Does good film-making, make a good film?

Rating: 6/10 (8 April 2010)

This is a difficult film, both in subject matter and in pace.
In 1920s America, a woman returns from work as a telephone exchange supervisor to find her young son missing. Five months later, the police re-unite her with her son; only, it is not her son. From this premise, we dive into a dark world where bad things happen to good people on a whim, where the police are corrupt, and where, good exists only in the individual.
This is an America trapped by 'the system', where conformity is the only route to freedom.
Clint Eastwood is a masterful story teller, but this movie is overly dense. It is literally 'bursting' with heaviness. Every detail, every nuance is ruminated on, every close-up is a study in Actors working hard. It is as preponderant as the word suggests.
Don't get me wrong; everything about the film is very accomplished. The high-contrast photography. The measured editing. The throaty, horn-dominated symphony, lurking dangerously below the surface.
The thing is, it takes itself far too seriously. And there is a gaping plot-hole concerning the boy's involvement that you must suspend in order to access the story.
The actors are brilliant as is to be expected, but by the middle of the film one can't escape the feeling that they have all been tragically mis-cast.
Even for those of you for whom verbosity is not a problem, this film will leave you cold. Any number of other films have done this sort of thing before and made it work.
Watch Doubt, or Capote before you dive into this one.