review was a spur of the moment endorsement of the film, simply because I thoroughly enjoyed it. The idea of civil disobedience is a difficult issue with many different angles to consider.
I have not explored these issues deeply aside from the precepts taught in scripture. I have not ruled out the possibility that at times, some form of civil disobedience may be the appropriate response. On the other hand, my focus is on these precepts lived out in the life of Jesus Christ. I didn’t mention the last speech in the film in which the young boy considered violence as appropriate though I don’t consider violence to be appropriate in any case.
As a Christian, I believe that in his death on the cross, Jesus was a graphic example of how he, as well as we, should conquer evil. This idea is in opposition to the wisdom of the world that believes that violence must be met with greater violence for peace to prevail.
I was not without sympathy for the plight of those in the film. Racism and slavery are degrading, dehumanizing, and a blight against humanity. You and I were both created in the image of God and these oppressive institutions are evil. This may sound odd or disingenuous but as a Christian, I too suffer oppression though not nearly to the degree as those affected by racism or slavery.
Again, I deeply appreciate your post on my blog site and will continue to consider your thoughtful comments. Grace to you until we meet again.
Russell Roberts
Thanks for your compliments on the blog and this post.
I did not even go into all the points I could have made in the comments at your post because I did not have time to write a dissertation then, nor do I know.
I don’t believe that the Gospel should pacify believers into accepting abuse or oppression of any kind. I think you do some extreme misapplication of the precepts. Under your convention of application, a woman has to except brutal spousal abuse endlessly by her husband because the man is the head of the house hold, and you’re not allowed to resist authority as you see it.
I think you take too singular and narrow a view of the precepts. If not for the civil disobedience of Martin Luther and his fellow reformers the true word of God would have been totally whipped out as the state and the apostate church had merged, and rebellion to the Church was rebellion to state. Again, under your convention even the word of God would die if we simply had to do what government officials or other authorities say.
Isaiah 1:17 tells us to relieve the oppressed.
I don’t believe God created us to be abused. I believe it is my God given right to be free; and no man has the right to take that from.
This was an amazing movie!!!