Mandela: Long Walk to Freedom stars Idris Elba as the titular character in this film adaptation of Mandela’s autobiography. You know that people loved you if you don’t resemble Elba, but they ask him to play you. Elba’s voice captures Mandela’s cadence. Come for Idris Elba, stay for Naomie Harris.
Mandela: Long Walk to Freedom is frankly a mechanical depiction of a great man that fails to successfully breathe life into historical events and convey information to people unfamiliar with Mandela’s life and South African history. It was as if someone used the American Civil Rights classic narrative framework and superimposed it on this story, which helps an American viewer to relate to the activist when dealing with boycotts and integration, but rushes over Mandela’s decision to shift strategy to something more violent without explaining what he meant, and how he pulled back from that impulse if he ever did, which the movie implies.
Another flaw of the film is that Mandela did not believe in one leader, but a movement, a fist, but while Mandela: Long Walk to Freedom enjoys depicting the rhetoric, it is still a biopic that equates the man to the movement and ultimately the nation. When the film showcases the others whom he is imprisoned with working as a team, you begin to see that rhetoric become dynamic, but it is too brief. There is one promising moment when younger activists join him in prison and chide him for being out of touch so he elicits them for information. The idea of a jail as a type of gathering place to gather and exchange revolutionary ideas could have been an excellent way of elaborating on what made Mandela an effective leader while giving shine to others in the movement, but the filmmakers drop the ball. The passage of time is uneven-sometimes abrupt and sometimes indiscernible.
If you are a chick in Mandela: Long Walk to Freedom, you can’t win. His first wife is too conventional to be married to this powerhouse. Of course, he has an affair. Then Winnie is briefly perfect until she is seen as too revolutionary without distinguishing her violent methods from his. Gasp, clutches pearls, she had an affair. I’m not saying the assessment isn’t fair. I don’t know enough to say whether or not it is, but if I watched a movie for 2 hours 21 minutes, I should at least understand the filmmaker’s point of view. What makes one Mandela’s violence and sexual wanderings better than the other’s?
Harris as Winnie Mandela stole the movie. She is so badass and fearless even at her most vulnerable that I couldn’t help but root for her. She peed on a guard! She made peeing on herself seem awesome and defiant. Movies always prefer saints over angry activists, but I love an angry woman. I’m not saying that Winnie Mandela isn’t problematic, but if she is, movies need to do better explaining why she is. History tends to sterilize and airbrush its heroes, and denounce and hide its heroines so Mandela: Long Walk to Freedom is no different. It did make me realize what is lacking in movies is the portraits of the women of the movement.
Mandela: Long Walk to Freedom is probably as strong as its creators. I did not find out until after seeing the movie that screenwriter William Nicholson said, “12 Years a Slave came out in America an that sucked up all the guilt about black people that was available. They were so exhausted feeling guilty about slavery that I don’t think there was much left over to be nice about our film.” Or maybe your film wasn’t as good, dude! They let you adapt Mandela’s autobiography!?! First, this film is a foreign film. Foreign films rarely do well even if they are perfect. Second, I don’t think that I even knew this film existed so it was not in a theater near me otherwise I would have seen it. Third, Mandela died when this film premiered, and Nicholson blamed the timing on oversaturation in the media. Um, no, that was free publicity so it should have had the opposite effect. Maybe it is y’all. If you bring that attitude about black films as if it is Highlander (“There can only be one”), then maybe your adaptation is inherently flawed because your vision is flawed. He thought Mandela’s speeches were boring and made up the speeches in the film. Maybe if you think Mandela is boring, you are the wrong guy for the job. Get the guy or gal who finds them riveting then have them try to convey their interest to viewers. If you are not interested, then why would I be? I’m glad that I didn’t see it in theaters and reward their incompetence.