While it is a pity that the story wasn't told with more visual finesse, this is trivial compared to our real-world problems. It takes a good movie to put that into perspective.

Not sure how, but this is easily one of the best movies all summer. Multiple levels of funny, never takes itself seriously, super colorful, and creative.

It’s sentimental, ridiculously long and only occasionally funny

Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

To that I mean, because the film could have been interesting since its idea, that of defending freedom of expression and not for that to be against freedom is great. But what a pity he gets out of hand and does not know how to take it.Spoiler: Why do I say that he does not know how to take it? Because, for my taste, none of the moments of the singer come to mind. They only delay the movie. Maybe because it lasts only an hour and a half, I wanted to lengthen it, I do not know. The beginning with everyone speaking in mute, what's the use? The truth is that I have become eternal and only lasts what lasts. That if I like it, not everything is good in that company, because, why are not couples allowed? Lack of freedom. With such a good idea, however, for my taste the script is slow and poorly run. He will have good dialogues, he has them, but it is not well written. Not to say directed, I will not say that I plan bad, no, it is worse. With seated characters, it has nothing of staging and nevertheless, I imagine that to give him speed, he makes planes cutting heads. Some actors, who are all very well, cut them off or do not focus when speaking. The photograph that if it is very beautiful and manages to narrate a time. Like the costumes and makeup, they are fine as well as art. But these parts can not prevent me from watching the film and thinking, that this is not progressing, that I have many things left.

Good Night, and Good Luck starts with a framed narrative in the form of an acceptance speech from Murrow years on, for an award for his services in media. Why place this speech here and at the close of the film, bookending his most infamous moments in the spotlight? We have seen so many of these docu-dramas jump straight into the narrative and throw you into the time capsule world. But here we have a few effects. The first is the immediate moral judgement of the actions of Murrow - we expect, after the rousing call to arms to the people of the media world, so influential and affecting, a hero's story, something that has become mythologised and therefore worthy of being commended. Oddly, within his layer of the film there is the de-mythologising of Murrow too; contrasting the gushing introduction from Mickelson is Murrow's silhouette, swallowing nervously, and the paper he holds in his hand, shaking slightly. The outward shield is of course the copious puffs of cigarette smoke. So we have alternating personas that becomes a recurring theme that is played with even within the bookends of the film - the Murrow everyone saw in his condemnations, and the Murrow off-mic (but not off-camera). The hero becomes humanised. Another effect that becomes more obvious at the film's close is the never-ending cycling of popular media opinion that shifts and morphs to suit its audience and hit those rating. Murrow as a controversial figure during his time on the air, demonised by certain attacks, now being rewarded with an esteemed honour, perfectly demonstrating the hypocrisy and unending ability to switch stances at the drop of a hat of the mass media. Clooney has utilised the usual technique in inserting real footage of the events within his narrative. This makes by far the most sense of all the examples of this usage I have seen yet. It fits the theme like a glove; most were not there to witness in person the attacks of Joseph McCarthy himself, or the interrogation of the timid Annie Lee Moss, but we endlessly pored over television screens and radio broadcasts that covered the events. The act of scrutiny, of thousands of screens and ears tuning in, each with their own perspective, becomes thoroughly integrated into the film. We can almost hear the collective rise as Welch utters his iconic condemnation, or the hushed, held breaths whenever Murrow takes the stage. Strathairn himself is electric. He has completely submersed himself into Murrow, taking on the cold, steely gaze, mind constantly churning and cigarette endlessly dragging. In his addresses to the public he radiates pure and unadulterated fury that justice might not be served in the courts of America - it is as strong a belief as we can see on our screens. If there is a flaw (though it is not a glaring one) it is that the direction of the attack is perhaps a little on- the-nose. Clooney's political stances have never been hidden away. At one point Strathairn looks right down the camera as if he was addressing not just the fictional audience but the viewer themselves - the furious gaze almost daring us to not see McCarthy for what he really is. But then again, isn't a topic like this meant to elicit such a reaction? Perhaps Clooney is not just pointing at the McCarthyism of the 50s, but events a little more recent.

I wish that I knew more about the story portrayed in Clooney's Good Night and Good Luck. I initially thought that the real problem here was that the film was just too short and sort of fell off a cliff, as though the budget had been drained and the production crew all packed up and went home, leaving Clooney to wrap up as best as he could.After reading some of the "hate" reviews here at IMDb, it does appear that investigations have been made into the basis of what is now the conventional wisdom (at least among liberals) according to which McCarthy was a witch hunter whose hysteria ended by harming many innocent people.Well, kudos to Clooney for at least getting people to think about these matters! The theme is incredibly contemporary, given our current government's obnoxious appeal to "State Secrets Privilege" as an excuse for withholding evidence about what is being done in the taxpayers' name. These days, it seems more like a ploy used by bureaucrats to protect themselves against charges of having wrongly killed and inappropriately spied on citizens, etc. I'll stick with my original '7' because I do believe that this film is worth watching, regardless of one's political slant. I liked the aesthetic use of black and white, and it was good to learn something about Murrow. Thanks, George!

At its core, "Good Night, and Good Luck" contains a message about the power of the press that's both powerful and disappointing. It's hard to reconcile what's on TV today with what Edward R. Murrow was doing in 1953 when he used his show to push back against Sen. McCarthy. There was nobility in Murrow's fight, and David Strathairn plays him with a quietly commanding presence. He delivers Murrow's words beautifully and it's a highlight that the telecasts play out (largely) on their own. This is a modest story but makes for good drama and breezy entertainment.7/10