For handling a big subject, George Clooney is obviously still in a state of groping and practicing. The direction is right, the more important things are, the less fancy performance is needed. But there is a problem with it. It can be seen that he has too much material in his hand, and the experience of too many people can be told, so much that he can tell a group rather than just a Moro, and can tell how the stubbornness of a few people has created an era. The turning point. But precisely because everything is available, how to choose or make a choice has become the biggest problem. It is his responsibility to shoot badly.
A good result without a trade-off is self-division. The part of Molo is very clear, but the part other than Molo-the editor-in-chief who supported Molo, the big head of CBS, the couple who concealed the identity of the husband and wife, the "leftist reporter" who committed suicide, the one who was investigated for his ex-wife Positions-all very vague. The appearance of some plots completely makes you jump away from the movie, thinking about what it is saying, and it turns out that it says nothing. It seems to be dizzy, but it can't be really dizzy! If you shoot well, there will always be room for you to feel and respond at that time. Movies that leave everything to the audience to flip through the information and summarize their thoughts after watching them are not really good movies for me personally.
BTW: If I want to choose, I will put the long group portrait at the beginning to the end of the film.
View more about Good Night, and Good Luck. reviews
