I recently viewed the best picture of the year 2005, in my opinion. The George Clooney directed, co-written and co-starred "Good Night and Good Luck," regarding CBS journalist Edward R. Murrow's public takedown of Senator Joseph McCarthy.
I hope that most of us know at least a little bit about the so-called "McCarthy Era," when the Cold War was still in its adolescent stages. Communists were supposedly infiltrating the United States' security measures with spies, threatening our freedom and our way of life. Senator McCarthy was the chairman of a Congressional committee to investigate any potential threats and indict individuals who might secretly be Communists.
But McCarthy went to far and began scaring anybody and everybody, persecuting probably innocent people and spreading paranoia (from Communists AND his own RADAR) far and abroad. For a wonderfully black and satiric comical work documenting the lunacy of that time, I would recommend 1964s "Dr. Strangelove: or How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb," directed by Stanley Kubrick.
But this blog is about Clooney's masterpiece. I was inspired by this movie to the point that I initiated a dialogue between my brother-in-law and father, via e-mail. Here are our thoughts:
MIKE:
Joe:
Yesterday I accidentally came in to work 2 hours early, so I had to take a 3-hour lunch. I wandered over to the Broadway and viewed the Clooney/Strathairn movie and loved it.
I think you mentioned that it was one of your year's favorites.
Do you think it might be subtle commentary on the news media's coverage of current affairs? President Bush and the war on terror in particular?
Today I think I'll go lunch at Curry in a Hurry. Remembering the hate crime on them four years ago with the arson has brought them to mind, and now I want tandoori chicken.
For whatever reason Clooney decided to make the film, it was smart, poignant and pregnant with extremely persuasive rhetoric. It was the perfect movie in that is was concise; only 90 very efficient minutes. The acting was brilliant.
JOE'S REPLY:
I think Cloony purposefully avoided commentary on current events. In this way the principles speak for themselves. It also makes the movie more timeless because it's a more accurate portrayal of the situation of the time. Having said that, though, it's easy to see parallels with current events. But that, again, will be what makes it timeless. Hopefully if it had been made exactly the same 10 years ago or 10 years into the future, someone would still wonder if
there was subtle commentary on current political events.
I feel sorry for McCarthy on many levels. I sincerely believe the majority of policy makers have good intentions. What the documentary didn't show (and really couldn't because of the context) was McCarthy's alcohol and drug addictions, which more or less killed him a few years later. I think some of his overt paranoia stemmed from that. Boy, I have to say, though, that even better that watching the press take him out was watching the fellow-Senators putting him in his place.
-Joseph
MIKE AGAIN:
Agreed--I, as well, am glad that there were no specific references to our times. Walking back to work I thought about how we should be more responsible for how we use, well, any sort of medium to communicate our thoughts. Where entertainment and enjoyment are essential to balance in our lives, words like "insulated" and "complacent" really made me wonder how responsible we as a people are with our newscasts, editorials published and televised, and right on down even to entertainment. Then zooming in on the individual, how responsible are we for what we view, and furthermore how responsible are we for what we portray in our own communications? ...or are we merely Sunday Christians?
It used to amaze me and catch my attention when I would find a true principle being preached and practiced outside of an explicit gospel context, but anymore I am not surprised. Truth is truth. If we can portray wisdom and charity beyond some compartmentalized portion of our lives (church), then I think we are making progress. The gospel should be relevant and present in all that we are.
It is nice to finally watch a movie and leaving thinking more than "that was a visual feast."
FRED:
Arthur Miller's great play "The Crucible" was written about the McCarthy terror, but placed during the Salem witch trials for several reasons, one of which was to keep Miller off McCarthy's list. Another was to show the timelessness of the struggle of truth and justice against prejudice, ignorance and mob mentality. By moving his anti-Bush feelings back 50 years in time, Clooney has done the same thing. Anyone who criticizes Bush and his cronies overtly is subjected to vicious smear attacks. By portraying McCarthy as the ignorant boob he was, Clooney can slam Bush and come away clean--because Dubya and his mob will NEVER see the parallels between themselves and McCarthy. They're just too bleeping stupid. At the same time, Clooney can educate us about a scary and important time in our nation's history. History is repeating itself and lives are being destroyed again in the same way because, as Hegel said, the one thing we learn from history is that no one ever learns anything from history.
Also, a true hero like Ed Murrow deserves to be dusted off and shown to new generations. Unfortunately, CBS would never employ a man like him nowadays, and the Hannitys and Limbaughs would be dumping their verbal manure all over him. I've always liked George Clooney, and now I have immense respect for him. This was a great movie.
I would welcome you all to view this movie and participate in our discussion. Post a message, e-mail me, whatever.
No comments:
Post a Comment