Day 67: We Must Not Confuse Dissent With Disloyalty

GOOD NIGHT, AND GOOD LUCK (2005)
Directed by George Clooney
Starring: David Strathairn, George Clooney, Jeff Daniels, Robert Downey, Jr., Patricia Clarkson, Alex Borstein, Frank Langella

It is the mid-1950's, and the host of CBS's See It Now, Edward R. Murrow (Strathairn), usually content to interview celebrities, is concerned about the growing threat that Senator Joseph McCarthy poses due to his Communist witch-hunt.  Murrow and his producer Fred Friendly (Clooney) decide to go against the Network's (and sponsors') wishes, and rush to the defense of Air Force Lieutenant Milo Radulovich, who had been discharged seemingly without reason.  The Air Force says it was because of his "Communist leanings," but there is no evidence to support the accusation.  Murrow and his team give Lt. Radulovich a platform to defend himself.  He also covers the Senate hearing of another suspected Communist, Annie Lee Moss, a small, aging black woman who happened to work at the Pentagon.  However, after coming to the defense of these people, Senator McCarthy and his lawyer Roy Cohn begin targeting Murrow and CBS.

Good Night, and Good Luck is very much a lesson on how to do a period piece right.  Everything about this film conveys the feeling of the mid-50's: it's shot in black-and white, everybody smokes, the soundtrack is all smooth, big-band jazz.  One of the best choices in the film was the decision to use archival footage of Senator McCarthy, Roy Cohn, Milo Radulovich and others, rather than try to re-create the scenes with actors.  It works quite well not only as a period piece, but as a history lesson.  Anyone interested in the "Red Scare" of the 50's and of the McCarthy witch-hunts and the House Un-American Activities Committee can get a wealth of information from this film.

However, there is one part where it doesn't work so well.  Clooney is so interested in getting the look, the feel and the message right, he neglects to inject any kind of emotional anchor into the film.  Yes, it is (for the most part) historically accurate, but there's no real emotion.  We watch what Ed Murrow and his team do, but we don't really know why they do it.  We know they feel it's the "right thing to do," but they just do it, and don't explain why.  There's very little motive to what anyone does.  Everyone just sort of does what the script tells them to do, and the effect is pretty lifeless.

But if you just focus on the film as a time capsule, it works very well.  Also, the attention to detail is pretty amazing.  This is the sort of film that directors like to watch.  The public at large may not cotton onto all the politics and lengthy speeches, but the film works equally well if you're interested in either history or cinema.