#8 Film of the 2000s: Good Night, and Good Luck (2005)

Just before getting off the phone with partner-in-crime movie critic Sam Gooley, I wanted to create a pull for him to read this write-up for Good Night, and Good Luck. When he asked me about the #8 Film of the 2000s, I told him, "it's a movie we both love and admire, yet it is a movie that none of our friends have seen or even heard of." He immdediately told me to shut up, hang up, and write this piece so he could find out as soon as possible what it was. Honestly, I thought it would be obvious; however, I realized 2 things:

1. We've seen a lot of good movies that none of our friends have never heard of, and

2. My "teaser trailer" for this article proved to be a success.

For those of you -- which will probably be most of you -- who have never seen Good Night, and Good Luck, let me provide a basic overview before delving into my criticism and reasoning behind the film's excellence.

What's not to like?

First, its stellar cast includes George Clooney (who wrote and directed the film), Robert Downey Jr., Frank Langella (the guy who played President Nixon in Frost/Nixon), and Jeff Daniels (best known as Harry from Dumb & Dumber). It also stars David Strathairn, who you may know as Meryl Streep's husband in The River Wild, the guy who oversees the women's baseball league in A League of their Own, or 50's pimp and Fleur-de-Lis owner Pierce Patchett in LA Confidential. If you enjoy good films with big stars, you'll get no shortage of them here.

Second, it's a history lesson covering one of the biggest moments in journalism history. It takes place during the Red Scare when Senator Joseph McCarthy was accusing everyone of being a Communist. While a small handful of writers spoke out against McCarthy's witchhunt, no broadcast journalist had the courage to stand up against him until CBS anchor Edward R. Murrow dedicated an entire episode of his nightly news program "See it Now" to McCarthy's outlandish behavior. Good Night, and Good Luck covers the preparation, airing, and impact of that episode.

Third, it's critically acclaimed. On top of winning the SG Award for Best Picture of 2005, Good Night, and Good Luck was nominated for 6 Academy Awards - including Best Picture, Best Actor (Strathairn), and Best Director (Clooney) - and received a positive review from 94% of critics across the country (Rotten Tomatoes).

So why have you not seen it?

Why does a film with all these big stars ... a film that covers a major topic in US History ... and a film that receives accolades from critics across the country ... why does a film like Good Night, and Good Luck go unnoticed by the almost everyone?

The answer - and bare with me as I explain this - is that Good Night, and Good Luck is a symbol in of itself. The film works as an essay; and its thesis claims that nothing of true importance or objectivity can be found in the world of television anymore. The American viewer no longer cares about "just-the-facts" reporting; rather, the American viewer wants to be entertained by corporations who create news - not report it - in order to earn higher ratings and charge more for advertising.

Take the following quote from Murrow in 1958, and tell me if you can relate any of it to what you currently see on television:

We are currently wealthy, fat, comfortable, and complacent ... Unless we get up off our fat surpluses and recognize that television in the main is being used to distract, delude, amuse, and insulate us, then television and those who finance it, those who look at it, and those who work at it, may see a totally different picture too late.
- Edward R. Murrow, 1958

Do those words seem like a prophecy to anyone other than me? How could Murrow successfully predict the television paradox of the 21st century? How could he have known that the same programs we turn to for mindless entertainment and uselessness be at the same time the programs we rely on to provide an honest interpretation of the realities of the world, its politics, and current events? Unfortunately, I cannot answer these questions with any sense of certainty or confidence; rather, a mere speculation that Murrow himself would call libel and editorializing.

Another reason why you haven't seen this movie? Well, it's a movie about journalism. No movie about journalism has really taken over at the box office. If you check out boxofficemojo.com, you'll see Bruce Almighty and Marley and Me as the only News/Broadcasting films to top $100 million. Good Night and Good Luck earned $31 million, and ranks behind Fletch Lives as the 15th highest grossing film under the News/Broadcasting umbrella. Just to name a few other #15's: the #15 Christmas film (This Christmas) earned $49 million; the #15 Comic Book adaptation (X-Men Origins: Wolverine) earned $180 million; and the #15 Slacker/Stoner film (yes, there's a category called Slacker/Stoner, and #15 is Harold & Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay) earned $38 million.

A third reason you haven't seen Good Night and Good Luck, is due to its lack of popcorn entertainment. Such films lack promotability from their respective marketing companies. Because the thesis of Good Night, and Good Luck highlights the true values of "just-the-facts" reporting, the film itself is a short, concise, "just-the-facts" piece that lasts 89 minutes. You won't hear a sweeping score by John Williams; you won't hear a theme song by Randy Newman; you won't see any needless subplots that provide thorough backdrops of every character; and you surely won't see action scenes with slow-motion crashes or stunts. Nope, this film is edited down to the very core of its storyline ... which, in my opinion, is exactly why it is so effective. It isn't a drama, or even a docu-drama for that matter. It's a period piece and an essay; and it never strays from its thesis.

(This is the point of the article where the average viewer would say, "Dang, Mike. It seems like this movie will be pretty boring. Where's all the excitement?" To which I would reply, "Actually, I was on the edge of my seat for the entire movie. Without any useless flashbacks, musical numbers, or slow-motion sequences, Good Night, and Good Luck gets straight to the goods and never allows you to take a break. You probably haven't seen a movie like that before, have you?" The average viewer would answer, "Not really," and I would say, "You should." )

Why you should see Good Night, and Good Luck

1. As mentioned before, it is a symbol in of itself. Two other films you will see later in my Top Ten will fit within this category as well -- they exemplify the very point they're trying to prove. (A hint to those who are actually reading this article, and who actually want to know what lies ahead: they're both about memories, how we create them, and how we choose to remember or forget them). Good Night, and Good Luck is portrayed as true, fact-based journalism, and its plot portrays true, fact-based journalism in action. It's about 1950's television, and very much looks like 1950's television: 1.) it's filmed in black-and-white; 2.) Cinematographer Robert Elswit frames David Strathairn in several scenes just as the television camera frames Murrow while he's on the air. (Several of the camera angles pay direct homage to 1950's ads in Life magazine.); and 3.) the pace of the film is very controlled - quick, necessary, and unemotional. It's unrelenting, matter-of-fact, and doesn't apologize for its presentation or it's delivery.

2. It uses history to provide commentary on what television has become. For those of you who may not be aware of broadcast television: Fox News, CNN, and MSNBC are for-profit corporations. Their bottom line depends on the ratings they receive and the ad space they sell - not necessarily the quality of journalism permeating their newsrooms. Do I think there's a problem with news corporations putting out stories in order to make a profit? Absolutely not. Do I think there's a problem with viewers interpreting these news stories as truth, and not bothering to ask why these stories were published in the first place? Absolutely.

With that said, imagine the stories published in the fall of 1953, when McCarthyism reached its peak. News stations were either spreading the fear that Communists were infiltrating our country and government (a fear which gave power to Senator McCarthy); or opting not to confront the famous false-accuser from Wisconsin, (which in turn gave leverage to Senator McCarthy). Either way, Senator McCarthy's rise to power was quick, emotional, and entirely unquestioned; and what fueled it? The constant publication of what America didn't want to happen. Unfortunately, American journalists weren't reporting on what was actually happening.

When Murrow decides to run the story against Senator McCarthy in Good Night, and Good Luck, he faces two immediate set-backs: His show loses its sponsors, and his producers strongly caution him against editorializing the facts. Can you imagine, in today's society, Coke or Pepsi refusing to run an ad on Fox News because Bill O'Reilly bashes democrats on his show? Absolutely not! Half the reason so many people watch his show in the first place is to watch him go off on a left-wing guest speaker. It's true! Along the same lines, do you honestly think Democrats would boycott Coke or Pepsi for running a commercial during an episode of The O'Reilly Factor? Wouldn't that be something.

What makes Good Night, and Good Luck special is the value it places on non-biased reporting. The characters don't make money, but at the same time won't hesitate to reach into their pockets to make sure both sides of a story are covered. While the rest of the country is afraid of being called a Communist, a few men chose to stand up against a tyrant who gains power by spreading fear and accusing all opponents of supporting the enemy.

Writer/director George Clooney's thesis, as so eloquently described by Murrow in the final lines, wants us to believe that men of this unflinching character still exist in the world today. Unfortunately, it will take a man of Murrow's stature and character to stand out from the crowd and reinstill the spirit of informative, educational journalism in our society. Otherwise, television will become "merely wires and lights in a box."

3. It's perfectly made. I mean perfect. There is never a wasted scene, a wasted shot, or a wasted line. Every second of dialogue, music, or silence justifies its inclusion within the film. While only 89 minutes long, Good Night, and Good Luck is so dense with information that I discover new mannerisms, asides, and symbolisms with each viewing. On top of that, each shot is so crisp, so symbolic, it's as if we're witnessing history unfold before our eyes in a smoky, black-and-white world we now know as the 1950s.

(Three hidden treasures I found after multiple viewings:

1. The importance Jazz singer Diana Reeves' character. The first time I saw Good Night, and Good Luck, I thought she was merely a character for CBS who simultaneously provided the score. Somewhere between my second and tenth viewing, I started paying attention to her lyrics and freaked out over how much they reflected the mood of the film. Do you remember the guy who sings the theme from There's Something About Mary, and appears randomly throughout the film to serenade us about what's going on in Ted's mind? That's Diana Reeves, but in this film she doesn't sing to us directly; rather, she plays a recording artist at CBS whose studio work is combined with the action of the characters, thus providing us with a rather insightful score. For example, Reeves sings over the opening credits, and introduces our audience to the ever-growing popularity of television with the song, "TV is the Thing This Year." Also, just after Murrow delivers the "Dear Brutus" speech, Ms. Reeves sings a song that sums up what I believe to be Senator McCarthy's reaction. It's called "I've Got My Eyes on You," and the lyrics are as follows:

I've got my eyes on you, so best beware where you roam..
I've got my eyes on you, so don't stray too far from home.
I've set my spies on you
I'm checking all you do, from A to Z.
So darling, just be wise and keep your eyes on me.

The next time we see Senator McCarthy on screen, he has sent out his spies against Murrow; he attacks Murrow's past; and accuses Murrow of running a smear campaign against him. It's almost as if Diana Reeves knew it was about to happen...

2. Murrow's facial expressions in the Liberace interview. God, that was funny.

3. The shot where Murrow is sitting at the typewriter writing his piece on Senator McCarthy. After saying, "It's Shakespeare," the camera pans out to show Murrow sitting alone in an office amongst several empty typewriters; and the only sounds we hear are the clicks of his typing. Why do I think this shot is cool? It's because Murrow is the only jornalist willing to take a stand; his voice is the only one speaking out; and he is the only one making noise in a sea of silence. His typewriter makes noise, while the other typewriters are not only unoccupied, but deserted.)

I couldn't see Good Night, and Good Luck one time. The rewatchability factor scores a 10 based solely on the fact that it is impossible to absorb the total picture of this film after only one viewing. I remember the first time I saw the film. I called Sam immediately after the credits ended (we always call each other immediately after we watch a great movie -- it's an unwritten rule). His first words: "Yea, it was perfect, wasn't it? I thought so, too. Now you gotta see it again to understand why it's perfect." Now that I think about it, that may be the most simple review/recommendation I ever heard about Good Night, and Good Luck. While it's such a quick, matter-of-fact film, Good Night, and Good Luck has yet to receive a quick, matter-of-fact review; or at least I haven't found one yet.

It's tough to describe perfection. It's pretty much impossible. You can spend hours upon hours of piecing facts together, only to come up with the same two-word conclusion: it's perfect. I dare you to call Citizen Kane, "a basic movie about a kid who loses it all in the process of becoming wealthy." It would be an insult to the film itself. If you were to call Good Night, and Good Luck "a basic movie about Murrow vs. McCarthy," it would be a similar insult.

For all you readers who have never seen Good Night, and Good Luck, I ask you to see it. Perhaps it'll inspire you to become one of the great people George Clooney believes still exist in America.

For all you readers who have already seen it, I suggest you see it again. I've written over 2,000 words attempting to justify Good Night, and Good Luck's perfection, but all I really needed is Sam's ten-word summary: "It's perfect; see it again to find why it's perfect."