Thank you for being a valued part of the CNET community. As of December 1, 2020, the forums are in read-only format. In early 2021, CNET Forums will no longer be available. We are grateful for the participation and advice you have provided to one another over the years.

Thanks,

CNET Support

General discussion

Haven't heard any comments good or bad on Good Night

Apr 16, 2006 2:39AM PDT

and Good Luck here. Watched it on DVD last night, and really enjoyed it, though it portrays a dark episode in US post war history.

It covers a few months in early 1953 (we didn't get our television til Christmas that year) and is wonderfully evocative in black and white, since that's how we used to see everything on the tube anyway.

Unfortunately it comes in on Welch's speech, the attorney for the US Army, just after he makes one of the great assaults in Senate history. When one of Welch's firms younger attorneys is attacked by McCarthy as a member of a Communist organization (allegation like so many made by McCarthy untrue, and unfounded) Welch asks "Where did you get this information?" McCarthy waffles and says its not important where he got the informantion but Welch continues "Well did you get it from an informant and if so who is that informant? McCarthy continues to waffle, and says no it didn't come from an informant. Welch then asks "Well, did it come from a Pixie?" McCarthy looks both baffled and amused and asks what a Pixie is, while Roy Cohn tries to stop him from pursuing the issue, Welch replies "Well Senator, I think I would describe a Pixie as a second cousin to a fairy!" at which the smile falls from McCarthy's face, and Roy Cohn, the object of the comment, looks completely stunned. From that point on we move into the better known territory of Welch explaining that the young man had come to him and had said he belonged to a Lawyers League which McCarthy and nobody else had named as a Communist Front Organization. After that we get to the "Have you no shame, Senator, Have you at long last lost all traces of decency" speech which many of us know nearly by heart.

And yes Bobby Kennedy is visible in a couple of shots sitting at the end of the hearing table.

Murrow himself lost his program almost immediately after the interview, and the relationship, once very close, between Murrow and Wm Paley the head of CBS never recovered though Murrow remanined VP as head of the News Division.

I think its a terrific movie, and deserves a viewing for its content, and another for the commentary track which explains why George Clooney made (and co-wrote) the movie (his dad was a newsman during this period).

Rob

Discussion is locked

- Collapse -
As I noted in my post, the movie takes place in a few months
Apr 19, 2006 2:00AM PDT

of 1954 and at an address given by Murrow in 1958.

The whole process of movie making is ill equipped to handle the story that the reviewer, a nit picker in my opinion, wants handled which would then cover about 10 years and include a lot of extraneous material. I understood the movie to be about the confrontation between Murrow and McCarthy. Certainly I have mentioned most of those things that the reviewer considers important in my posts and so I don't feel the need to reply to them.

But an important point may be glossed over that appears in the Washington Post article, and that is
"the phony posturing of Senator Joseph McCarthy aside." In other words the reviewer embraces one of the points of the movie which was that McCarthy was a grand-standing blow hard with not a shred of evidence, who never found a Communist anywhere, and almost certainly couldn't have found one even had someone had given him a road map.

The other point of the movie is the famous line quoted by Murrow rebuking the gullibility of the American people, and its governors. "The fault, dear Brutus, lies not in our stars, but in ourselves." Wm. Shakespeare, Julius Caesar.

Rob

- Collapse -
That is an artificial constraint Rob
Apr 19, 2006 2:44AM PDT

I could probably make a movie showing Che in a positive light by limiting the scope -- oh wait, already been done Sad -- but such movies should be dismissed for any historical value and viewed as pure entertainment at best.

I find it hard to belive that Murrow was without bias or motivation in his coverage of McCarthy given his relationship with Duggan and the facts that eventually came to light.

- Collapse -
So it is your contention that Murrow was a Communist,
Apr 19, 2006 12:46PM PDT

or an apologist for Communists, or a Fellow Traveller, and this all without evidence. Lots of people get taken in by friends who have their own agendas. As noted before, Murrow left Bill Shirer to twist in the wind despite Shirer's impeccable record and absence of Communist connections. That indicates to me that Murrow was insufficiently staunch in standing by his friends when they were under attack, which makes him Right leaning not Left.

I know I'll never convince you Evie, but this kind of baseless slur is really beneath you. You're too smart for that.

Rob

- Collapse -
Your post is the baseless slur
Apr 19, 2006 8:12PM PDT

I said no such thing.

- Collapse -
a nod is as good as a wink to a blind......
Apr 19, 2006 8:46PM PDT

I find it hard to belive that Murrow was without bias or motivation in his coverage of McCarthy given his relationship with Duggan and the facts that eventually came to light


you had me convinced.....

.

- Collapse -
(NT) (NT) *sigh*
Apr 19, 2006 8:57PM PDT
- Collapse -
Since I have a little more time now ...
Apr 21, 2006 2:51AM PDT

... I'll explain my comment more fully. I was talking about PERSONAL bias, not political. I'm talking about being motivated out of duty/loyalty to a close friend, not that he was a communist or a sympathizer. And in many ways, Murrow's actions were a matter of self-preservation.

This link might shed some light: http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/pipermail/lbo-talk/Week-of-Mon-20060213/031756.html

George Clooney walked up to this human drama, brushed lightly against
its edge and passed right around it. Given his politics, one can see
why. But any self-respecting cinematic storyteller ought to kick
himself for failing to find room for the psychic tension, the tragedy,
the surprise, and the supreme irony of the fact that the crusading
journalist Edward R. Murrow, believing he was vindicating the dignity
and rights of the loyal opposition, took his potent shot at
"McCarthyism" partly in defense of a Soviet spy.


We can only guess at how Murrow might have reacted had he been alive when VENONA was released.

- Collapse -
Tho' I saw those times and events "live"...
Apr 18, 2006 4:03AM PDT

.... I am waiting for it to be on cable.

IMO, it should be seen.

Though some may think it is an embellished and slanted story produced by a liberal, IMO, the length of a movie made for theater showing is not long enough to capture the full impact of those hearings.

Let's hope we never see the same again in this country.

Angeline
Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email
semods4@yahoo.com

- Collapse -
I would prefer a well done ...
Apr 18, 2006 4:50AM PDT

... History Channel documentary. I don't believe the length of the film for theater viewing is the problem.

Evie Happy

- Collapse -
It's available on DVD...."Point of Order"
Apr 19, 2006 9:37PM PDT

The Army-McCarthy hearings (different from the House Un-American Committee hearings) were the ones that spelled McCarthy's downfall.

Those hearings lasted 6 weeks.

The DVD runs 97 minutes.

"Point of Order" is a a series of clips taken from the nationally televised hearings.

As the hearings were televised per the format of that day (?kinescope?), I don't know how much of te hearings has been preserved.

There was also a docu-drama series made for TV in the past, maybe in the last 20 years. It had a sympathetic aura, included his marriage, and his alcoholism. But I could not find any references to it, so it maight not be available.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0058481/

Angeline
Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email
semods4@yahoo.com

- Collapse -
P.S. Just found out it was on TV in 1975...
Apr 19, 2006 9:44PM PDT
- Collapse -
Thankyou! Will take a look!
Apr 19, 2006 11:27PM PDT

It's not just this subject, there have been a lot of similar type films made for the bigscreen that I've taken a pass on because they don't tell the whole story, or a version thereof.

There are certain people in Hollywood whose pockets I would rather not line as well. Wink

Evie Happy