The Good Shepherd (2006)

Today I picked The Good Shepherd as my movie to watch. With a cast consisting of Matt Damon, Angelina Jolie, Alec Baldwin, Robert De Niro and Joe Pesci, it's hard to pass it by. My friend mentioned that he had seen it before and really liked it, but it would require intense mental concentration to get through it. I prepared myself for one of the most stressful mental exercises known to man, and I hit play. Was this the most confusing movie I've ever seen, or was it a walk in the park? Find out after the jump.


We follow the life of Edward Wilson, played by Matt Damon, from young innocent man, to cold hard CIA agent. We watch as he gets involved in secret societies and makes contacts that eventually lead him into helping the government during WWII as an information officer. Not long after that, with tensions growing between the US and Russia, we start seeing the beginnings of the CIA. Through all of this, we witness the effect it has on this one man's life and how it shapes and alters him.

At the start of the movie, I think after 10-15 minutes, I was already finding it a little hard to follow, and I found myself asking questions I knew I should know the answer to. It was then pointed out to me that the film had been jumping back and forth in time, showing Edward's life as a young man, before the CIA, and the present time in which he is trying to solve a particular mystery.

Matt Damon made a very convincing cold-blooded agent

Apparently, every time it made the switch, it would state the date in the lower left corner of the screen. I had been missing the text in the corner completely because it was so small and unobtrusive. I made a mental note to check that bottom corner every time the scene changed to make sure I didn't miss anymore, but I also started to notice other telltale signs. In the past, Edward had very thin framed glasses on, while in the present he had large horn rimmed glasses. Also, earlier in the movie, whenever the scene switched to the past, it would start off as black and white, and fade into colour. This last effect didn't last the whole movie, though, and seemed to disappear as the past events caught up closer and closer to the present time.

Once I had caught on to the time shifts, I didn't have too much trouble following what was going on, but it was certainly no walk in the park. Nearly every scene and piece of dialog points to a future event or is a clue to some other spy type dealings. A glance at a picture may reveal a person's association with another, but never actually be spoken about. An off handed remark about something someone likes or hates may resurface much later in the story. The movie is about the CIA after all, so it's no surprise that every bit of information provided can become pertinent sometime later.

The cast of the movie is of course very good, but I did have some small issues and surprises along the way. First of all, I just thought Angelina Jolie looked out of place in the film, and she seemed to stick out like a sore thumb. She still did a great job, but I just never believed her for some reason. Also, the kid/man cast as the son of Damon and Jolie was totally miscast. He's a scrawny little nothing who is noticeably unattractive, and I didn't for a second believe he was the offspring of either of these two people.

For some reason that I can't place my finger on, Angelina Jolie looked out of place to me

When Joe Pesci showed up, I was taken aback. I haven't seen him in a movie in ages, and usually those movies are already pretty old. I have never seen him look this old ever before. The role he played though, however short, was amusing to say the least. I was also surprised by the appearance of John Turturro, who I've only ever seen in the Transformers films. I couldn't believe how serious and great he was. Why couldn't he have been like this in those movies? It would have been so much better!

Overall I'd say The Good Shepard was a good film. It did turn out to be a little confusing to follow some of the time, the sequencing of some of the events at the start and how they related to events at the end, being the most problematic. However, I don't think it's something that couldn't be cured by another viewing. This definitely seems to be a movie that would only amplify in quality with rewatchings. If you do plan on watching it, make sure to pay close attention to what's going on, and be ready for a slow burn that had a few of us on the edge of drifting off, before it really started picking up with the conspiracies and spy stuff. If you're into the more realistic spy movies, about governments and the CIA and political backroom dealings, check this out! If you prefer your spy movies to come with big explosions and Arnold Sschwarzenegger yelling "The bridge is OUUUUT!" then maybe leave this one on the shelf.