Movie Review
Robert DeNiro’s “The Good Shepherd” is the kind of movie where one of two things can happen to the person watching it. 1.) It will bore them out of their mind. 2.) It will leave their thoughts totally provoked.
It’s been interesting over the last few years to notice how much the environment in which one watches a movie affects the actual watching of the movie. In the case of “The Good Shepherd,” watching it at the right place, at the right time, with the right people is imperative. At my screening the theatre was nearly full, and as each shocking moment passed, the audience was naturally loyal in their reactions.
With edifying baby-steps, DeNiro unravels the story behind the turmoil-filled vocational life of Edward Bell Wilson (Matt Damon). Beginning at his rise to power in the 1930s, “The Good Shepherd” fragments Wilson’s life into two major time periods: His career at the time of the Bay of Pigs and the events that led him there from 1939 to 1960.
Damon’s Wilson is stone-faced and quiet. He rarely smiles or laughs, but he’s incredibly devoted to the job at hand. In fact, when Clover (Angelina Jolie) is literally throwing herself at him, he denies the invitation. His heart is with Laura (Tammy Blanchard), a deaf girl he met and fell for at school.
Nonetheless, attraction (or rather, submission) intervenes, and Wilson is forced into marriage with Clover. This mistake is the foundation for a subplot self-contained inside the strenuous spy-life of Wilson. As he tries to stay sharp on the war front, his household unfolds. That neglect eventually catches up with him, and when it happens, the moment is devastating.
Again, I believe the effectiveness of such storytelling will depend both on the viewer and on the environment in which it is viewed. As it stood, I was not once confused by the time frame. This, despite a drastic lack of aging make-up on Matt Damon. The entire movie, he seems to be about the same age, although his character spans twenty-two years.
In story, this is a film of major complexity and scope. Screenwriter Eric Roth (“Munich”) is sly in his narrative, assuming his audience is willing to follow many characters over decades and, what’s more, into the complicated realm of spies, double agents, and multi-government vendettas. He assumes correctly, at least in my case.
Robert DeNiro, aside from doing his best work as an actor in a long time, is very strong in two other areas: his casting is impeccable; his direction is mesmerizing. In terms of sheer talent, “The Good Shepherd” claims a monopoly on the industry’s great veteran and youth actors, from John Turturro to Angelina Jolie, William Hurt to Michael Gambon, Alec Baldwin to Billy Crudup. And there’s not a false note in the bunch, not even in the surprising cameos by people like Joe Pesci and Timothy Hutton.
DeNiro is fantastic as a director; he’s the kind of filmmaker that knows how to insert visual subtleties. It’s the type of insertion left unaware to passive moviegoers, and yet the very thing that makes “The Good Shepherd” – with its 2 hour 40 minute running time – a tight fit.
By the end of it, “The Good Shepherd” has transported us to that time so flawlessly that the real world is a shock. As an appreciative viewer, I was thankful the movie was so wonderfully detailed, so viciously unhinged, so terribly unapologetic. It’s a view of one of the CIA that we don’t see, nor do we assume. And with the accents of tragedy and betrayal, “The Good Shepherd” is a slyly rewarding and thrilling spy drama. ****