Review of The Great Debaters (2007) by Hunter C — 07 Dec 2014

Debating, despite not being as glorified as sports (which are also wholesome) and suffering the mockery of such shows as "Futurama", is ideally a wholesome and respectable activity. This is primarily because it requires its participants to be informed, organized and sharp; even defeat is quickly eclipsed by the fulfilling sense of having grown in the capacity to engage in strong conversation. In selecting the story of the debating team from Wiley College as the basis, Denzel Washington manages to convey this well, but also takes things further by adopting a relatively unique approach to the age old theme of making a difference in a world percolated by prejudice.

As has been pointed out by quite a few, "The Great Debaters" seems to follow some typical formulas found in certain genres. The idea of a team forming in opposition to the prejudices that surrounds them, ultimately facing off against the "Big Guy", is also found in "Remember the Titans" and "Glory Road". On the other hand, the grim realities of racism were explored in the excellent "Boyz N' the Hood". In the end, this film is not as idealistic as "Glory Road" or grim as "Boyz N' the Hood"; it doesn't have to be. It utilizes familiar formulas in the most superficial manner, being not so much about debating as it is about people who debate to demonstrate their worth in a time when misfortune has way of following them around.

Denzel Washington and Robert Eisele have done a commendable job in portraying the process of debating. Essentially the entire process is shown, from research to predicting the opposing side to articulating the claims. It's really engrossing to watch the members of the debate team develop their skill and confidence over the course of the movie, as well as be treated to some of their coaches training methods. I particularly liked that dialogue he would have them recite at the edge of a lake to get them in the right mindset. Much like the interviews in "Frost/Nixon", the debates themselves carry the tension of a boxing match, in which every successfully spoken claim hits just as hard as a physical blow.

The greatest achievement of the film lies in its treatment of the characters. A common mistake in this genre is the habit of overly glorifying its key players. This doesn't necessarily distract from the overall message, but does tend to rob some of the realism required of such a drama. The members of the debating team are wonderfully realized as distinct, smart individuals that are not exploited for cheap sentimentalism. Each one has a reason to try out for the debate team and, for the most part, we come to understand how their behavior has been molded by the world around them. Perhaps the most remarkable example of this is Henry Lowe. Within the first act, frankly, you hate the guy. He is depicted as an uncommonly learned womanizer who manages to win the affections of the only female on the debate team, by what seems to be nothing more than cheap flattery. Later, however, we learn that he developed these bad habits as a means of numbing himself from the horrific things he tended to witness. By the end of the story, he has discarded these tendencies in favor of a better way. It's quite rare that my opinions of an individual evolve so much over the course of a movie.

The other characters are portrayed just as well. Denzel Washington does his usual stern work as the coach Melvin Tolson, a poetry professor with a secret political agenda. He is regarded as a bit of a radical, but he is an educated and civil one who understands the proper way to induce reform. With a fascinating blend of wit and frankness, Washington presents us a man, who understands the difficulties faced by his ethnicity, is not afraid to confront his students with that reality and is determined to arm them with the tools to overcome those difficulties. Denzel Whitaker is also very convincing as James Farmer, a smart 15 year old whose life seems to be a constant struggle to understand why everything is so unideal. He kind of reminds me of the titular character in "Lucas". Interestingly, the only problem here is Samantha Booke. She is the only female on the debate team, which carries much potential, and she is shown to be just as capable as any of her teammates. The issue is that we don't get much of an idea of her personal life or background, and as a result she is left feeling a little less real than the others. It's unfortunate that the pivotal point in her growth amounts to a mere love triangle, which is a pattern that modern movies really need to eschew. Even so, a lot can be said about her decision at the end of the matter. I won't spoil it, but I will say that it is infinitely more satisfying than the route often taken.

Much more can be said about the film's boldness in acknowledging the social conditions of the time, but James Berardinelli discussed that in his article far better than I can, so I will leave it at that. Suffice it to say that this has become a largely overlooked gem. Though able to stand with some of the finest examples in its genre, very few seem to bring it up in conversation anymore. I suppose that's just the direction things have taken. Even so, I certainly recommend this one to those seeking a frank, honest tale that respects its characters and may even leave you a bit more motivated in becoming informed.