Raisons d'état

It starts on April 16, 1961. Edward Wilson (Matt Damon) is a top American spy. When the Bay of Pigs don't go well, everybody is suspicious of a leak. Then it flashes back to 1939 Yale University. He is a student and recruited by Bill Sullivan (Robert De Niro) to spy on a professor with German ties. He is forced into a shotgun wedding with Margaret (Angelina Jolie). The war starts and he goes to Britain working for the fledging American spy agency. He would become one of the best at counter-intelligence but his family life suffers tremendously with his wife and son (Eddie Redmayne).

As far as I'm concern, director Robert De Niro is 2 for 2 so far. Matt Damon puts in a deadly quiet performance. This is no Bond movie. There are no flashy gadgets and movie contraptions. This feels like the real thing. A spy would obviously not talk about spy stuff. The internalization and the paranoia seems to hit the right notes. The family dysfunction follows logically. I guess people who want the excitement will have trouble with the quietness. I personally found it intriguing.

I had a huge advantage before watching this on DVD. I was told by a good friend that it was extremely slow, and be prepared to be bored out of "my mind." Well, I wasn't bored, maybe because I now expected a slower, non-action-packed CIA-type film....and I wasn't disappointed. Actually, I liked it, mainly because of the cinematography. This is stunning in its photography. Kudos to Director Robert De Niro and Director of Photography Robert Richardson for their work in here.

I also appreciated the low profanity in here. After watching "The Departed," this far-cleaner film was a treat for the ears, too. Yes, there are a handful of 'f-words," but not much else including no blasphemy.

But, I agree that this is a very slow film and it helps to know that in advance. It's also one you have to follow closely and time periods shift back and forth, mainly from 1961 back to the early 1940s.

The story winds up presenting an interesting question which is posed to Matt Damon's character, "Edward Wilson." He plays an extremely loyal CIA man, a guy who is straight-arrow and one whose priority is country-first. The dilemma occurs at the end when he must choose between what's best for his son or his country.

It's a thought-out, interesting story that takes a few sides to the left of center more than the right, but is not really a movie with any heavy-handed political agenda, mainly pointing out what it takes to be a successful "spy" and that this unemotional detachment can be rough on some people and their families.

Damon heads an all-star cast that includes Angeline Jolie (who looks spectacular as a woman in the early 1940s), Billy Crudup, Alec Baldwin, William Hurt, Timothy Hutton and many others.

This movie, I suspect, will either put you to sleep or fascinate you.

This a very long movie. It's a bit confusing unless you intend to rewatch the beginning after watching the end. Then ... you can understand the beginning better. Sound confusing? It shouldn't be this hard to watch a movie. Plus, the first 2 1/4 hours of this nearly 3 hour movie is kind of boring.

The movie is basically about the life of a man during the start of the CIA. We follow him from his induction into an elite fraternity (or order) into his career with the formation of the CIA.

If it doesn't sound interesting, that's because that's all there really is. Unless you're a CIA history buff and are interested in this stuff, it's a bit boring for the average viewer. There is only one place where there is a real plot - and that's right at the end for about 15 minutes.

Furthermore, the way the movie is chopped up and given how long it is, it's likely you'll forget the what happened at the beginning by the time you get to the end.

For the average viewer, this movie isn't really worth the time. For the CIA history aficionado - knock yourself out.

After enduring trailer after trailer with endless stings of explosions, ridiculous CG-assisted stunts and mindless action, I felt very rewarded with an intelligent and intriguing film that defies the status quo of bigger and louder is better.

The Good Sheperd doesn't insult your intelligence, it stimulates it, sometimes confuses it, and forces you to look several layers beneath the surface. It feels like a throwback to another era of films when the complexity of a character was of greater importance than spectacle.

De Niro took a page from his producer's best work, Francis Ford Coppola, emulating films like The Godfather, The Conversation and Apacalypse Now. The drama rises not from the usual blatant conventional devices but rather by raising questions because of what we're not told and not shown. It requires a great deal of courage to use this style as films have gravitated more and more toward assuming the average moviegoer is of substandard intelligence. The scope of the film is enormous, yet the point of view is narrowly focused to be seen through the eyes of one man. There are a dozen of subplots, but all are carefully tied into the through-line of the story to match the main character's progression.

The film may require some understanding of American history from WWII through the Kennedy administration. It starts with the later years of the story, The Bay of Pigs debacle, and traces the steps that lead to it, one of the more embarrassing moments in the history of U.S. foreign policy. I found it a bit annoying that Matt Damon's character, Edward Wilson, barely seemed to age in the film while others around him did (the best way to determine his age is whether he's wearing wire-rimmed or horn-rimmed glasses), but it didn't ruin the film for me.

Overall though, definitely one of the best films of 2006. A rare film that makes you want to think and understand, rather than forget.

If you're out to see a movie soon, this is one that should be on the top of your list. An all-star cast and an intriguing story isn't all that this movie has. It has some great performances from both Matt Damon and Angelina Jolie that are likely to get some award nominations.

I won't give any spoilers, I'll just give my background and overall opinion. When I saw the commercials, I thought it seemed interesting, but not interesting enough to get me out of my seat right now to go see it. It just didn't seem to have anything totally different than other movies, other than the combination of actors. Since I just got to see it anyway, I realized that it's one of those movies that ends up being better than you think it would be.

Matt Damon, as always, plays a good serious guy who's smart, savvy, and dedicated to his job. It kind of reminded me of his characters in The Departed and the Bourne Identity, except it's in a different situation and setting. His performance in this role was very fitting and believable.

Angelina Jolie surprisingly worked well with this role. In the commercials I thought she was a little too wild compared to Matt Damon's calm character, but she really brought out the emotion of a wife who felt shut out and didn't have a complete relationship with and understanding of her husband.

Robert DeNiro of course was great. It was a nicely added touch to an already good movie.

While I wouldn't say it's as factual as the History Channel, I think the subject of the movie does put good insight on the history of the CIA. I think people who are into government/politics and history would like the storyline. It does focus quite a bit on his family relationship and how it is affected by his job in the CIA, and I'm sure any couple who has been in a similar situation would understand it.

Overall, the movie was better than I thought and I would recommend it to movie-goers, especially those who like suspense and any of the main characters.