The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

There are moments that feel comical, some horrific, and some downright inspiring but the tonal shifts hardly matter as the end results come to a film that's perfect for this time.

It's a movie as timely as it is provocative and amazingly, for much of its running time, it is weirdly funny.

The tone of this movie is interesting -- the stakes are both dramatic and high, but it's balanced with a lot of fun, tongue and cheek dialogue.

This is a dramatization of the events that lead to the resignation of Dan Rather(Robert Redford) and firing of Mary Mapes (Cate Blanchett) of CBS news/ 60 Minutes. It shows us how the reporters gathered the Bush air force reserve story and were rushed to meet a deadline. About a third of the way through Rather canonizes Mary Mapes by telling us her biography. The production includes scenes where they have to tell her the resume of Dick Thornburgh, something that most likely didn't happen but was done for us "stupids" in the audience.Redford did a good job. You could close your eyes and see Dan Rather when he spoke. Nailed it. Blanchett did a convincing job of Mary Mapes, a woman who depicted as a hard and honest worker with daddy issues. Since Mapes wrote the book on which they based the script, expect to see a story told from her viewpoint. People who "are now or have ever been a liberal" might enjoy this film more than a conservative.Guide: F-bomb. No sex or nudity.

Powerful non-fiction drama about the modern-age tactic of tearing apart someone else's news story for fear of its validity--or rather, finding a vulnerable link in that story and attacking it, dissecting it in the public eye, until nobody remembers anymore what the point of the actual story was supposed to be, only that a flaw was found and therefore it's a crock. Cate Blanchett is excellent as "60 Minutes" producer Mary Mapes who, just prior to the 2004 presidential election, thought she found a tasty piece for the television news program on CBS: questioning whether President George W. Bush received preferential treatment during his time in the military. With hard evidence in the form of letters and documents that Bush did skate by (going AWOL for one year), Mapes and her team beat a five-day clock to produce the story news-anchor Dan Rather (Robert Redford) reported on the air. All appears to be fine after the segment airs, but when pro-Bush camps go after the accuracy of the documents--perhaps smelling a liberal bias--Rather, Mapes and her crew are all called on the carpet by nervous network executives. An investigation of journalism, of television news and its ethics, of politics in the business of TV news and the internal workings of breaking a story about a story all come to the fore here, in generally grand fashion. Redford, initially, seems a curious choice for Rather; he looks nothing like the legendary television personality, though he does have Rather's cadence down and you come to believe in the performance. Blanchett and her support, Dennis Quaid, Topher Grace and Elisabeth Moss, are all terrific. Director James Vanderbilt, who also co-produced and adapted Mapes' book, "Truth and Duty: The Press, the President and the Privilege of Power", does fluid, engrossing work. While the theatrical film faded fast at the box office, it plays very strongly on cable or home video. This might have been the perfect HBO event movie, the intimate medium of television a better fit for the material. *** from ****

This is a very good film. The cinematography, writing, acting, pacing, and most everything else just works. Particularly satisfying is Redford's portrayal of Rather, while not an impression or imitation, treats the man with the respect which is his due. Based on Ms. Mapes's book covering the "Rathergate" scandal, it tends to cover both sides of the issue - was the story politically motivated? The film says "No!" but the words say "Yes!" It's left up to the viewer to decide - which is a welcome and refreshing movie experience in the days of Michael Moore leftist propaganda.The problem I have with the story is the constant assertion that the CBS 60-Minutes news team did no thing other than pursue the truth. This is not the case by the film's own revelations. The team starts off with a clue that George W. Bush was AWOL during his "privileged" tour in the Texas Air National Guard, and that he was "released early" so he could attend Harvard. At times it reads like Stone's JFK with conspiracy theories flying about and fingers pointing at enlarged documents on the wall, building this "solid" case that Bush was deliberately put out of harms way because of who he is while others died in Vietnam. While the film does touch on John Kerry's "purple heart" debacle - it fails to mention stronger issues such as Bill Clinton being the beneficiary of friends in high places regarding Vietnam. The 60-Minutes crew has just one problem - they can't find any collaborating evidence to support their theory. They call everyone they can find and it isn't that no one is willing to talk about it, but they are constantly told there is no story here and getting hung up on. "No stings were pulled" they are constantly told. Suspecting that everyone is afraid of Bush, and rather than "following the facts to the truth," they continue to dig, and end up finding Bill Burkett, who has copies of two memos that seem to suggest that Bush was AWOL from the Air National Guard. They don't say that, but it's what Mapes WANTS to believe, and so they go with it. AWOL stands for "Away Without Leave" which means a soldier who has orders to be at a post at a certain time was not - in fact - there at that time and in violation of those orders. A soldier is not AWOL if he is away WITH permission - something the film glosses over. That is, we never know if Bush has permission or not - just that he was not on base to be evaluated - according to the memos.They try to have the documents authenticated, and two of the four experts refuse to do it because they are not originals. Mapes pushes forward, backed by the belief that even if the memos themselves are fakes, the information on them is at least true, and that's good enough. They put the story together, and because 60-Minutes is being pre-emptied by - shudder, a Billy Graham crusade - they decide to push the story out in four days rather than - well - actually baking the story more before rushing it to air. According to the film, they were editing footage seconds before air time. But, it would seem, it was more important to get "the truth" out about Bush in the election year sooner than later, then say, do their jobs.Calamity ensues after the airing, with everyone pointing out the very obvious proportional fonts used in the memos, the fact that they were copies of copies, the New Times Roman Font, and a silly stunt about the super- scripted "th" which indicate that the memos were produced using Microsoft Word. They actually dig through boxes of documents looking for a super-scripted "th" to "prove" that it was possible in 1972 to have a typewriter with such a feature. Tap-dancing and straw- grasping at its most desperate.The film ends with an inquest, where Mapes defends the memos insisting that they must be real because of the intimate knowledge a forger would have to possess in order to create them, but then make the ridiculous mistake of creating them using Microsoft Word. That alone screams that the documents should not have been trusted, but Mapes did anyway because - well - you can't un-ring a bell and if it gets Kerry elected then it's all in being on the Right Side of History. Yet, it still doesn't excuse why the memo format wasn't questioned until it was pointed out to them. The punch line is that Mapes needed them to be true so they could smear Bush. Right or wrong, true or false, the story was run to smear Bush, which is NOT pursuance of the truth even if it should end up being the truth.The film never takes a solid position on Bush, and I think that's the point. What is the truth here? It's left up to the viewer.

This is a dramatic re-creation of the fall from grace of CBS news anchor Dan Rather (Robert Redford). Controversy swells after erroneous reporting is blamed on newscaster Dan Rather and his CBS News head Mary Mapes (Cate Blanchett) following a segment on 60 Minutes exposing how President George W. Bush received preferential treatment to avoid being drafted to the Vietnam War. The aftermath's bottom line cost their highly respected jobs. The R rated presentation also features a cast including: Dennis Quaid, Elisabeth Moss, Topher Grace, Dermont Mulroney, Stacy Keach, Bruce Greenwood and Rachel Blake.