The magnificent Morgan Freeman was unknown when he starred as the spirit of Malcolm X in a Christ like return to Earth after his assassination. He seems to be business as usual but finds his mission has created conflict that even he does not comprehend. Through conversations, attempts to learn who this person really was becomes perplexing and does no advantage to the issue of racial peace. It's beyond frustrating to watch, not just because it gives no answers, but it places blames without real justification and seems to end up nowhere. Malcolm X claims here to be fighting for equality within the confines of the law, but only ends up showing opposite intentions. Yes, this is inconsequential and most likely forgotten, but it's like a simmering volcano ready to explode yet cooling down just before the final blow. There's also the unanswered theory of him regretting the actions of the past as he grows older, even after death. All this tells me is that the complex issues of racial tensions can't be lead by one person, one sect, one age group. It shows justification for anger and frustration, but gaining the needs of an entire race won't lead to any winners when hatred is the motivating factor. It's ironic that almost immediately after this, Morgan Freeman was cast in a major role on the soap opera "Another World" which strived to equalize the ratio of white characters to blacks, and worked for a time. Freeman's career after that turned him into a much respected actor, but this little drama remains a mystery as to how it got made without really contributing anything but frustration over its lack of substance on a truly serious issue.

I'm sorry, but I guess you had to see it in 1981.Part of the distaste here is that it doesn't really compare to Spike Lee's last good film.And the other part is Morgan Freeman. It's really hard to see him as Malcolm X. That's not to say that he isn't a good actor, and it is not to say that Washington is a better actor.Push comes to shove anyone will take Freeman over Washington for most roles...and Freeman does his best, but he just doesn't have it in his personality to capture Malcolm X. He's lacking the ominous intensity he's, well......it's honestly just really hard to see Freeman as anyone that's ever been militant.It's not unlike his role in Glory, or Robin hood, you can see him as the teacher, the father figure of a group of soldiers...but the moment he picks up a rifle (or in Robin Hood a sword) and threatens to harm someone else...you lose that willing suspension of disbelief.It may be easy to see him in the role of a Civil Rights leader...but not one as Militant as Malcolm X.It may just be me, but I like Freeman because I get wise and peaceful father-figure vibe off him, or even just the teacher vibe...and that's only a small part of Malcolm X.It just didn't sit right. The casting ruined the film for me. But like I said, it could be that I watched it in 2017, after the Spike Lee adaptation of his life, and not in 1981 before Freeman established himself as the teacher-father figure for the audience.

This film is NOT about the last 24 hours of Malcolm X's life. It is a 'what if' fantasy that shows Malcolm walking around New York in the years following his death, relating to the black movements in America and abroad. One can tell this isn't about the actual last 24 hours of his life from countless details, such as hippies (that movement wouldn't start for well over a year after Malcolm's death) a bookseller (in a dashiki!) talking about the death of the Kennedy children and Martin, footage of black people in afros on a TV discussion program (with no white host - remember, Malcolm died in February of 1965!), black FBI agents... the list goes on and on. The film takes liberties with history to make points about the impact Malcolm had, but such a form of storytelling can be dangerous, since obviously the one other reviewer here thought this film was an actual documentation of the last day of Malcolm's life. Who knows how many others think the same thing? I don't mind filmmakers taking such liberties, after all, one has a right to speak metaphorically about the 'prophet' Malcolm. But it's done in such a slipshod way. Morgan Freeman is one of my favorite actors but he portrays Malcolm as if he was made of stone: a dangerous thing when portraying a martyr. It's vital that people know that Malcolm was a flesh and blood human being. Everyone in this film though, is acting as if they were under extreme hypnosis. The whole film is lethargic, and will surely be confusing to those who don't know very much about the civil rights movement, or the independence movements throughout Africa. I guess for 1981, this film was better than nothing since Malcolm still hadn't been acknowledged by the film world (other than a documentary in 1972). But as long as one is going to watch a docudrama on Malcolm, skip this junk and watch Spike Lee's magnificent "Malcolm X". You'll get a much more focused, passionate, and correctly detailed account of the man and what it was that he stood for.

This movie tells of the last 24 hrs of X's life.. Morgan Freeman does this film justice.. A must see for any X fans.. Has real life X's daughter in it also.