Unsatisfactory film

Rating: 4/10 (6 March 2006)

Although I agree that the acting and direction were superb, and with the grainy B&W I had to keep reminding myself that it was not archive footage, I found the film unsatisfactory.
Although I live in England, I know enough about McCarthy and his witch hunts to know what a devastating effect they had on American political life, and on the media and entertainment. None of this came over in the film - one Chicago-based airman, and a half-wit who had suddenly been promoted from cleaner at the Pentagon to the coding room - what was all the fuss about? Similarly, I knew about Ed Murrow - I grew up in Britain just after the war, when his reports from the US were a regular feature of BBC output, and I had a great admiration for him even before I found out that his reports from London during the war had played a major role in softening up US opinion so that after Pearl Harbor the US came in and helped us win the war.
But how did he come over in the film? Ineffectual and vindictive (with good cause - but vindictive none the less). The film ended when McCarthy was about to be called before the Senate to answer for his actions, and I suppose we were meant to believe that Ed Murrow and Fred Friendly had played a part in this (as I am sure in real life they did), but their broadcasts seemed peripheral and to take place in a vacuum - were they really having such an earth-shattering effect? In short, the film failed to make its point. I am sure those guys at CBS did a great job, but if you didn't know that before seeing the film I doubt if you would come out of the cinema convinced.