A very careful look at paranoia and American censorship.

Rating: 9/10 (14 March 2006)

After so many years of watching David Strathairn perform in many supporting roles, it was very satisfying to see him play the lead part of Edward Murrows, a 1950's news commentator who eventually went to take on Senator Joe McCarthy and early American censorship. Personally, I thought the film was very brilliant and a nice portrayal of an America caught on the skids of post-war paranoia. What makes this movie so pivotal is the fact that it presents two key arguments to the viewer: the responsibility of journalists to report on major, meaningful issues and the relationship between the bureaucracy and the media when those issues are brought forth. The movie also serves as a haunting allegory of today's America and the state of paranoia its citizens still find themselves contending with.
The story initially takes off in 1958 when Murrow delivers a speech before an audience of prominent journalists as to the responsibility of the media with regard to investigating and presenting credible stories to the American people. After the opening of the speech, the film jumps back to 1953 and into the days Murrow had while working as a commentator for CBS. Already a prominent figure on American TV sets, Murrow and his producers agree to air one of their first controversial pieces: the story of an Airforce lieutenant forced to resign because of his father's alleged ties to Serbia. While not a direct attack on McCarthy, the piece does place scrutiny upon the US government and its methods. It also poses the question of how well a citizen's rights are protected when certain expressions are deemed unpopular or sensitive. Can a person become a security threat solely because of what they read? Does the government protect our civil liberties only when it serves as a convenience? From this point the film explores the inner workings of the Red Scare and goes to show how vulnerable the media was during that period. Strathairn excels in portraying Murrow as the stern, articulate, and no-nonsense journalist that he was at the time. It also delves into the internal structure of America's bureaucracy and shows how easily the media can be manipulated.
Aside from the arguments put forth in the film, its structure was put together very well. Also of note was the great supporting cast and Clooney's directing talents. One of the best philosophical movies that I've seen in a while. 9/10