The first half is a challenge, with all the details necessary to retell the story. The second half is much better (and more relevant), with a brilliant Cate Blanchett representing the struggles of journalism in our era.
Justifiably sentimental about the decay of news, and broadcast journalism in particular.
I really love the acting. Cate Blanchett was amazing and the story itself was quite interesting. Not being a US-citizen I did not know about this scandal – in addition to being a little bit too young at the time.It was really well told and I hope it was accurate to at least the book (of course she also tells her own story but it seemed to show both sides a little).
Whilst the film is interesting, this true story does not make for compelling cinema. Possibly of worth to US audiences who are likely to be more familiar with the story than those of us in the UK.
"If truth goes against power, power tends to crush the truth" - Robert Redford
Since I´m not from America I didn´t follow this in 2004. Did they screw up in their investigations ? Maybe, but does this mean they were wrong ? I´d rather have journalists asking questions with the risk of getting it wrong at times than the other way around. As for the movie itself - if you like good quality movie making without green screen and CGI effects this is a movie to watch. As said before good performances and production in general is good.
I'm not sure this should even be a movie. Strong actor performances can't help change what was said and done at CBS in 2004, nor can it change the outcome. They fucked up...royally.
The filmmakers obviously want us to feel sympathy for the involved, and make us believe that they did this in good faith. And well..I do...and have to a degree always done so. BUT...That they acted in good faith doesn't by any means make up for sloppy work.
The acting was good, but the story lacked just about in every department. Very biased, and doesn't give answers as much as give me more doubt about my sympathies in this case. Stay Away!!