Truth (2015)

Cate Blanchett stars as Mary Mapes, producer of the CBS 60 minutes programme hosted by Dan Rather (Robert Redford), in Truth. The story takes place during the Killian documents scandal when allegations arose that George Bush Jr went AWOL during the Vietnam War to dodge the draft. The controversy gets out of hand causing the resignation of Dan Rather as anchor of CBS news, and the dismissal of Mapes as producer. The film is based on the book by Mapes titled Truth and Duty: The Press, the President and the Privilege of Power.

There are multiple messages the film tries to get across. One could be that people in positions of power can get away with certain things pretty easily. Another is that people can take advantage of the chaos that ensues after the outcry of a loud minority on the internet, with the help of other media outlets, to distract from the main story. The main theme, I would say, is that bullies come in all forms, and can be highly destructive.

I think that the film-makers wanted to elicit from their audience opinions about power imbalance and accountability, and maybe even sensationalism. Clearly the other news agencies depicted in the movie were guilty of sensationalist behavior. Perhaps the writers and directors and actors wanted to simply tell a true story about a brilliant journalist who had to struggle very hard to combat the gravity of hyped up nonsense. It was an insult to Mapes' professionalism to have to deal with lame bloggers who weren't accountable to anything (assuming this is even true). Maybe that's the movie's biggest flaw. I don't know what it wanted me to believe. I'm not going to think that Mapes and Rather were innocent just because Quaid whispered a cliché monologue about why they're so compatible with each other (the plane scene).

An original draft of this review had me ranting about the political landscape of 2005. I (sort of?) learned about an important part of American media history. But the focus of the film kept changing. Some themes would come and go while others would resurface in little intervals (three to be exact). For example, the movie started out strong, with high hopes about evidence of the scandal being strong and hard hitting. Then quickly the plot takes a 90-degree turn, and now we're watching Mapes struggling to resolve one measly discrepancy that's grabbing all the media attention. After that disaster subsides, we begin watching a movie about a corporate investigation into false journalism. The storytelling was incoherent, finding myself with unanswered questions as the next big event came.

Most of my questions regarded the documents. The technical military jargon in the dialogue was difficult to follow, adding to the confusion. I found myself repeatedly asking: "who's that guy? Why is he mentioned all of the sudden? John Kerry was a thing back then?" That last question speaks to my ignorance, but still, the dialogue was clunky.

If you watch the film conscious of the underlying theme, it'll be less painful. The theme whose undertones influences all of Mapes' actions is her relationship with her abusive father. She admits at one point that he's the reason she needs to stand up to bullies. And in each of the three stages described above, that is precisely her motivation. First, she "asks questions" about a possibly incriminating aspect of Bush Jr's military history. But what happens? The bully strikes her down. She fights back by proving that the stupid discrepancy

Fmovies: Greetings again from the darkness. The film is based on the book written by Mary Mapes, "Truth and Duty: The Press, the President, and the Privilege of Power", and plays like a desperate attempt at rationalizing the actions of a TV producer, a TV news icon, their team of reporters and researchers, and the endless drive for ratings by a network news organization. Telling only your side of the story when a significant conflict is involved, does not encourage thinking people to take up your cause.

In 2004, Mary Mapes brought in her team to dig into the rumors that President George W Bush had received preferential treatment in military assignments and that his military service records were either incomplete, had been altered, or proved that he did not fulfill his service requirements. Ms. Mapes professional relationship with Dan Rather allowed her to bring him into the fold, and resulted in significant air time on CBS and "60 Minutes". Most of us know how this saga ended Â… Mapes and her team were let go, and Mr. Rather's time as the network news anchor was unceremoniously ended. While there may very well be substance to the story they were chasing, both the book and the movie act as Ms. Mapes defensive pleas of innocence.

In the film, Cate Blanchett plays Mary Mapes, and Robert Redford plays Dan Rather. Ms. Blanchett, as usual, is exceptional; and Redford is solid in capturing the essence of Rather (though the hair color variances are distracting). The other key players are: Topher Grace as reporter Mike Smith, Dennis Quaid as researcher and former Marine Lt. Colonel Roger Charles, Elisabeth Moss as Lucy Scott, Bruce Greenwood as Andrew Heyward (President of CBS News), Stacy Keach as Mapes source Lt. Colonel Bill Burkett, and Dermot Mulroney as CBS attorney Lawrence Lampher. The film is well cast, but it's not enough to make up for the weak script and the less-than-stellar direction from first timer James Vanderbilt (who did write the screenplay for Zodiac, and is the great-grandson of Albert G Vanderbilt).

Rather than provide any proof that the story was properly documented and confirmed, Mapes and Rather decry the loss of reporters who ask the "tough" questions. Their defense seems to be that they were brave enough to chase the story and ask questions. A sequence is included that positions these two as the last bastions for true news reporting, and that these days news organizations are more concerned with profits and ratings, than breaking a story. This argument conveniently omits the fact that information flows much more freely today than in "the good old days". The actions of politicians and industry leaders are constantly being questioned and scrutinized by the endless stream of bloggers and reporters – both amateurs and professionals. There is no shortage of questions being asked, and the ease with which accusations are leveled actually fits right in with the Mapes approach.

The frustrating part of the movie is that it's a missed opportunity to detail how "legitimate" news organizations go to extremes to document and verify their information and sources, and this is where Ms. Mapes' team fell short. Without intending to, the film plays more similar to Shattered Glass (2003) than All the President's Men (1976) Â… getting a story being more important than proving a story. We are left with the feeling that Ms. Mapes believes asking a question is more important than proving the facts. The cringe-inducing shot of Dan Rather's

There is a sense of self parody to be found in the Pudovkin (Hunger), Eisenstein (Strike)single word title Truth that purports to tell it like it is in the grand but terse titles of ancient Bolshevik propaganda. Then as now we have the big lie if repeated enough becomes truth and in this straight faced telling we have Hollywood allowing nearly a decade to pass to re-hash none of what has changed in the hopes our memories of the incident will have faded. It hasn't.

In 2004 Dan Rather and his 60 Minutes producer Mary Mapes attempted to slander a sitting president (George Bush) up for re-election with false documents that claimed he had skipped out on National Guard duty years earlier. Their smoking gun however was doctored evidence of recently printed material that seasoned journalists should have walked away from but given Dan Rather's open hostility towards Republican Presidents he quixotically mounted his steed with loyal Sancho Panza Mapes at his side and went with the rumor without bona fide facts. CBS fired both of them for applying such amateur skills to their profession. Dan sued, Dan lost.

Hollywood has put a lot of lipstick on this pig by bringing out superstars past (Redford) and present (Blanchette with some of her new shiny Oscar performance leftover angst) to promote and sustain a lie that comes straight from the prevaricator's (Mapes' book) mouth and then further tarted up by a screenwriter specializing in Spider Man scripts. Sometimes the losers do get to write history. They attempt in this case to makeWoodward/Bernstein out of a vindictive Mo and Curley employing sloppy investigative skills bent on getting the scoop even if it is built on a foundation of sand. Meanwhile CBS execs are made to look like a nefarious group out of Network standing in the way and failing to back up our heroes and their inchoate story even if it does not pass the smell test. Truth would like you to believe CBS is part of a "right wing conspiracy" and a secret Bush supporter. Just a bit of a stretch but in keeping with Truth's tall tale.

A much better (and far more honest) story would be on the rise and fall of Nixon slayer Dan Rather's Shakespearean stumble from grace after assuming the mantle of CBS anchor Walter Cronkite and taking the top rated news show to last in the ratings as he had hissy fits on air made quirky statements and claimed to have been kidnapped by a Chicago taxi driver among other things. The divide between Cronkite, "the most honest man in America"and loose cannon Rather may well have brought on the distrust in American media that had the populace turn hard right to the bias viewsof Fox and left to the liberal mocking of comedy news shows. For this Rather should be vilified not lionized with a story that through lies of omission could not be further from the truth.

Truth fmovies. "You're supposed to put yourself out, seek the truth, and take what comes from it." During the election of 2004, 60 minutes producer, Mary Mapes (Blanchett) uncovers a story saying that President Bush went AWOL from the national guard for a year. Thinking she has enough evidence and enough verification Dan Rather (Redford) reports it to the world. Almost immediately the report is called into question and the careers of everyone involved are in jeopardy. This movie hits all the right notes for me is is a true story, it's political and historical. I was looking forward to this movie, and was not disappointed at all. I knew most of the story that took place, but this movie deals with the behind the scenes events that no one knew about. Regardless of your political beliefs this is a hard movie to ignore the facts of. I'm not talking about the facts of the report, but the events and the "witch hunt" that essentially took place. For example, none of the events were investigated but the font of the letters were. This is just a great movie and reminded me of All The President's Men. I highly recommend this. Overall, tense and anger inducing. A movie I highly recommend. I give this an A.

This movie is based on true events. How CBS caved in to the George Bush administration in 2004 to discredit a true news story. A major plot point hinges on the fact that rich and "connected" sons of influential Texans were allowed to enter the National Guard rather than be drafted and serve in Vietnam. CBS's internal investigators said it couldn't be proved. I know it's true because I served in the National Guard in another state and there were several people who got placed there because of "favors." and connections. Kate Blanchett is really good and totally believable as are the other characters. Maybe there is not so much action as ideas and conversation. But the movie rings very true and deserves to be seen.

Truth is a polemic, the title is ironic as it tries to justify shoddy journalism.

In the year 2000, the producer for 60 minutes Mary Mapes (Cate Blanchett) wanted to investigate whether any strings were pulled for George W Bush to evade doing combat in Vietnam and instead got himself a nice number with the National Guard where he rarely showed up for duty and got extended period of leave. However because of personal circumstances she could not go much further.

In the run up to the 2004 elections by which time Bush is President and assembled a formidable dirty tricks brigade, Mapes who was an award winning producer was hit by a sucker punch which owed more to her stupidity and arrogance.

Mapes was given some photocopies of memos that confirm Bush was rarely in attendance at his National Guard unit. Time factors meant that fact checking was erroneous and Mapes and presenter Dan Rather (Robert Redford) ran with the story. The memos were forgeries and some serious players were apparently behind it although maybe the newsroom needed some old timers who could remember whether typewriters in the 1970s could type a certain raised font.

CBS put together an independent panel to investigate Mapes and her team but we are presented to view them as a kangaroo court.

The film really ties itself in knots to justify sloppy journalism and laments the course of television news in America.

Blanchett is centre stage here surrounded by an all star cast. Redford provides subtle support as Rather. As it has been said, 'an icon playing an icon.'

However this is no 'All the President's Men.' The film was mainly shot in Australia and this harms the film with a lack of location shooting in the USA. I also think it needed a more experienced director to handle the material better as it gets lost in the second half when it becomes plodding and loses sharpness.

As for television news in America, like the UK and other countries it has become lazy or maybe in the age of the internet we can gather news from various sources ourselves and like an old black and white puppet movie, we can see the strings being pulled.

Truth wants to justify that the 60 Minutes team were prepared to ask difficult questions. The team could not answer why they did such poor fact checking when investigating a sitting President who was by then involved in two wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and some elements of the American public were in no mood to rock the boat.