Genres

Visitors Review

2012-05-25 11:47:40

History Unfiltered

This movie takes us back to the 1950s, a time when right-wing demagogues used fear and intimidation to drive the nation's press agenda - in other words, just like now but in black and white. Fortunately for all of us, one man wasn't having it: the legendary CBS newsman Edward R. Murrow, who created such a high standard for TV journalism that no broadcaster since has dared live up to it out of respect to his memory. Murrow's lonely, courageous battle against "the Red Scare" is an example to us all, though not so much the part where he chain-smokes unfiltered cigarettes. Still, a generation will always remember his integrity as well as his legendary sign-off, "Seacrest out." David Strathairn is excellent as Murrow. He is so dull, grey, dour and devoid of expression that we actually believe he has been dead for forty years. But the real find here is the actor who portrays Senator Joseph McCarthy. I didn't stick around long enough to catch his name in the credits and I don't see him on the Oscar ballot but whoever he is, he is really good. Scary good, in fact - I found everything he said very convincing. If this guy wants to get out of the movie biz and start a political career, it's his. Let's just hope he's one of the good guys and not another Schwarzenegger. Good Night was directed and co-written by George Clooney, who also co-stars and bankrolled this modest production off his Facts of Life residual checks. While the film's message is entirely relevant to our time, the b&w cinematography and jazz soundtrack is a nice throwback to the age of Eisenhower, I Love Lucy and principled reporters. So cheers to Good Night And Good Luck - the Best Picture of the Year!

2012-05-25 07:05:47

Kiss Off, Ya Commie!

Before there was Bill O'Reilly, Larry King, and Rush Limbaugh...there was Edward R. Murrow. Good Night, And Good Luck (which was Murrow's Trademark sign-off phrase) delves into the period of time where Joe McCarthy was full-steam ahead on his paranoid conquest against communism. With the help of co-workers at CBS, Murrow took on a quest of his own. To make a change. To take down Joe McCarthy for his ruthless treatment of innocent people and to clue the American people into the absurdity of McCarthy's accusations.Good Night. And Good Luck is filmed totally in black and white. Though, don't think that makes the movie any less vivid! The black and white actually gives the film a very crisp feel. It also enables director George Clooney to experiment with the lighting. The lighting was very well done and exceeds in giving the movie the claustrophobic feel that it was meant to have. Clooney also seemed to focus a lot of his attention on the actors faces. The film consists of many close up shots, which at some points was a blessing, and other times was a curse. The close-ups on Jeff Daniels worked very well since he has such good facial control and a natural talent to forget about the camera. On some of the close ups of David Stratharin, especially the portions of the film where the character of Murrow is broadcasting his show, an aura of overacting hangs over his head. It's not that he did a bad role, it's just that he was trying to hard to catch the dead-eye intensity of Edward G. Murrow. But in his defense, there are other times where the close ups look totally natural for him.David Strathairn does an overall good performance of Murrow. With the exception of the few scenes I mentioned above, the performance was a natural fit for Strathairn. The supporting acting, with the exception of Jeff Daniels was just...I guess the nice way to put it is plain. I expected a much better performance out of Robert Downey Jr. who usually rarely disappoints. George Clooney himself does a somewhat believable job as Fred Friendly, but just like Strathairn, at times the role was overplayed.The plot is based on historical fact. The footage of Joe McCarthy is the actual archival film from the 50's. Interesting fact I picked up while researching the film; When the movie was first screened, people complained that the actor that played Joe McCarthy was overacting. The funny thing is that it was in fact actual film of McCarthy's speeches. Though one thing that puzzled me about the film is the additional under plot of Robert Downey Jr. and his wife trying to hide their marriage because of company policy. It just didn't seem to serve any purpose to the meaning of the film.In a perfect world, Jeff Daniels would of at least of been nominated for a supporting acting Oscar, George Clooney would of won the award for achievmant in direction, and Robert Elswit would of won for cinematography. But in our world full of political driven descions and biased personal views, Good Luck, and Good Night had a snow balls chance in hell of winning any awards while dealing with such films as Brokeback Mountain and Crash. Maybe on a different year or era, this film would have been offered more of a chance to Academy consideration. But in this world of paranoia and terror, a movie so honest about the fears and compulsions that live in us all. The overall theme of the movie is what is important, which is said best by Ed Murrow himself: "We can not defend freedom abroad if we defeat it at home".4/5

2012-05-24 13:20:49

An important new classic

This is a fascinating movie, but certainly not empty-headed entertainment. It reminds you of critical lessons of history and it challenges you to think. I "shelve" it with the likes of Judgment at Nuremberg, Inherit the Wind, Grapes of Wrath, Schindler's List (Widescreen Edition), All the President's Men (Two-Disc Special Edition), Amistad, Amazing Grace, etc. A must see.

MovieGuy109 2012-05-24 04:02:13

Personal and provocative

Clooney brings this film to life like no other director could have.Clooney, who had been involved in some outspoken journalism issueshimself directs this with passion and power. The film not onlymasterfully uses archive news footage but also envisions what theconversations behind Murrow's news shows were like. The directorcombines the two and uses black and white to capture the time periodwith a talented cast acting the parts to perfection. Few films manageto convince us of time period and historical journalism like thispowerful film. Not only a great piece of work but a powerful historicaldocument as well. A real wonder.

jg167 2012-05-19 00:35:27

Its good, but also disappointing

As a docu-drama (i.e. trying to be like you were in the news studio ofCBS at the time) its well done. But I wanted more than that. Itsinteresting that Murrow's on screen presence as the ultra seriousreporter is depicted as just the way he is all the time (which may havebeen true, but seems a little doubtful). I found this to sort of dilutethe weight of his words (that I have heard before). You also getnothing about who Murrow and Friendly were, why did they do this, whatwere the risks etc. What did they think and feel about it, what didtheir families think and feel about it, what price was paid etc.Clearly Friendly and Murrow (and others) put a lot of their lives intothis, and must have been passionate about it, but that passion does notcome across. Its like the cast is on anti-depressants and having theiremotions compressed, no real highs, no real lows. It has this constantair of ultra seriousness, yet also a sort of superficialness. Its aboutwhat they did, but not who they were or why they did it. You get alittle of this in the one scene with in Bill Pailey's office, but itsnot enough.

2012-05-18 07:46:27

Whatever happened to CBS news?

Much in the same way as "The Insider", "Good Night and Good Luck" does a great job of showing CBS News when it was at its best--when it cared more about the news and not sensationalism. David Strathairn does a great Edward R. Murrow, and George Clooney is excellent as Fred Friendly. The film does a great job of displaying the struggles of Murrow taking on both Bill Paley but also Joseph McCarthy. Murrow, fighting to give the public decent news, realizes that news is becoming a playground for superficial stories, and tries to keep his show above such nonsense. His stand against McCarthy, while admirable, ultimately still does not save his show. A great story and great insight to Murrow.

criticalview 2012-05-16 10:04:27

Shallow story with too much hype; unfit for movie

Good Night and Good Luck was a typical Hollywood heart warming, feelgood kind of a movie that leaves us with nothing to wonder or debateabout. It simply presented us with a story about an evil man whothreatened our freedom (McCarthy); and quickly supplied us with thehero (Murrow) who confronted that man and saved our democracy, just intime. Wow, that was close! Thanks to Ed Murrow, now we can all sleepbetter, secure in the knowledge that we're safe and our freedom is ingood hands, namely the media heroes. The media continues to inventsuperstars as a way of romantically relieving us from the task ofthinking for ourselves and directly dealing with our problemsrationally. I am disappointed to say that this movie missed a goldenopportunity to make us question the practices of our trusted officials,then and now. Instead of stirring us intellectually into debating theconduct (or misconduct) of people of authority back then, and moreimportantly connecting with today's politicians' alarming violations ofour rights, it gave us a very simple good versus evil story with ashallow plot and obvious conclusions. And, as expected, it left usfeeling warm and fuzzy about our hero(es) who, as always, magicallysave our democracy at the end, leaving us with nothing to worry aboutor debate, other than the all important "less filling; tastes great"debate and Coke versus Pepsi dialog. The subject, our freedom, wouldhave been much better served if the movie left us feeling angry andthreatened by those individuals who rob us, and continue to do so, ofour rights.As a director, George Clooney showed us no artistic talent in buildingcharacters and exploiting emotions. He has followed in Hollywoodtypical approach of making a shallow movie that doesn't challenge ourstate of intellectual hypnosis. For such a highly controversial andsignificant subject, the film lacked any meaningful tension. It didn'treally make one bond with or feel anything toward any of thecharacters, as it never breathed any life into them. We were neverchallenged intellectually or emotionally into evaluating the charactersand their role during that time period because we never got to know anyof them well. Everything happened so quickly: the problem, its effect,and then the happy solution. I was never emotionally involved in thismovie and felt nothing for its characters. At the end of the film, allI can think is what was the point of that movie? This film could'vebeen better presented in a 20 minute clip on 60 Minutes. Additionally,several of the characters, like Robert Downey Jr. and his wife, were acomplete waste and their absence wouldn't have been missed at all. EvenGeorge Clooney's contribution to the story was very limited and hisacting lacked depth. I really can't understand why the critics likedthis movie, artistically or intellectually. But again, what do youexpect from the big happy Hollywood family where they're good atmassaging each other's egos and exchanging favors.Factually, the movie was misleading. McCarthyism went on for years anddestroyed many lives before it was brought down. It wasn't brought downby Ed Murrow, as the movie leads us into believing, but by itschallenge of other powerful institutions, namely the Army, the Senateand other powerful individuals, including the President. There weremany events that took place before Murrow's attack on McCarthy,including heated confrontations between McCarthy and the Army. Onemight argue that Ed Murrow's attack on McCarthy was a bit too late andcame at a time when McCarthy's popularity was on the decline, makinghim an easy target.

2012-05-15 19:47:16

Good Retrospective

This film gives you a good view of a small period of time where Edward R. Murrow decided to risk everything to confront the insane senator (wannabe fascist?) Joseph McCarthy. It's all well and good, and loaded with sentiment true patriots will appreciate (those of us who put this nation's belief in human rights before parties and demogogues.)The only thing you might want to know before seeing it is that, while dramatized, it doesn't have all that much in the way of thrills or build up in pacing... in other words you might not want to make it the main event at a party or something.

2012-05-13 06:01:05

Very Good Historical Film from Clooney & Crew

Joseph McCarthy was an unusual character in American politics and the events surrounding him and his paranoia scare regarding supposed Communists are legendary. This movie brings some of the hysteria of that era to the big screen, delivered from the perspective of one courageous broadcast journalist who had the guts to challenge McCarthy on live television. Ed Murrow was that man, and he rose to the challenge because he knew McCarthy had overstepped the boundaries of decency and constitutional law. He felt it was time that someone take a stand and expose all of this nonsense once and for all. This movie takes an interesting angle in the McCarthy saga and it isn't quite the angle I expected. I assumed this would be a movie that was basically a biography about McCarthy with an actor playing the role of McCarthy, allowing the viewer to see the Wisconsin Senator up close and perhaps get a better understanding of the motives that led McCarthy to behave the way he did. But this movie isn't like that. Instead, it presents McCarthy from the perspective of a broadcast journalist, with most of the footage in the movie taken from inside a broadcasting office. Actual scenes from the past are shown in this movie, with McCarthy interrogating suspected Communists during official government hearings. While these scenes are running in the background, the actors and actresses in the movie respond to what they see and calculate their next move. This movie takes its name from Murrow's signature close to his television and radio shows. He would always end the broadcast by saying "Good Night, and Good Luck" and it became the phrase everyone associated with this respected newsman. The film begins and ends with Murrow talking to the viewer and these segments are taken from a 1959 speech where he discussed the merits of television as a communication medium. Murrow felt that television had much to offer and was an excellent means for staying informed about the world but only if viewers pay close attention to what is said and only if they think about the pros and cons of the information fed to them from the people on the screen. Clooney decided to film this movie in black and white, which adds to its appeal. You feel like you are observing an actual moment of history. The black and white scenes combined with real footage of McCarthy makes this move seem realistic- like a hidden camera was placed in the back rooms at CBS News in the early 1950's and it has now resurfaced for everyone to enjoy for the first time. One other thing about this movie that I liked (but others may not) is the general chaos that is felt from time to time. Like I said before, most of the scenes in this movie take place right in the offices at CBS. There is a scene in a restaurant, one in a bar, and one in the Wershba's home but other than that, all of the scenes are from the offices. When the guys and gals in the offices talk, they tend to talk all at once so you have to decide whom to focus your attention. Some people might criticize this and other scenes like it because it's difficult to know what is going on and it seems a tad sloppy. But I liked it because it adds to the movie's realism. Journalists, when they are deciding what to report and how to report it, tend to be outspoken and like to get their points across. They talk all at once with little regard for order. The cinematography in this movie is interesting and besides the black and white, you get to witness plenty of indoor scenery courtesy of the early 1950's. Most of the people depicted in this movie are smokers and the sight of the toxic fumes billowing up from a lighted Kent or expelling from the mouth or nostrils of one of the characters catches your attention. Even if you're the anti- smoking type and don't like to see smoking on the big screen, this is one instance where you will probably be able to forgive the movie makers. Smoking was common during this time, and the sight of smoke actually adds to the cinematography of the movie. With the performances, let's just say that most all of them are top notch and well deserving of recognition. David Strathairn is the most memorable and he really has the persona and speaking style of Edward Murrow down pat. Clooney and his comrades are also very good. With the outspokenness, the clapping, the cheering each other on, etc, they portray the attitudes and mannerisms of journalists quite well. Overall, "Good Night and Good Luck" is a very good movie that shows how one man was able to make a difference by helping to bring an end to the McCarthy "witch hunts" of the early 1950's. It isn't a biography, so don't go into this expecting to learn a great deal about McCarthy as a person. What you will learn is how important it is to take these anti- democratic actions, like those of McCarthy and other politicians, more seriously than before. McCarthy may be gone, but his tactics and paranoia are likely to surface again in one form or another. Like Ed Murrow himself would warn, we need to take these threats seriously to ensure they don't go too far and to make sure that Constitutional protections remain intact.

le_wizardo 2012-05-12 15:11:45

A Milestone in American Film-Making

It has been awhile since I watched a film and became fully sympatheticand supportive of the views and message that it conveys. The movie isactually well-written, concise and to-the-point (all of which conveysgood journalism) which assists in generating the aura of the film.During these times, we have lost touch of the positive and productiverole of television or media in general, that is enlightenment,education and culturing and not just pleasure and entertainment. Thisfilm is not just about journalism, the freedom to speak and conveyideas or documenting the medial foundation for the constitutionalrights of the American citizen, its much deeper than that. I believethat it tells us subliminally, that the current ignorance, fear andunreadiness towards terrorism is due to the inability of journalism toenlighten and broaden the horizons of the viewers to current issues,policies -whether they be homeland or external, and actions theAmerican government carries out which may or may not be in the interestof its people. The closing speech at the end of the film suggests this.It is the responsibility of the media to pass on this information in aconsistent and productive manner so as to ready the viewers for thepossibilities and outcomes. Good Night, and Good Luck. :)

hoseapluma 2012-05-06 00:19:06

Boring

Just really dull. Long extended scenes of exposition, talking headsyakking from the screen. David Strathairn got the nuances of Edward R.Murrow down just right but just missed the essence. (Or it may be thatmy impression of Murrow, being 40 years old, is flawed.) The entirefilm contradicts the point being made in the speech that bookends thestory: TV, by its very nature cannot be a medium of extended,thoughtful debate. The "debates" in the movie were all just one talkinghead pontificating, and then sitting down for the bloviater on theother side to spew. The debate between Murrow and Senator McCarthy isthe centerpiece of the story, but there is no give and take betweenthem; they don't even appear to be in the same room. Some otherquibbles: All of the humor in the story falls flat; I wonder how manypeople got the interview of Liberace. What was the point of the romancebetween the Robert Downey Jr. character and the Patricia Clarksoncharacter? Finally, some of the themes and even the dialog ("They wereon our side.") were stolen from The Front, a much better movie. I know,I know, it's an "homage."

yen-tsai 2012-05-05 05:55:54

What a total farcical of a film!

This film has no tension, no character build up, no plot. While it isnot difficult to see what the movie is trying to achieve, this filmfailed to engage me into the period and the significance of what thecharacters were trying to do. Despite it's desperate attempt to put usin the period by filming it in black and white, I still couldn't helpmyself by feeling a complete and utter sense of apathy towards thesepeople or what they were trying to do. I simply just didn't care forthe movie, the character or what they were doing.Meanwhile,I kept hoping for more that'll ultimately bring the wholemovie together to make sense but ultimately, my patience was promptlytossed into the bin by having expected too much.

2012-04-29 08:24:00

6 Sets of 4 measuring spoons.

The sets/measuring spoons were purchased for gifts to my grown-up children. Thank you for your service.

asenkron 2012-04-28 22:59:19

A true but boring story about the press freedom...

The film shapes around 1950's the press's condition under pressure. Aclassical black and white view film is directed by Clooney.The story that is chosen is good for this theme.It would be better than that if it was in 1970's.The direction is very poor.I think George Clooney isn't so successful as his role talent.Almost whole story continues in studio and it got me boring.I couldn't find so remarkable comments.My comments come to an end because there is not too much thing tocomment.

2012-04-28 16:45:17

Stylish Recreation of Murrow-McCarthy Battle. TV News As Ideological Force.

In "Good Night, and Good Luck" , the Fourth Estate gets a good cinematic scolding in the form of a stylish black-and-white dramatization of the 1953-1954 battle between journalist Edward R. Murrow and Wisconsin Senator Joseph McCarthy, waged over the airwaves on Murrow's television news magazine "See It Now". The stated intention of director and co-writer George Clooney is to give the news media a lesson in civic responsibility, picking up Edward R. Murrow's banner in chiding television networks for providing nothing but "decadence, escapism, and insulation from the realities of the world in which we live". Now that we have a startling array of choices in news and entertainment on broadcast and pay television, it seems clear that the market for penetrating commentary and dissent is small. But viewers may the appreciate the similarities between the actions of House Un-American Activities Committee and more recent trampling of civil liberties in efforts to combat terrorism. In October 1953 at CBS Studios, popular television journalist Edward R. Murrow (David Strathairn) and producer Fred Friendly (George Clooney) decide to take on the communist witchhunt that is sweeping the nation in the early years of the cold war. "See It Now" runs a story about Air Force Lieutenant Milo Radulovich, who has been dismissed from the armed forces on account of his father's and sister's alleged left-wing politics. Radulovich never knew the charges against him, as they were sealed from even his lawyer. That was the beginning of a battle of words between Senator Joseph McCarthy and Edward R. Murrow that culminated in April 1954 when McCarthy took to the airwaves himself with an impassioned, rambling response to Murrow's accusations that HUAC displayed a "hysterical disregard for decency...and the rights preserved by the Constitution" in condemning Americans as communist subversives based on hearsay. Milo Radulovich was reinstated, demonstrating the power of television and encouraging the coterie of liberal journalists on staff at "See It Now", as CBS mogul William Paley (Frank Langhella) tried to balance ideals with the realities of commercial television. "Good Night, and Good Luck" is a polemic in conversations and vignettes more than a traditional narrative. It's an interesting look behind the scenes of television news in the 1950s, where we see everything from Murrow interviewing Liberace for his celebrity show "Person to Person", to Joe and Shirley Wershba (Robert Downey, Jr. & Patricia Clarkson) hiding their marriage, to journalists forced to sign statements denying any communist connections. It's part documentary: Joseph McCarthy is represented by himself using old HUAC and "See It Now" footage. Dianne Reeves sung the jazz soundtrack live. Good writing by George Clooney and Grant Heslov and fantastic editing by Stephen Mirrione keep it all from seeming disjointed. Unaffected performances by a magnificent cast keep the audience connected to the people, not just the politics. I'm very fond of black-and-white film, and "Good Night, and Good Luck" does not disappoint. It's relatively low budget and shows no shortage of low-key b&w cliches. But the rich, sensual shadows and occasional new lighting trick won me over. It's beautiful. Between this and "Confessions of a Dangerous Mind", George Clooney impresses me as a director capable of using non-traditional narrative and visual styles with great success. Edward R. Murrow was a confirmed self-righteous crusader for many a cause. "Good Night, and Good Luck" doesn't deny that. It does explore the power of the media and the excesses of "national security".The DVD (Warner Brothers 2006): Bonus features include one featurette, an audio commentary, and a theatrical trailer (2 min). "Good Night and Good Luck Companion Piece" features interviews with the cast and writers, as well as with people who knew and worked with Edward R. Murrrow, including Murrow's son and Milo Radulovich. They discuss the political atmosphere of the time, television news then and now, and the goals of the film. The audio commentary by George Clooney and Grant Heslov is frustratingly casual at times. It's spotty and includes some technical details, some additional history, and some discussion of themes. Subtitles are available for the film in English, Spanish, and French.

2012-04-28 03:24:38

David Strathairn's Heated Debates, A Listen-In

Larry King and Dan Rather remarked this George Clooney joint as a great on CNN Larry King Live. The film, in business right on top off the CBS newsroom, successfully temps to give spotlights on broadcast journalism in 1950's America.

sacolman 2012-04-27 16:46:56

Good Night, Good Luck, Good Film.

I remember watching on a small B/W TV set Ed Murrow having a go atMcCarthy. He was to me a hero because I lived under Fascism during WWIIand wished that someone would have stood up to the demagogues of thosedays.I was particularly impressed by the actor taking on Murrow's voice anddelivery in the film, also the fact that McCarthy was being usedhimself in the film.All during watching it, I felt that it was more than a film about thepast and Clooney was cleverly suggesting that we live in another fearinduced World, but it is not the Commies, but the terrorists we have tofear.Yes we still have demagogues amongst our leaders, even 'though they arecard carrying liberals, republicans or democrats.

tedg 2012-04-27 08:22:31

The Camera

Rarely when an actor tries to direct does it work, and when it does youget "character study" without all the supporting scaffold a realfilmmaker would provide.Clooney is a smart man who knows this. So he structures his projects inways that are well serviced by what he has to give. The last one was anactor playing a character who created a character within. The structureof the thing was all focused on building and exploiting thoseambiguities. Especially clever were the staging devices. Many were novel and a fewwere particularly striking.Now this is a more serious, but has the same values. It is after all acharacter study, and one that deals with these same two worlds. The manwhen off the camera, and the man on. Fabricated truth as an act bypoliticians. "Journalism" as way of piercing through those layers.Two evils, McCarthy and Paley. Clooney's point is that control over thepipeline is what matters in delivering the "real." So he works withsome very studied staging. This movie has some of the best staging inrecent memory. It must have taken forever to set the angles andlighting. Fortunately these are so powerful that no scene needs morethan two setups. This is the way this cinematographer works for PTAndersen too.The switch in lighting from when Murrow is on the air to just after hegoes off is rather thrilling: both are intense, in fact the on-airlighting is stark. But there is a powerful and visible shift fromexternal to internal energy.If you just saw the script as words on a page, it would seem boring andpreachy. It is the staging that makes this thing come alive, that givesa container for the great acting. The only actor who seems off isMcCarthy, which is telling.I have the book Clooney's dad wrote about movies. Fortunately the sonhas better insights into what works and what doesn't, and has goodintuitions about what to attempt.Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.

2012-04-26 15:32:48

Sophisticated docudrama

This is George Clooneys masterpiece - and its easy to see why he made it now, as the issues brought out in the movie are so easily transposed to current day. The movie faithfully depicts, through faithful reproduction of his monologues as well as actual footage, the sequence of programmes Ed Murrow made exposing McCarthy and ulimtately playing a part in bringing about his downfall. This is mixed with the drama of what was going on behind the scenes and the real cost of telling it like it was at a time when fear was king, and telling the truth had real consequences.This is a talking heads movie - there is no flash bang effects, or tense scenes. It's all about what was being said, and why it was being said. Even then, you have to listen pretty hard because Clooney has used a verite style of people talking as they do in real life, overlapping and not always talking in neat sentences.. except for those masterful monologues. The movie is in black and white, which does not detract but rather accentuates the drama both by making it feel authentically of its time, and bringing out rich detail of the characters expressions and nuances.. and as a sidenote, cigarette smoke has never looked more beautiful, almost a character in itself at times - how jarring it is to see one of the most respected newscasters, with cigarette in hand while addressing the nation!The acting is simply perfect - Strathairn is knockout as Murrow, and must have spent ages poring over his newsacst to so faithfully recreate him, and do so with so much heart.For me the movie had two messages - one, the obvious political one, and the other - the state of television today. There is nothing on TV now that comes close to the intelligence and impact of Murrow's pieces.Watch this if you want something to spark debate and conversation - don't watch this for a popcorn movie or if you want something exciting or tense. As entertainment, this scores low - as thought provoking cinema, this is first class.

nama chakravorty 2012-04-25 22:10:46

An Engaging Film!

'Good Night, and Good Luck.' is An Engaging Film, that is nicelywritten, wonderfully directed & superbly acted. In short, amongst thebetter films of 2005.'Good Night, and Good Luck.' Synopsis: In the early 1950's, the threatof Communism created an air of paranoia in the United States andexploiting those fears was Senator Joseph McCarthy of Wisconsin.However, CBS reporter Edward R. Murrow and his producer Fred W.Friendly decided to take a stand and challenge McCarthy and expose himfor the fear monger he was. 'Good Night, and Good Luck.' works because it's an engaging story, thatgrabs your attention. The entire conflict between veteran radio andtelevision journalist Edward R. Murrow and U.S. Senator Joseph McCarthyof Wisconsin, makes for a compelling cinematic experience. GeorgeClooney & Grant Heslov's Screenplay is fast-paced, unbiased &absorbing, while Clooney's direction is absolutely wonderful.Cinematography is appropriate. Art Design & Editing are good. Performance-Wise: David Strathairn delivers a razor-sharp performance.Robert Downey, Jr. is excellent, while Clooney does his bit well.Patricia Clarkson is first-rate, while Jeff Daniels is functional.Frank Langella is terrific. Tate Donovan & Ray Wise lend able support. On the whole, 'Good Night, and Good Luck.' offers a solid punch.Strongly Recommended!