Released: 11/4/05

Viewed: 1:35pm 11/6/05

Starring: David Strathairn, Rober Downey Jr., Patricia Clarckson, Ray Wise Jeff Daniels, George Clooney

Directed by: George Clooney

For anyone a little confused by the comic that is Senator Palpatine from Star Wars. He's been making himself a regular around these parts. To get caught up check out his history here at JLCM.. Now, on to the review!

I would say that normally I'm not drawn to pictures so deeply routed in reality. If recent films have taught me anything (Jarhead, Walk the line, Get Rich or Die Tryin', Elizabethtown, Domino) it's that sometimes the most realistic plots can be the least entertaining. A story based on actual events is limited by those actual events. So the story has got to be good, or your angle has got to be good. And having the word "Good" in the title twice is not an angle.

Thankfully there is something there.

Good Night and Good Luck is a story of the McCarthy trials told from the perspective of a major news team lead by Edward R. Murrow, that was in part responsible for taking McCarthy down. McCarthy had been terrorizing the country seeking out high profile communists living in America. Most people in retrospect view his actions as excessive. If anything they just added fuel to the fire of an already frightened nation, but those were terrifying times (I assume. 27 years young!) and there's no way to judge the atmosphere of the world back then.

We live in frightening times. i live here in NY city and honestly, I feel pretty safe. But in that era there was always the feeling of "the enemy among us" which I don't feel now. I'm sure to an extent it's true but the National Guard is also among us. I'm getting off topic.

Basically they were very confusing times and it's great that we had people like Murrow who, with a clear head reported the truth. This movie definitely portrays a special kind of bravery. the people involved were certainly at risk for targeting a highly powerful highly respected figure. But they did it for truth, which is admirable in it's own journalistic way of nobility.

The best moments of the film are the confrontations. It's weird, there's little to no direct debate only official reporting followed by response, followed by response. How frustrating it must have been to wait a week to here what Murrow thought about the Senators comments. Fortunately it was only 10 minutes for the moviegoers.

But those moments that, on the surface are just a report of the facts, are so much more than just that, because of the consequences. What will happen if we report this? Whose taking the fall? Whose responsible? Serious consequences. it brings and insane amount of drama an tension to what is otherwise a simple news reading. It's why these people are legends in their field.

The story is told almost exclusively form the perspective of the news team. Even to the point where we never see there home lives and we never see them outside the work environment, unless it pertains directly to the events surrounding the broadcast. This is done to the point where we never even see McCarthy except on TV in his transmissions.

That does sort of one-side the argument. This film is certainly biased, but if you think about it, that's all that 99% of the American public ever saw of McCarthy too. If we tell his side of the story it would either endear or vilify the idea of McCarthy. Why do either? Just show the facts.

Showing a limited personal life on the side of the news team could be viewed positively or negatively. On one hand the story becomes very focused. It's about McCarthy and how these people dealt with it. The End. On the other hand the filmmakers miss an opportunity to show how the work affected their personal lives which it certainly must have. Showing that effect would certainly bring a new kind of power to the movie. Less sterile, less isolated. So which way is better?

I'm not going to lie, I'm pretty interested in what long term effects these events had on the people involved. Tell what happened is important, but it's always nice to know what ELSE happened. Still, I've accepted that this is not what the movie is about. It's more a study on how these specific people dealt with this specific situation in this specific place in this specific time. See? Claustrophobic.

On those terms it's a pretty brilliant study. Unfortunately it's not as entertaining as I would like. Performances all around are great. David Strathairn will get an Oscar nomination and I'm sure someone whose "very clever" has already nominated McCarthy for his "best villain Razzie award.

Directions great too. I love Clooney, and his first movie Confessions of a Dangerous Mind was pure brilliance. He's able to capture some real moments here and just let the scene happen. It remind me a lot of a Michael Mann film the way you can easily become part of the scene in the eerie calm of it all. It gets a little heavy in moments which hurts the pacing, but the acting's good enough to cover it up.

Where the film lost me was in ending. You see the ending coming about 1 minute before the credits roles, and that minute is a frantic conversation in your head about how you can't believe it's over. It couldn't possibly be over. Sure things are resolved but is this REALLY how it's going to end. it's not a bad ending by any means it's just... the realistic ending.

Honestly I'm not sure what I expected but no one cleaves off the head of a fire spewing McCarthy as the fair maiden cheers them on. I've been ruined by Hollywood, I know. 6 out of 10 Points lost because with all that's going on, not much happens. I left the theater unfulfilled with the ending and questioning if there was enough of a story here to legitimize making the movie at all. It's entertaining in its way but more than a little disappointing after all the buzz this movie got. Looking back it's easy to see how much was done well, but is it enough? .

DVD worthy?: Maybe if I was teaching a class on the subject or something like that. Forgetting the specific story, it's still a really nice character study, but not one I would enjoy on a regular basis. I feel like if I bought it, it would be more as a status symbol than a source of entertainment. That's not really fair to the material.

If you liked this movie check out: No clue?

I would love to recommend some great movie on journalism, but I freely admit that any I've seen, I haven't seen in a while, and for me to recommend anything would be the equivalent of a blind guess. There are a lot of ones out there that are considered classics like All the Presidents Men. A movie I've wanted to see for a good while. I'm afraid I wasted my youth on Roadhouse.

If I had to recommend a movie, I would point you towards Clooney's first movie Confessions of a Dangerous Mind. That movie knocked me out of my seat a couple of years ago, and I feel like it was one of the better movies of that year.

Trailer Hitch:

There were no trailers up before this movie. I was surprised because even thought the movie had been out for weeks it was still a crowded house, so it was prime advertising time. Either a bunch of old folks complained about the excessive trailers or the good people at Regale Cinemas truly have kind hearts.

I'm excited about the return of Palpatine this week. I've grown very fond of him. I hope you guys like him too. I'd love to hear from you Palpatine fans out there, and I'm pretty easy to find via Live Journal, Message Boards and e-mail. Feedback from the readers has been great recently, thanks to everyone that's taken the time.

Palptaine has become a favorite of the Digital Pimp crew as well, it's not odd for us to reference him from time to time in conversation. Today's incentive has me doing my best Palpatine impression. Enjoy. And Thanks for reading!