Sunday, February 23, 2014
Discussion: GOOD NIGHT AND GOOD LUCK
When I asked you all to discuss the film on the blog, I meant someone should go ahead and post about this topic! This is a 400 level course, and so it's really an expectation that you will all take some initiative where this blog is concerned. That said, this is the place to offer any comments on the film we watched last week, in particular its relevance to studying television and culture..
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Good Night and Good Luck, despite being a slower paced movie is one of the most detailed films I have seen in quite some time. When I say detailed, I mean the amount of effort that is put into filming the minutiae, the same way David Lynch did in Twin Peaks. Some examples of this include the smoke rising from the silhouette of Edward Murrow right before he takes the stage at the start of his speech, or the way that they focus on a character's face from behind the shoulder of another. I also noticed that sometimes the sound was amplified in awkward situations, so you were able to hear the clothes of the characters rustling. One of these scenes is when it is revealed that Joseph and Shirley are married and have to leave CBS. Anyone else notice these things? Any symbolic references?
ReplyDeleteI don't think it was all symbolic but it was more of indicator for the audience to pay close attention to a specific moment.
ReplyDeleteI realize this is a 400 level class, and it is expected to say something quite intellectual or deep about GOOD NIGHT AND GOOD LUCK, but I honestly was bored by the movie. All talented actors, yet it just didn't peak my interest. It was in fact well done; I don't take that away from it; with the use of music, the use of silence, the close ups, the change in pace, etc. to evoke certain emotions and reactions, to set the scene and feelings of the scenes in the movie, to emphasize certain points, etc....But I'm sorry to say that I just couldn't get into it (though I really am in love with Robert Downey Jr.).
ReplyDeleteI thought the film itself was amazing, and although it was slow I found it still entertaining. I felt between the usage of black and white and the slow pace it really did bring you back to a more simple time when news was actually news and not full of celebrity gossip. These days it is hard to find real journalists still on television. It was nice to see the process and dignity that was upheld by television journalist. I think portraying the world of television in a film gave us a more up-close and emotional look at what went into making this history. We can all see Ed Murrow in YouTube clips and television archives but it’s nice to see what it took to get such hard hitting news to the television screen. The slowness of the film made the exciting moments even more exciting. It was also nice to see a general sense of dignity and respect in a media related career, which I feel is very hard to come by nowadays.
ReplyDelete