Healthy Living Books DVD
welcome to the Healthy Living Bookshop, here you will find a great resource for DVD for the whole family.
DVD : Good Night and Good Luck [2005] .
Rating: 
- Historical Inaccuracies
We all know that what Senator Joe McCarthy said in the 1950s about the communist threat facing America was filled with lies. But how many of us also know that much of what today's news and entertainment media says about the McCarthy Era is equally flawed? McCarthy died discredited in 1957, and his lies fortunately died with him. But the distortions that today's news media use to conceal their own misdeeds during that era remain with us. This film is an illustration of that. It's not only propaganda, it's poorly done and implausible propaganda.
The clue lies in this film's portrayal of McCarthy, a portrayal that has hardened into dogma among most professional journalists. Senator McCarthy, the film tells us, was such an immensely powerful figure that Edward R. Murrow, a journalist at CBS-TV, displayed great courage in talking him on in 1953.
Does that make sense? In 1953, McCarthy was the junior senator from Wisconsin and had been in that office for only six years. It's not a position that carries with it much political power. Today, most Americans don't even know who holds that office and certainly wouldn't hesitate to criticize someone with so little power. In contrast, Murrow had been an internationally known and well-respected reporter since May of 1938, when he covered the German annexation of Austria for CBS radio. The American public had been hearing him for fifteen years and millions tuned into his TV show, "See It Now." Look at the numbers. McCarthy had been nationally known only since his Wheeling, West Virginia speech in February of 1950, a mere three years earlier. Three years or fifteen--who really had the most influence and power?
Of course, that doesn't mean that McCarthy wasn't powerful or that no one need fear to tangle with him. Even President Eisenhower, who loathed McCarthy, was forced to bide his time, waiting for the senator to self-destruct. But McCarthy's power did not rest in who he was. It rested on what the national press had made out of him. That's the key to understanding why the media in this country has a vested interest in distorting the history of that era. It was they who had turned a politician with no particular talent and a propensity to lie into someone millions of Americans saw as a brave and honest opponent of communist infiltration into American life.
If you want a historical parallel, think of former Vice-President Albert Gore and the millions who believe what he says about global warning. They eagerly follow his hints of dark conspiracies by oil companies. They want dissenting voices silenced, and our lives forcibly reorganized to remove what they think is a great danger. Former vice-presidents aren't that powerful. It's the media that gives Gore a platform from which to speak and rarely challenges what he says. The real problem isn't the fear-monger. It's a hysteria-prone press lacking in judgment.
Substitute a communist conspiracy for one by oil companies and you have the McCarthy Era. It was created by the press and not McCarthy. That's what this film fails to point out. Murrow had to take a bold stand against McCarthy because for three years many hundred of reporters and news outlets had repeated what McCarthy said without critically examining it. Over and over, McCarthy made claims that did not stand up to close scrutiny. The closest this film comes to admitting that is in its oft-repeated statement that reporting the news should mean more than reporting what each side in a controversy was saying.
I'll close with a brief look at the film as a film. It's the fifties, so be prepared for more smoking than you see in films set in the present. Murrow himself was heavy smoker who died in 1965 of lung cancer. Also, this film focuses almost exclusively on the world of CBS. The larger world only appears in brief flashes, typically on television monitors.
--Michael W. Perry, editor of The School of Journalism in Columbia University: The Book That Transformed Journalism from a Trade into a Profession
Rating:
- A Wonderful Critique, If Not The One You Expect
George Clooney freely admits that "Ocean's Twelve" was made in order to ensure that both this and "Syriana" saw the light of day. Perhaps this is a case of making a silk purse out of a sow's ear. It is heartening to see something of use coming out of that.
"Good Night & Good Luck" seems, on the surface, to be a film about the witch hunts of Joseph McArthy against perceived threat of communism in America. The film traces journalist Ed Murrow's televisual campaign to discredit the committee set up to investigate this and also McArthy himself. Using newsreel footage to illustrate McArthy's interrogations highlights his approach excellently and also highlights the film's liberal tendencies, but this film isn't a critique on paranoia from invisible threats. It could be argued that the modern equivalent is the war on terror but this is merely the context.
The film opens with a speech delivered by Murrow 5 years after the central action of the film takes place. Here Murrow warns of the potential for television to abandon the prinicples of a high-minded media for mere trivia. The description of a possible future televisual landscape obsessed with the mundane seems to quite adequately describe the current state of the media. The film nicely illustrates the tensions of producing bold campaigning issue based programmes in prime time. Essentially this is a better, more intellgent, serious minded version of "Broadcast News".
David Strathairn's Murrow is excellent. He captures a real sense of the purpose and drive of a man who not only sees McArthy as a narrow-minded bully but a threat to democratic and free speech. Supported by a large cast of uniformly excellent actors, this is not star vehicle it well could have been. The likes of Ray Wise as a beleguared anchorman, Robert Downey Jr. as slick reporter, and Frank Lingella as the CBS chief executive shining through as jewels in this richly well acted crown.
That doesn't mention Clooney who both performs in, writes, and directs here. His performance is good but it's the direction which shines. The film looks just right with the rather bleached black and white tones of cinematographer Robert Elswit effectively evoking a sense of the past. This is extremely taught and sharp. Not only does he get the excellent cast performing but he keeps the film moving nicely. It slips by nicely seeming longer than its rather spare 89 minutes. The pace is partly due to the lovely musical contributions of jazz singer Dinanne Reeves. The opening song, "Come Dance With Me", has never sounded better.
The film won't please all, it's the story of the brave man facing down his detractors in the name of integrity, wearing its liberal credentials on its sleeve. Yet it's also probably the best critque of the morality of television since "Quiz Show".
Rating: - communism = terrorism
world didnt change much after WWII under the USA (they had bombarder 48 countries since UN was created), before threath was the Communists, now the threat is us; potential terrorists!!!!
Rating:
- Skilfully crafted and thought provoking
Skilfully crafted and thought provoking. Small in scale and tightly made, but all the better for it. I don't think the hi-def versions at twice the price would add anything over the standard, very crisp black and white picture. If you're not familiar with the antics of Senator Joseph McCarthy then brief yourself beforehand because you will miss much of the context of the film. If you like 50s jazz then you'll also appreciate the soundtrack, a nice bonus.
Rating: - A nice history lesson
Ed Murrow was an important figure in American television during the 50s and at the time of the Un-American Activities Committee of the Senate was courageous enough to speak out against the despicable McCarthy, a paranoid drunk who chaired the committee. McCarthy ran this rather on the lines of Soviet show trials, with rules of evidence and judicial procedures generally shown little respect. McCarthy's activities broke the lives of hundreds of people, many greatly talented, or drove them into exile. This film shows Murrow taking the decision, with the somewhat fractious support of his boss, to editorialise at the end of his show, criticising McCarthy's methods. That a large broadcasting corporation like CBS allowed this says something good about those times and is something that would not happen today. An interesting thing was the way Morrow and his colleague pay for the advertising slot the sponsor refused to pay for given Murrow's controversial stance. In the USA, it is the advertisers that are the censors.
That George Clooney produced this film at this time suggests he is making parallels with Bush's America. Since 9/11, the media in the USA has been timid in criticising the government. Instead of Communists, the enemy has become the liberals (what we would call moderates or centrists). The Patriot Act (how often is the word 'patriot' or 'patriotic' linked to repressive policies?), massive phone tapping and replacement of the management of Public Service Broadcasting by 'politically acceptable' personnel are just a few examples of repression. Meanwhile, Fox News editorialises non-stop for the political right. McCarthy had a very broad idea of what a Communist was and included anyone with leftish tendencies. It is my view that Clooney sees the two eras as showing different manifestations of political intolerance by the far right which could progress to unthinkable changes to the governance of the USA if not vigorously opposed.
Murrow is shown, correctly, as a chain smoker. This led to his untimely death from lung cancer a some years later.
The acting in the film is first rate. Much of the cinematography was done with a hand-held camera but this has been used judiciously to get into small spaces. There is none of that jerking and wobble put in for 'artistic effect' by many 'creative' cameramen. There are times, though, when part of the field is obscured by intruding heads or bits of the studio structure. The dialogue is naturalistic, with people talking across each other but this can make it difficult to pick out the important bits. The general atmosphere is a bit claustrophobic but wasn't the whole country claustrophobic in those days.
- Historical InaccuraciesWe all know that what Senator Joe McCarthy said in the 1950s about the communist threat facing America was filled with lies. But how many of us also know that much of what today's news and entertainment media says about the McCarthy Era is equally flawed? McCarthy died discredited in 1957, and his lies fortunately died with him. But the distortions that today's news media use to conceal their own misdeeds during that era remain with us. This film is an illustration of that. It's not only propaganda, it's poorly done and implausible propaganda.
The clue lies in this film's portrayal of McCarthy, a portrayal that has hardened into dogma among most professional journalists. Senator McCarthy, the film tells us, was such an immensely powerful figure that Edward R. Murrow, a journalist at CBS-TV, displayed great courage in talking him on in 1953.
Does that make sense? In 1953, McCarthy was the junior senator from Wisconsin and had been in that office for only six years. It's not a position that carries with it much political power. Today, most Americans don't even know who holds that office and certainly wouldn't hesitate to criticize someone with so little power. In contrast, Murrow had been an internationally known and well-respected reporter since May of 1938, when he covered the German annexation of Austria for CBS radio. The American public had been hearing him for fifteen years and millions tuned into his TV show, "See It Now." Look at the numbers. McCarthy had been nationally known only since his Wheeling, West Virginia speech in February of 1950, a mere three years earlier. Three years or fifteen--who really had the most influence and power?
Of course, that doesn't mean that McCarthy wasn't powerful or that no one need fear to tangle with him. Even President Eisenhower, who loathed McCarthy, was forced to bide his time, waiting for the senator to self-destruct. But McCarthy's power did not rest in who he was. It rested on what the national press had made out of him. That's the key to understanding why the media in this country has a vested interest in distorting the history of that era. It was they who had turned a politician with no particular talent and a propensity to lie into someone millions of Americans saw as a brave and honest opponent of communist infiltration into American life.
If you want a historical parallel, think of former Vice-President Albert Gore and the millions who believe what he says about global warning. They eagerly follow his hints of dark conspiracies by oil companies. They want dissenting voices silenced, and our lives forcibly reorganized to remove what they think is a great danger. Former vice-presidents aren't that powerful. It's the media that gives Gore a platform from which to speak and rarely challenges what he says. The real problem isn't the fear-monger. It's a hysteria-prone press lacking in judgment.
Substitute a communist conspiracy for one by oil companies and you have the McCarthy Era. It was created by the press and not McCarthy. That's what this film fails to point out. Murrow had to take a bold stand against McCarthy because for three years many hundred of reporters and news outlets had repeated what McCarthy said without critically examining it. Over and over, McCarthy made claims that did not stand up to close scrutiny. The closest this film comes to admitting that is in its oft-repeated statement that reporting the news should mean more than reporting what each side in a controversy was saying.
I'll close with a brief look at the film as a film. It's the fifties, so be prepared for more smoking than you see in films set in the present. Murrow himself was heavy smoker who died in 1965 of lung cancer. Also, this film focuses almost exclusively on the world of CBS. The larger world only appears in brief flashes, typically on television monitors.
--Michael W. Perry, editor of The School of Journalism in Columbia University: The Book That Transformed Journalism from a Trade into a Profession
Rating:
- A Wonderful Critique, If Not The One You ExpectGeorge Clooney freely admits that "Ocean's Twelve" was made in order to ensure that both this and "Syriana" saw the light of day. Perhaps this is a case of making a silk purse out of a sow's ear. It is heartening to see something of use coming out of that.
"Good Night & Good Luck" seems, on the surface, to be a film about the witch hunts of Joseph McArthy against perceived threat of communism in America. The film traces journalist Ed Murrow's televisual campaign to discredit the committee set up to investigate this and also McArthy himself. Using newsreel footage to illustrate McArthy's interrogations highlights his approach excellently and also highlights the film's liberal tendencies, but this film isn't a critique on paranoia from invisible threats. It could be argued that the modern equivalent is the war on terror but this is merely the context.
The film opens with a speech delivered by Murrow 5 years after the central action of the film takes place. Here Murrow warns of the potential for television to abandon the prinicples of a high-minded media for mere trivia. The description of a possible future televisual landscape obsessed with the mundane seems to quite adequately describe the current state of the media. The film nicely illustrates the tensions of producing bold campaigning issue based programmes in prime time. Essentially this is a better, more intellgent, serious minded version of "Broadcast News".
David Strathairn's Murrow is excellent. He captures a real sense of the purpose and drive of a man who not only sees McArthy as a narrow-minded bully but a threat to democratic and free speech. Supported by a large cast of uniformly excellent actors, this is not star vehicle it well could have been. The likes of Ray Wise as a beleguared anchorman, Robert Downey Jr. as slick reporter, and Frank Lingella as the CBS chief executive shining through as jewels in this richly well acted crown.
That doesn't mention Clooney who both performs in, writes, and directs here. His performance is good but it's the direction which shines. The film looks just right with the rather bleached black and white tones of cinematographer Robert Elswit effectively evoking a sense of the past. This is extremely taught and sharp. Not only does he get the excellent cast performing but he keeps the film moving nicely. It slips by nicely seeming longer than its rather spare 89 minutes. The pace is partly due to the lovely musical contributions of jazz singer Dinanne Reeves. The opening song, "Come Dance With Me", has never sounded better.
The film won't please all, it's the story of the brave man facing down his detractors in the name of integrity, wearing its liberal credentials on its sleeve. Yet it's also probably the best critque of the morality of television since "Quiz Show".
Rating:
- communism = terrorismworld didnt change much after WWII under the USA (they had bombarder 48 countries since UN was created), before threath was the Communists, now the threat is us; potential terrorists!!!!
Rating:
- Skilfully crafted and thought provokingSkilfully crafted and thought provoking. Small in scale and tightly made, but all the better for it. I don't think the hi-def versions at twice the price would add anything over the standard, very crisp black and white picture. If you're not familiar with the antics of Senator Joseph McCarthy then brief yourself beforehand because you will miss much of the context of the film. If you like 50s jazz then you'll also appreciate the soundtrack, a nice bonus.
Rating:
- A nice history lessonEd Murrow was an important figure in American television during the 50s and at the time of the Un-American Activities Committee of the Senate was courageous enough to speak out against the despicable McCarthy, a paranoid drunk who chaired the committee. McCarthy ran this rather on the lines of Soviet show trials, with rules of evidence and judicial procedures generally shown little respect. McCarthy's activities broke the lives of hundreds of people, many greatly talented, or drove them into exile. This film shows Murrow taking the decision, with the somewhat fractious support of his boss, to editorialise at the end of his show, criticising McCarthy's methods. That a large broadcasting corporation like CBS allowed this says something good about those times and is something that would not happen today. An interesting thing was the way Morrow and his colleague pay for the advertising slot the sponsor refused to pay for given Murrow's controversial stance. In the USA, it is the advertisers that are the censors.
That George Clooney produced this film at this time suggests he is making parallels with Bush's America. Since 9/11, the media in the USA has been timid in criticising the government. Instead of Communists, the enemy has become the liberals (what we would call moderates or centrists). The Patriot Act (how often is the word 'patriot' or 'patriotic' linked to repressive policies?), massive phone tapping and replacement of the management of Public Service Broadcasting by 'politically acceptable' personnel are just a few examples of repression. Meanwhile, Fox News editorialises non-stop for the political right. McCarthy had a very broad idea of what a Communist was and included anyone with leftish tendencies. It is my view that Clooney sees the two eras as showing different manifestations of political intolerance by the far right which could progress to unthinkable changes to the governance of the USA if not vigorously opposed.
Murrow is shown, correctly, as a chain smoker. This led to his untimely death from lung cancer a some years later.
The acting in the film is first rate. Much of the cinematography was done with a hand-held camera but this has been used judiciously to get into small spaces. There is none of that jerking and wobble put in for 'artistic effect' by many 'creative' cameramen. There are times, though, when part of the field is obscured by intruding heads or bits of the studio structure. The dialogue is naturalistic, with people talking across each other but this can make it difficult to pick out the important bits. The general atmosphere is a bit claustrophobic but wasn't the whole country claustrophobic in those days.
We have also partnered with Amazon and are able to provide a very wide selection of New and Used DVD for sale. Please browse our extensive collection and take advantage of our great discounts and savings offered. DVD : Good Night and Good Luck [2005]
