Genres

Visitors Review

2012-05-24 09:40:36

excellent

I really enjoyed the movie although I did not like the time frames back and forth.

mike-4143 2012-05-23 18:22:53

Not Entertaining

I was worn out after watching this very long movie. The movie hadwonderful actors and technically, it was nice. But the plot was sopainfully slow and the excitement level was just dreadful. There werealmost 2 light moments to offer some relief, but the key word is"almost." The movie could have been edited to 90 minutes easily withoutmissing anything other than the boredom. I think that the story line isa great idea and wish that it had moved in less clinical style. Themovie was sterile. While the emotions portrayed by Jolie were good,Matt Damon's stoic and almost grimacing style of the character'sportrayal were numbing. Damon didn't age in the movie either, whichtechnically made us question the lengthy time-line going from the late30's into the early 60's. Another strange quick was the very shortappearances by some great actors. These short cameos were almostfrustrating reminding me of campy movies shot for marketing titillationversus significant actor content. Timothy Hutton's short appearance waswasted as was Joe Pesci's. The hype this movie has commanded isinteresting; I don't understand why people flock to see wakes. Thismovie certainly fill the criteria as an expensive and extremelyover-hyped attempt at entertainment. It was not entertaining.

tomandolly 2012-05-23 04:40:36

Very good, ignore the bloke who would rather of spent $10 on gas

This is a spy movie in the old school way. Yes it is slow but that'sthe whole point. It's the behind the scenes of the CIA so the wholepoint is that it's not meant to be action packed and gun tooting. Theperformances all round are brilliant. Matt Damon once again proves thathimself and Ed Norton are the best actors working in America at themoment. It is interesting to think that Damon is currently giving Bonda run for his money in the new Bourne film, as one of the best and mostbelievable 'action' spies on film. And then a year earlier he wasplaying an equally believable spy of a different kind in The GoodShepherd. I thought this was a great, un-rushed and intelligent filmfrom De Niro, which also offered us a little history, which may ofscared American audiences. If you have a brain you will enjoy it.Cheers

wb83 2012-05-22 18:25:28

Do not see this movie

This movie went nowhere! It jumped back and forth between a 20 yearperiod without much warning. It's 3 hours long with a very predictableending. Do NOT waste your money on this movie! Matt Damon plays a goodpart but the movie as a whole was very disappointing. The female actingwas bad all around. The was also too much male nudity, and lack ofmasculine characters. Damon's son is a cry baby with no spine. Therewas very little focus on the founding of the CIA or the effect it hadon American foreign policy. It's more of a personal story about thecharacter that Damon plays instead of a "Spook" movie. The movie couldhave been done very well if it was only 2 hours instead of three. Therewere a lot of scenes that went on and on for no reason. Please saveyour money, you can thank me later.

2012-05-20 05:39:24

much fiction, some truth

I was drawn into the movie, a story well told, but allow me to digress. If you want to know what really happened at the Bay of Pigs read Donald Kagan's 'On the Origins of War.' Eisenhower set a plan in motion to take Cuba back from Castro, but JFK balked at the last moment, failing to send enough troops or air support, even though his military advisors implored him to do so. He lacked the will because he was afraid if we invaded Cuba more 'robustly' Khrushchev would respond by making a move for the western half of Berlin, and from there we'd be obligated to respond; Perhaps with an ICBM. In truth Khrushchev was baffled that JFK failed to take back Cuba which he referred to as "the little sausage shaped island." Because of JFKs indecisiveness with the Bay of Pigs Khrushchev found the huberis, 6 months later, to put Nukes on the island, which caused the missle crisis...But the crisis was overstated as the Soviets only had 11 ICBMs to our 300 plus, so they weren't about to do an 'exchange'. Besides which (and this is seldom mentioned) a deal had been cut behind closed doors wherein we agreed to remove missles from Turkey (so the "stand-off was all 'sound and fury' signifying nothin) and that's the real dope folks, but back to the movie. In one scene they torture a Soviet spy, plying him with LSD (as an aside that qualifies as truth stranger than fiction: The CIA first tested acid in a whorehouse that was their front in San Fran. The prostitutes gave their johns a tab while the spooks looked on thru one way mirrors in operation midnight climax) Anyhow, The tripping spy says they have nothing to fear from the Soviet Union, that it's just "paint over rust" and that they know it but they have to keep the appearance of a grave threat to justify and maintain spending for the military industrial complex. Some food for thought.

Andy4444 2012-05-19 15:49:05

Like watching a robot for 3 hours

After seeing the commercials for this film, I was eager to go see it. Aspy thriller about the origin of the CIA, with DeNiro, Pesci, and thestar of the Bourne Identity sounds like a good idea. Unfortunately itturns out to be 3 hours of boredom in which Matt Damon walks aroundlike an expressionless robot for the whole film. Even the sex sceneswere devoid of emotion.The film chronicles a young Ivy League man's rise through the ranks ofthe Office of Strategic Services, and its successor, the CentralIntelligence Agency, from his pre-war college fraternity days to theKennedy/Johnson era. Along the way we meet lots of shady people whocan't be trusted and so forth. DeNiro is the seldom seen godfather ofboth intelligence services. He's in the film for like 5 minutes. Pesciis in it even shorter.Despite the exciting events Damon's character is involved in, includingvarious hot spots from wartime Europe to revolutionary Cuba, there isno action. None. The film doesn't focus on the history of the CIA, it'sreally about how a young man loses his soul amongst the dark shadows,yada yada yada. There is a brief scene near the beginning of the filmwhere Damon is yucking it up with his fraternity buddies, and then forthe next 2.75 hours he has no expression, no smile, no emotionswhatever. Couple that with the lack of action and the slow-moving storyand I was more interested in the conversation the jerk in the seatbehind me was having on his cellphone than I was in watching the movie.Even the supposed twists are uninteresting, "who cares" moments. Thereare many opportunities to see some cool spy craft, but they are lost,as is the opportunity to tell us something about the CIA's history,good and bad. Instead we are treated to scenes where the characterswhisper to each other, even inside secure offices, so that I actuallyhad to move closer to the speakers to hear what was going on."Godfather of the CIA"? Not hardly.

2012-05-18 21:19:55

Good, if dry movie -- but is there a commentary track or features?

This was an engrossing, if dry, film for those who like Le Carre novels and the Alec Guiness-starred movies based on them. But it's not clear from either the product description or the reviews if a) there's any director or actor commentaries on the film; b) any making-of featurettes; or c) any documenatries about the real CIA or historical figures, such as James Angleton, upon whom the movie is based. Since there's no mention of any of that in the product description, I assume there's no commentary track or other features. Is that correct?

edwagreen 2012-05-18 14:07:04

The Good Shepherd-Tend to this Flock ***

Robert De Niro directs and co-stars in this memorable film dealing withthe birth of the CIA and one member's eventual disillusionment with thetop secret organization.Both Matt Damon and Angelina Jolie give career performances in thisfilm. With his thick glasses, Damon is a powerful figure in arestrained performance as a CIA agent who sacrifices his life forworking for the famous agency. Jolie has never been better as theneglected wife that he had to marry when he got her in trouble.Detailing the rise of the agency as World War 11 was about to begin, wesee with the effective use of flashbacks, the Kennedy debacle at theBay of Pigs and going back to 1939 as war breaks out in Europe and acovert group is needed and assembled.We have a terrific supporting performance by Michael Gambon, as asupposedly Nazi sympathetic British college professor who is a doubleagent but is put to death because of his homosexual activities beingviewed as a threat.

spiderman20171 2012-05-16 00:29:26

Great Movie

A three hour movie usually is not going to appeal to me, yet this onewas just fine for an afternoon's viewing. Be sure to bring your drinkinside the theater and don't go in hungry.I loved the photography that brought me right into DC of the 1960s andback to Yale in the 1930s. Someone needs to receive a reward for thephotography and music that bring you deeply into the secret world ofEdward Wilson (Matt Damon) super-spy, the OSS and CIA. We see thealmost accidental development of the current US Central IntelligenceAgency from its World War II beginnings in the OSS to the present.The story gives a hint of all the old stories of how the intelligenceagencies began with Ivy League recruits who managed to hold on into thepost-war era and further recruit more Ivy League spies, both for goodand bad. With wide-ranging intellectual talent that many of these menbrought with them, they had a surer hold on how other parts of theworld, especially their governments, would act in a given situation.The tough guy spy is not left out, however, but shown to be a sort ofassistant who can be counted on to beat the hell out of someone or evenkill them when it is in the national interest. Apparently, according tothis movie, recent CIA misbehavior did not begin on 9/11 and therounding up of Alcada suspects all over the world.You should love the stage setting scenery where we can feel that we arewatching Skull and Bones secret meetings, recruiting of spies for theUSA and recruiting double agents and defectors. A few blunders arethrown in to cover that part of CIA history, as are various incidentsof attempts to blackmail US agents with sexual secrets. Sometimes wenote that the American agents rightly do not trust fellow agents andothers in their own government.Personally, there are a few things that I did not understand at all.Wilson, the iceman's, married life is one big mystery in the movie. Itdoes give the writers a chance to show off the often frustrated CIAwife and how she can make trouble for the agent, dedicated to his joband sometimes tempted by others.A few incidents were not explained enough for my thick head and I willnot go into them since asking any questions or commenting mightpossibly give away a little bit about this movie. That they remainedpuzzling is, in some way, fitting as we would not have answers in reallife either.Having spent a lifetime in the State and Defense Departments, inWashington and overseas, I can say that much of the movie rang true.Without knowing any specifics many of us heard and saw enough torecognize some incidents in the movie were loosely based on truehappenings.If you have ADD, this movie is probably not for you, but if you want tosee a well-made drama, based on some general truth about our spyagency, then you should go see this on the big screen, not on DVD.

laureen8 2012-05-15 10:54:09

Comments on movie

It was very hard to drag myself through this movie. Deniro does notknow how to direct actors to get the audience to perceive a lot ofsubtleties. The depth of people was passed over completely for ashallow narrative. Without knowing much about that era, a lot of infocould have been included to inform the audience. Scenes jumped aroundin an erratic manner, not cohesive.The depth and purpose of the CIA wasnot made clear. I felt like I wasted my time watching and waiting forsomething, anything to become purposeful.I do not recommend this movie.Why do some people think they can act and direct. It doesn't seem towork that way too often. Missed the boat totally.

Cristi_Ciopron 2012-05-14 11:12:11

An epic by De Niro

Now of the artistic qualities of De Niro's spy thriller—in fact, a kindof an epic—'The Good Shepherd' I would like to mention at least hisknown sense of the places (--that another actor turned director,Redford, also has to some extent--), see-able in one London scene, theoccasionally exciting cinematography—also vaguely soothing; but for themost the movie is situated in Hollywwodian academic abstractness. Asecond quality the director De Niro has is affectionately filming, withunequivocal though discreet sensuality, the women, and allowing theactresses intriguing, interesting performances. Jolie is nicelyglamorized in De Niro's old—fashioned cinema; the German translator isan interesting presence. In some scenes there's a bit of atmosphere, asketched atmosphere—a room, etc., a feel for everyday scenes; butmainly, it isn't.The score and the cast are great; this epic is wonderfully scored, andthis music supplies much of the atmosphere.Matt Damon plays 'Wilson'; Angelina Jolie is his delicate wife,'Clover'. De Niro, Keir Dullea, Pesci, Turturro, Baldwin, Hurt, Gambon,Hutton do great supporting roles; Turturro, Pesci, De Niro exceed allexpectations, Baldwin delivers a subdued energetic performance. MartinaGedeck is truly very special. Of the less achieved things, let's indicate the leading character,flaccid and barely likable (the aim of the art being to present humanlyuninteresting characters as artistically interesting)—the less goodscripts will make a leading character look as if he was indirectlycharacterized. Yet this is very arguable; though even if it wasintended that the lead leave this impression, it should have beennonetheless an impression of art. Damon does a good role; if there's aflaw with the leading character, there's in the script. Perhaps themovie's flaw is the relative lack of pace, lost of gusto, and itsHollywoodian pseudo—classicism, its _academism; artistically, andnarrative—wise, the epic gets lost, the style gets thinner, beginningto look like a Le Carré adaptation's smarter cousin. The movie isunsatisfying, the whole looks aimless and academic. In conclusion, themusic, the cast and (seldom) the cinematography are fine; the directinglooses nerve, and the script is messy, so that the movie seems bothacademic, cold, and chaotic, disjointed, heartless and irrelevant, itlooks a bit fake and missed, underachieved.

joaocruzferreira 2012-05-13 19:05:10

Should have been an Oscar contender

"The Good Shepherd" is billed as the story of how the CIA began in1961, but it is really the story of Edward Wilson (Matt Damon) and hisinvolvement in the first covert wing of the CIA.In his third attempt at directing, Robert De Niro captures the natureof the cold hearted spy with such precision that he seems much morecomfortable in the details but less interested in keeping the storygripping. Ironically, this is the exact opposite of the main characterEdward Wilson, who keeps his eye on the big picture but misses thesmall moments he should have noticed, such as, his family.Nonetheless, "The Good Shepherd" is a great movie that tells us that ina world of lies, cheats and deceits, the one who survives is the onewho trusts less, loves less and lives less. Consequently, the maincharacter chooses to stay, and through symbolisms it becomes apparentthat Edward Wilson is not able to move on and is trapped and alone inhis own world of secrecy. With that, the audience is left withsomething to reflect on.Matt Damon does an excellent job by tackling the role of Edward Wilsonwith such coldness and dedication, in an aloof fashion. This is one ofthe best roles I've seen him perform.A movie that should have been a definite Oscar contender. 8/10

the-gossip-king 2012-05-13 02:54:31

Interesting and a little confusing at times

This movie definitely has its ups and downs. The story has about fiftysubplots that do tie together eventually but keeping track ofeverything is difficult. I can recommend this to any person though over13 is better. The acting is one of the many good sides of this movie.Angelina Jolie against all odds was absolutely fantastic as EdwardWilson's wife. Robert De Niro played the general very well. Abotherthing about this film that others always lack is the dialogue. Quotesfrom this film are still running through my mind. Lastly, finally wehave a movie about spies that does not involve a bloody gun fight everfive minutes. This movie instead skips that and shows the trauma ofEdward Wilson one of the first members of the CIA. In this movie itisn't about gun fights. It is about reflection and making choices aboutfamily, job, friends and country. Due to its confusing web of subplotsyou probably won't like it the first times but watch a few more timesand pay careful attention to the dialogue (in this movie words tellmore of the story than actions) and you will come to realise and seewhat a great movie this turned out to be.

SunshineDroplets 2012-05-12 14:05:18

Excellent Movie.

The movie was good. I enjoyed it. I have just a few complaints. Thefirst being that I felt that the movie was advertised incorrectly. It'sless about the "birth of the CIA" rather a story about one of the firstCIA agents. It's about his being in the CIA and how it affected hislife and such. Not about birthing the CIA. Also, the movie was a bittoo slow moving, lengthy, and only because there were scenes in it thatweren't completely necessary and seemed to act as filler to just makethe film longer. Other than these few problems, I considered the movieto be really good.Robert DeNiro has a talent not only for acting, butseems to be on the road to becoming a good director also.

rockangel1389 2012-05-09 03:23:43

Good movie, must buy on DVD

This was a very good movie, it kind of moves slow at first, and a lotof the time your wondering what some things have to do with everything,but it all comes together in the end. Matt Damon is a man of littlewords, and doesn't say much, but words aren't needed, thoughts andemotions are read in his face. I wouldn't recommend this film for anybody who has trouble followingflashbacks and remembering details that happen in the beginning becausethat is what the movie is made of. THe movie spans over the time ofabout 20 years, following Edward Wilson (Damon)and the effects he hason the CIA and the effects they have on him and his family.

eschetic-2 2012-05-08 15:13:46

A flawed but fascinating epic

Robert De Niro's direction of Eric Roth's layered evocation of theearly years of the CIA stumbles here and there - not least over thecasting of Edward Wilson, the brilliant "everyman" hardened into a notquite soulless operative by the times and the events he lives through(Matt Damon again pushing the boundaries of what a still young actorcan credibly pull off and this time coming up just short, but closeenough) - but over all the film soars on so many levels, theintelligent viewer has to be swept along in the sheer intellectualadventure.As with many historical works - and more than most - the more you knowof the history which inspired the film, the deeper the impact of workof all concerned. The CIA in recent years had gotten a very bad rapboth at home and abroad as its periodic shortcomings have been exposedand through the misguided right wing efforts to justify them or blamethem on "liberals," and the film does not attempt to change that,although it does show the fair minded the underlying necessity of SOMEeffective covert intelligence gathering agency.Roth and Di Niro make some aspects of the 50's (in the last half of thefilm) unrealistically dark - quite clearly neither grew up in thesuburbs of Washington where many knew their neighbors worked atLangley, but few (including the wives of these employees) knew exactlywhat they were doing - or often, where - but the largely top drawercast elevates the occasional "spy/thriller" stereotype to literature.Di Niro was able to literally pack the film with some of the best andbrightest talents Hollywood and London had to offer and it shows in thehold his by turns mystifying, enthralling and heartbreaking (waiting atthe church) story maintains on the audience.Possibly the best example is the young character actor who ultimatelybrings the balance of the film into focus as the father sees theturning points in his own life in his son's. The son is played by EddieRedmayne, a British stage actor who has already piled up half a dozenimportant film credits before opening this month (April 2010) onBroadway in RED - recreating his London role in a dazzling "two hander"opposite Alfred Molina as modern artist Mark Rothko - almost certain tobring him a Tony nomination at the least. In THE GOOD SHEPHERD,Redmayne's range and power as the son trying to live up to a fatherimpossible to understand and carve out his own life with the valuesthey share gives a texture to the story and a depth to therelationships that is quite dazzling - and the film has character aftercharacter doing the same thing (especially telling performances fromMichael Gambon as a possible double agent and Oleg Shtefanko as atransparently single one are alone worth the film); creating a realworld where we are all to used to seeing only the thinnest of storylines.Some will be reminded of John Le Carre's THE SPY WHO CAME IN FROM THECOLD, a Cold War film that anticipated the end of same, but while setat an earlier time, THE GOOD SHEPHERD is both less bleak and far moresophisticated in it's story telling. Not every twist works, but thewhole more than justifies the few parts which fall short.Go with an open mind on the subject and an appreciation for greatacting - even in the case of Damon's over carefully restrained one -and you'll realize how much of this film is brilliant. The immediateimpression of the film may only be seven of ten stars, but theafterglow is eight or nine.

2012-05-05 04:07:10

Better than sheep

This will put you to sleep, despite good actors and an interesting story. Too long. Is he a good guy?

judy 2012-05-04 16:24:03

Could have been very interesting if it had been more focused

The Good Shephard could have been more interesting if it had focusedmore on the relationship between fathers and sons. This movie by RobertDeNiro was trying to be a historical account of the CIA inception whichis nice but not exactly the kind of subject to keep people interestedfor almost three hours. My husband I think was really disappointed whennothing blew up every five minutes and I tried to tell him before wewent to the theater that this movie was not Spygames or James Bond. Itwas interesting and Matt Damon's character was nice to follow but itwould have been better is they had cut out the husband-wiferidiculousness and concentrated more on the father and sonrelationship. In fact it should have focused on all the father and sonrelationships as more of the Lilly White Men in the movie werefollowing after their fathers.

2012-05-04 15:17:33

VAGUE

This review is from: The Good Shepherd (Widescreen Edition) (DVD) I WILL SAY IT IS GOOD ENOUGH TO WATCH BUT AFTER YOU ARE INVESTED IN THE STORYAND BEGIN TO INVOLVE YOURSELF WITH THE CHARATERS YOU WONDER WHY THEY DELETED SCENES WHICH I THOUGHT HELPED ME AND THE END WAS VAGUE BECAUSE YOU START TO CARE ABOUT EACH ONE AND THEN IT JUST ENDS AND YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT ULTIMATELY HAPPENS TOTHIS FAMILY? I AM ALREADY LOOKING FOR A CUT WITH MORE EXPLANATIONS. I NEVER SAW TIM HUTTONIN THE MOVIE AND I THOUGHT IT SAID HE WAS IN IT.THIS IN MY OPINION WOULD BE MUCH BETTER IFAFTER THE END CAME IF IT WOULD HAVE NARRATED WHAT WAS TO HAPPEN TO THIS FAMILY AND AT LEAST YOU WOULD FEEL BETTER SO I HOPE THEY COME OUT WITH A DVD WITH EXTRAS TO ANSWER SO MANY QUESTIONS.JOSIE

2012-05-04 02:26:23

The most boring movie I have seen in a long, long time

I appreciate, love and respect every single key actor in this movie...but still I found it insufferably long and dull. I love political intrigue, wordy movies and am a fan of theatre, Silence of the Lambs was a great movie. Casino Royale great....But Dear Jesus, how this movie tested my patience!! I am not a person to fall asleep during movies. Usually my curiosity keeps me awake long enough...I could not survive THIS movie.