The state of independent, hard journalism hangs in the balance in Truth, a docudrama about the pivotal 2004 60 Minutes report in which veteran broadcaster Dan Rather called into question the validity of then-President George W. Bush’s military past. Based on the memoir by former 60 Minutes producer Mary Mapes, the film trumpets the heroism of journalists not afraid to ask any question necessary to get to the almighty truth. Writer and first-time director James Vanderbilt‘s messaging is heavy-handed to say the least (the script is full of loud monologues about journalistic integrity), but the humanistic layers of the story engage on a deeper level, with subtle, powerful character moments counter-balancing the bursts of righteous melodrama.

At the heart of the film is the relationship between Mapes (Cate Blanchett) and Rather (Robert Redford), who together broke the Bush story on CBS News. During their September 8, 2004 episode of 60 Minutes, they presented memos that indicated Bush may have pulled some strings in order to avoid the draft and falsified documents regarding his tenure at the Texas Air National Guard. In no time, right-wing media and bloggers offered up evidence that Bush’s record was legitimate, and that the documents uncovered by the 60 Minutes team were, in fact, fakes. Following a firestorm of controversy, Mapes, Rather and their team went down with their ship, losing their jobs at CBS News in a move that changed the complexion of modern news reporting.

The tragedy, according to Truth, isn’t that two of the most accomplished journalists in the field were fired, but that their original question about Bush’s records got swept aside so quickly. CBS’ media competitors spent an ungodly amount of time and resources covering the controversy surrounding Mapes and Rather and whether or not they were duped by their sources, time and resources that could have been better spent supporting the original question about the President committing fraudulence. Mapes and Rather are icons of old media, and their dismissal signaled the end of a more level-headed era of journalism when figures of power were forced to answer real questions face-to-face with someone like Rather, who at one time had the public’s full trust.

The most gripping aspect of the story revolves not around mass media, however, but Mapes and Rather, old friends who have a quasi father-daughter relationship (subtly expressed by Vanderbilt). As we learn, Mapes was reprimanded by her father for asking questions when she was young. In Rather, she finds a mentor who asks questions with her, a last-of-a-dying-breed confidant for whom she has bottomless admiration. Whenever Mary starts breaking down under pressure, Dan soothes her with his unflappable calmness and deliberately timed jabs of self-deprecation.

The casting of both Redford and Blanchett is excellent; they’re capturing the essence of their real-world counterparts rather than doing a shallow imitation. It comes as no surprise that the veteran actors are magic together, but the supporting get short-changed a bit. Filling out the rest of the 60 Minutes team are military consultant Lt. Colonel Roger Charles (Dennis Quaid) and researchers Lucy Scott (Elizabeth Moss) and Mike Smith (Topher Grace). It hurts a little to watch these three sit so far in the background (Grace goes for broke in his one showcase scene) though it’s understandable that Vanderbilt keeps the focus on Mapes.

The assignment of blame with regards to the scandal is a tricky thing since no party handled every situation properly. While Truth is clearly going to see Mapes’ side of the story the most clearly, the film does acknowledge the mistakes she and her team made in collecting evidence to back up their claims. The suits at CBS, who many believe should have stood by their people, aren’t painted as villains though it’s made very clear that their decision to fire the 60 Minutes team stood on the wrong side of journalism history.

In his first feature, Vanderbilt exhibits little style, though he does respect how priceless Redford and Blanchett look on-screen. At its most heavy-handed, the script is actually pretty cringeworthy. The film alludes to the connection between Mapes’ abusive father and the abusive media monster too heavily, to the point where she actually says she and her news team are being “smacked down” for asking honest questions. The symbolism would’ve rung true without all the underscoring.

Something we’ve seldom seen in movies is the chaotic hustle of a TV news production, something Truth depicts thrillingly. We see the Mapes team, just minutes prior to their deadline to turn in their Bush piece, gathered in the editing room, agonizing over what to cut to meet their required runtime. In the last moment, Mapes makes quick edits with a few flicks of the wrist and the show is ready to go. Frantic moments like these make Truth feel urgent and alive and incredibly entertaining. Were it not for the on-the-nose dramatic outbursts that throw everything out of whack, this might have been the best newsroom drama in years.

Joining the show this week is James Vanderbilt, a veteran screenwriter whose directorial debut, Truth, is out in theaters this weekend. The movie stars Cate Blanchett and Robert Redford and revolves around a the controversial report Dan Rather gave on 60 minutes in 2004 about the alleged fraudulence of George W. Bush’s military record, a piece that would lead to Rather (Redford) and his longtime producer, Mary Mapes (Blanchett) losing their jobs. Also on the show Bernard and CJ run their mouths (as always) about the Mill Valley Film Festival and festival fatigue as well as share their Indie Picks of the Week.

Topics

• Indie Picks (1:17)
• MVFF38 (7:18)
• Festival Fatigue (31:27)
• James Vanderbilt Truth Interview (39:57)

WTI Articles Referenced in the Podcast

MVFF38 Diaries
I Smile Back TIFF Review
Room TIFF Review
Son of Saul Cannes Review
The Forbidden Room Review

Subscribe to the Way Too Indiecast

• Subscribe to our podcast on iTunes
• Subscribe on Stitcher

Ten years ago Hollywood graced the world with their Tobey Maguire led rendition of Spider-Man which helped pave the way for a generation of super hero movies to litter our summer line up. Then, Hollywood upped the ante and delivered upon us Spider-Man 2 which was met with critical and financial acclaim. With dollar signs in their eyes and arguably the best source material in the entire Spider-Man universe, Hollywood churned out Spider-Man 3, and came up about two feet short of home plate and was tagged out by a mob of pitchfork wielding critics and fans. Poor Hollywood retreated into its cave of remake henchmen and stewed upon the decision of what to do with the Spider-Man franchise. “We will remake it!” They cried as they threw stacks of $100 bills at each other. “Yes! And we won’t even bother with any of that Nolan-esque gritty reboot nonsense either!” And they made it so. With new directors, writers, and actors, Hollywood was ready to rock-and-roll with their shiny new Spider-Man vehicle in The Amazing Spider-Man!

And rock-and-roll they did not. I can’t imagine a more flat remake than this. It literally treads the same water as the original only more failingly. Andrew Garfield may make an arguably better Peter Parker/Spider-Man with his British-ness and super hair, but everyone forgets that in 2002, Tobey Maguire was being hailed as the true savior of all things spider related.

The Amazing Spider-Man sticks closer to the source material in that they invite Emma Stone as Gwen Stacy to the party and provides a more fleshed out and real super science corporation Oscorp versus the cartoonish one provided in 2002. But the film has the much of the same origin story as the ten year old Spider-Man.

Even if it isn’t exactly the same plot-wise as the original 2002 version, it feels the same. The film still has that sappy ham-fisted moment where everyone agrees to help Spider-Man at a moment of great need. I imagine if a Brooklynite man saw a teenager dressed in a spandex unitard shooting ropes out his wrists and limping around sixty stories overhead, they wouldn’t say, “My good gracious, that man needs our help! Quick! Frank! Help conjure the manpower needed to help this poor unitard wearing teenager in his swinging ways!”

The Amazing Spider-Man also falters with some of the action scenes as well. One particular scene that stands out as especially awkward is one where the villain, a scientist lizard-man, attacks the school Peter Parker attends in an attempt to destroy him quickly. During the whole fight, the musical score accompanying the fight is a wailing and triumphant orchestral movement that is a very strange juxtaposition of the fight scene in which Peter Parker is getting his spider face smashed into everything.

The biologist in me also cringed when the villain grabs a couple of unlabeled beakers of presumably colored water and mixes them together to form a perfectly sized explosion to knock Spider-Man out from his hiding spot. Hollywood still hasn’t grasped the concept that their audience can tell when their being spoon fed fake science. Although, I say this whilst viewing a Spider-Teenager fly around a city fighting crime. But my point is still valid!

Overall, The Amazing Spider-Man languishes in dull territory and left me wanting some grittier content over the already overcooked and cheesy Spider-Man story. It was steering towards campy but narrowly avoids it with some humor, well done special effects and close ups of Emma Stone. It simply lacks any heart. However, Hollywood knows a money maker when they see it and I’m sure there will probably be two more multimillion dollar installments of Spider-Man and we will have two more chances to see random New Yorkers delivering pancake flat lines like, “He needs our help!” Until then, I will be figuring out how to make wall demolishing explosives out of blue and green colored liquids in my nearest science classroom.