I don’t think “Selma” should have been nominated for the Best Picture Oscar, though it was.
I’m not upset that its star, David Oyelowo, or its director, Ava DuVernay, weren’t nominated. I wouldn’t have voted for them either.

Clearly, I must be a racist.

At least that seems to be the logic behind the uproar over “Selma” being “snubbed” in several Oscar categories. The nominees in the four acting categories and the contest for Best Director are all white. This must mean, the thinking goes, that Oscar voters cast their votes based on race, not achievement.

Oh, and DuVernay not getting nominated for Best Director? That’s also misogyny, pure and simple. The academy hates women. Me, too, apparently.

Here’s a crazy thought: Oyelowo wasn’t nominated because more voters thought Steve Carell, Bradley Cooper, Benedict Cumberbatch, Michael Keaton and Eddie Redmayne were better in their roles. (And if anyone got snubbed, I’d say it was Ralph Fiennes for “The Grand Budapest Hotel.”) And DuVernay wasn’t nominated because more voters thought Wes Anderson, Alejandro Inarritu, Richard Linklater, Bennett Miller and Morten Tyldum did a better job with their films.

That’s what I believe was behind the voting in both categories. I understand that, being a white male, my perspective might be suspect to some, but I don’t think there’s much I can do about that.

I’m glad people are pointing out the lack of minorities among the top nominees. Though I don’t believe it represents racism in voting, it does suggest that not enough good roles, or opportunities to direct quality films, are available for minorities (and, in the case of directing, women).

But back to “Selma.” To me, it’s not only a good film, but an important one. Not enough people know, except in the vaguest terms, about who the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. was and what he, other black Americans and civil-rights workers, were up against in the 1960s. It’s hugely important that no one forget, which is why “Selma,” like Holocaust-related films such as “Schindler’s List” and “The Pianist,” transcend most movies in terms of importance. And racism and antisemitism clearly remain relevant topics today. “Fruitvale Station” is a great film about contemporary racism.

But there’s a difference between a great film and a good (or even bad) film with great intentions. This doesn’t just apply to films about social issues; it could be one of those inspirational sports movies. You know the kind: Films, based on true stories, about underdogs who battle the odds and struggle their way to victory. Not a dry eye in the house! Who cares if the movie is trite and formulaic? You must have a cold heart not to love it!

I’m not a big fan of feeling this kind of emotional blackmail, and I see something similar going on with “Selma” and the Oscars. “Selma” is a good, well-meaning history lesson, told with a kind of TV-movie earnestness and quality. It’s not as intellectually challenging or groundbreaking or artistically daring or emotionally raw as other, better movies. It’s not nearly as good as “Fruitvale Station” or “12 Years a Slave” (last year’s Oscar winner, by the way) -- or “Boyhood” or “Birdman.” At least, in my opinion.

I don’t think that makes me a racist. But if you think it does, you’re welcome to your opinion.

Tim Miller is the Cape Cod Times’ features editor and film critic. H’s reviews can be found at www.capecodonline.com/entertainment. To follow him on Twitter, go to @TimMillerCritic.