Good Night & Good Luck (2005)

about the film: behind the scenes of ed murrow's cbs television shows see it now and person to person shot as a fictional black and white filmed account of what all was involved in the decision making of cbs executives regarding the airing of ed murrow's exploitation of senator mccarthy's tactics in the early 1950's

what i liked: strathairn's portrayal of murrow (dead on), choice to film in high contrast black and white (enhances the 1950's feel to the movie), the action captured in preparing the individual broadcasts (unfortunately the only substantial and significant "movement" in the film), the set design, costumes and props (period pieces are always hard to pull off, but the trademark names of the day {ex. westinghouse} were abundant and helped in creating the 1950's era feel), choice to use footage of mccarthy instead of an actor (no one can play mccarthy better than himself), use of light, shadows and smoke (the use of all three are the insignia/trademark of the film and give what little art this film can claim to contain)

what i didn't like: the overall plot was very weak (murrow challenges mccarthy, mccarthy gets censured but keeps his job and murrow loses his job, yeah all this happened in real life but what was filled in between those big beats using artist liberties was a let down to the audience...also what the hell was the point of joe & shirley's "b" plot for?), this was a persuasive piece by clooney as a writer and director (the liberties as a director/artist were exploited by the interpretations made by clooney and the co-writer helsov regarding murrow's own personal thoughts and desires...murrow is a tool used by them to persuade to their audience 1. the importance of impartial journalism on tv {clooney was a journalist at one time, like his father} and 2. the role advertisers play in the decision making of a network tv executive ...i have to question if this birth of broadcasting the "importance of impartial journalism" via murrow's attack on mccarthy and the role in which tv advertisers play in the decision making of a tv network executive is actually film worthy...the fact that it all took place on tv in the 1950's doesn't warrant it to be made into a film in our day and age...it almost seems as if clooney is trying to say by revisiting murrow's fight against mccarthy that this same theme is revelant today in that the present US government {aka Bush} is on a witch hunt for terrorists much the same way mccarthy was on a witch hunt for communists...is this film then meant to be persuasive? is it just art? or is it entertainment? i choose to believe it is not the 2nd or the 3rd), it was very tightly filmed or claustrophobic in its style (i'm not sure but i believe that almost every scene took place inside, the one scene where joe's character received an envelope was captured in a court building of some sort and that was the lightest {opposite of heavy} scene that seemed to breathe a little bit...and just before that there were some camera men running up the outside steps of that same building but the pace of the shot was so fast, you couldn't capture the feeling of being outside...the narrow choice of set design that was chosen was well executed but limited the ability of the film to achieve anything beyond forcing two or more people in a room having to talk their way through an already weakened plot)

my conclusion: i don't think this story should have ever been made into a film. that said, i think the direction and cinematography were well crafted but the choice of set design (not its execution) and weak plot took away from what little life that was portrayed on screen. also noted strathairn's best performace since delores claiborne and quite possibly his career defining role.

for a "professional" written review, go to ebert's review here

for a "professional" voice recorded review, go to npr's review here