Featured Audience Ratings

• Chris W

  
  For his second turn as a director, legendary actor Robert De Niro decided to make somehting that was apparently a big pet project and labor of love for him: a slow-burn spy drama (not thriller) about the early years of the CIA, as told through the life of a quiet, reserved, yet… More
  For his second turn as a director, legendary actor Robert De Niro decided to make somehting that was apparently a big pet project and labor of love for him: a slow-burn spy drama (not thriller) about the early years of the CIA, as told through the life of a quiet, reserved, yet observant man named Edward Wilson. While supposedly claiming to give the true story of its subject matter, the film takes the approach of using composites, fictionalized names, and apparently altered details here and there, and does so using a near three hour run time, and unfolding at a very (very) slow-burning pace. The film jumps back in forth in time between the aftermath of the Bay of Pigs fiasco and everything leadng up to it starting in 1939, but despite these time jumps, and the fact that the film is so heavy on plot, it's actually far easier to follow ( if you pay attention) than most espionage type films. I loved that the film was focused on the Cold War, and the beginnings of the CIA, but I was somewhat let down by De Niro's approach. The film is light on frenetic action and violence, prefering to show a more classy and dignified origin story, and that's fine I guess, but the problem is that the film is really lethargic, depsite some violence here and there, there's not enough going on to keep the momentum up. I atually didn't find the film to be all that boring, but it is extremely long winded. And, though I'm okay with the "violence-lite" approach, I think the film could have had a few more scenes of action just so the film could have SOMETHING going on to keep the less patient viewers interested. I usually bitch about films that take on history that don't put it into a broader context, and while this film is one of those, it's still very academic in how it feels, IE it's less of a popcorn entertainer and more of a history lesson. I'd be more fine with this if the film could have avoided being as dry as its main character. The period details are impeccable though, and the film does have some wonderful cinematography, I just wish it could have been better paced. The film boasts an impressive supporting cast, with Matt Damon in the lead, Angelina Jolie as his lady, and, in supporting roles of varrying lengths, Billy Crudup, John Turturro, Alec Baldwin, William Hurt, and others, including a welcome, though underwhelming cameo from Joe Pesci. Damon is good. The character is supposed to be dry, closed off, and humorless, and he pulls this off, but unfortunately, though not Damon's fault, the character might be too closed off, too emotionally distant, and thus, really hard to know or care about. Jolie had potential to be a real spark and gives this film some needed energy and drive, and she starts that way, but her character soon fades into the background, and Jolie's talents quickly go severely misused. Of the supporters who have substantial screen time, I give the most props to Hurt. He's always (as far as I know) a solid, standup player. This film is perplexing. It's got an interesting story and subjext matter, but somewhat lackluster and tedious presentation. The cast is notable, but the performances are hit and miss and none of the characters are really as compelling as they should be. The film has great production values, but doesn't stand out the way it should. I am torn on this one. I didn't hate it, but I don't quite like it either. I actually am fascinated by it and the subject matter, and I have an odd kind of respect for it, even though I'm not fully on board. I'll just be nice and give it the rare thumbs sideways, as well as a mild recommendation (for a one time viewing only...and even then just for those who can appreciate a reserved, slow burning film that's heavier on atmosphere and ideas than developed and penetrable characters.

• Emil K

  
  Very standard espionage-thriller from actor/director De Niro who is aiming too high with this one. It is way too overlong with many subplots that feels un-necessary. Biggest flaw here is clearly the acting which is overly serious by everyone. It is as if De Niro had told every actor… More
  Very standard espionage-thriller from actor/director De Niro who is aiming too high with this one. It is way too overlong with many subplots that feels un-necessary. Biggest flaw here is clearly the acting which is overly serious by everyone. It is as if De Niro had told every actor to act with one facial impression. Even usually good Damon and Hurt are both wasted here. A Wasted opportunity.

• Universal D

  
  Many spy films depict a life of easy affluence and an amusement park of thrills, but this one is far, far different. Instead an existence of miserable ever gnawing fear and isolation, masked beneath a cheesy veneer of " everything's all right", slowly choke even… More
  Many spy films depict a life of easy affluence and an amusement park of thrills, but this one is far, far different. Instead an existence of miserable ever gnawing fear and isolation, masked beneath a cheesy veneer of " everything's all right", slowly choke even desperation away, leaving a pallid complacency. While admittedly not a work for everyone I found myself riveted.

• Jim C

  
  I really enjoyed this movie. The movie was a mix of the orgins and the CIA and the consequences of life this man had to make to protect his country. The plot was genius, even if it did have some fake stuff from real life. There were intense moments, characters, and secrets. True… More
  I really enjoyed this movie. The movie was a mix of the orgins and the CIA and the consequences of life this man had to make to protect his country. The plot was genius, even if it did have some fake stuff from real life. There were intense moments, characters, and secrets. True it was too confusing and not a reall spy movie, and really long. But its a small price to pay to watch this classic.

• Jeff "

  
  The Good Shepherd is a film that recounts the origins of the CIA. Robert De Niro directs a good spy thriller. The Goof Shepherd has a stylish period atmosphere and the cast that De Niro has assembled are an impressive bunch of talented actors. The film will certainly appeal to fans of… More
  The Good Shepherd is a film that recounts the origins of the CIA. Robert De Niro directs a good spy thriller. The Goof Shepherd has a stylish period atmosphere and the cast that De Niro has assembled are an impressive bunch of talented actors. The film will certainly appeal to fans of espionage, but won't appeal to average film buff. I love espionage films so of course I enjoyed this film. The Good Shepherd has everything you'd expect from a top notch espionage film, intrigue, action suspense. Robert De Niro has assembled a cast of incredible talent here. A performance that surprised me was that of Angelina Jolie. Jolie who is normally mediocre in her roles, offers a more than descent performance here as Margaret Russell. The Good Shepherd is a film that won't appeal to everyone, but to those looking for a fine period piece dealing with espionage, then The Good Shepherd is the film that you should check out. The film recounts the birth of the CIA from the World War II era Agency the OSS to the Bay of Pigs invasion. Though a flawed espionage Thriller, The Good Shepherd manages to be engaging and interesting. Though slow and long, I thought the film is one of the best crafted Espionage thrillers in recent memory. There's really nothing to hate about The Good Shepherd, it may not be everyones cup of tea, but those interested in subjects of espionage will certainly be thrilled with this intricate film about the most covert intelligence agency the world has ever known.

• Mark W

  
  Robert DeNiro's second directorial effort, 14 years after his debut "A Bronx Tale". He again shows that he's as good a director as he is an actor but unfortunately, it's the script that let's this potential classic down. In 1961, after the Bay Of Pigs… More
  Robert DeNiro's second directorial effort, 14 years after his debut "A Bronx Tale". He again shows that he's as good a director as he is an actor but unfortunately, it's the script that let's this potential classic down. In 1961, after the Bay Of Pigs fiasco, CIA agent Edward Wilson (Matt Damon) tries to learn who leaked word of the planned invasion of Cuba. He recalls his long service with the Agency, and ponders the failure of his marriage to Clover (Angelina Jolie). Having been involved in some of the best films ever made and worked with some of the best directors; Scorsese, Leone, Coppola, Bertolucci to name a few. You can see where DeNiro's ambition and scope has come from with this sprawling, convoluted espionage film. First off, he amasses a very impressive cast playing out over a number of years and in split-time frame structure. His attention to detail and eye for capturing time and place is astutely done and wonderfully captured, and it certainly doesn't lack ambition. It's heavily based on fact and covers a lot of ground; the origins of the CIA; Nazi sympathisers; the invasion of Cuba; the cold war conflict with the Soviet Union, as well as Wilson's strained relationship with his wife. Despite all this though, the film is surprisingly lacking in excitement. At times it borders on boring. It's a real shame as everyone involved puts in a good shift but the major problem is the main character. He's so stoic and impassive that it's hard for Damon to deliver a performance that's anything other than awkward and expressionless. It's a difficult character to identify with and he's hardly ever off screen, which is a bit of a slog at a running time approaching 3 hours. There are still many powerful scenes throughout though and Robert Richardson's cinematography is splendid but despite the ambition also shown in Eric Roth's script, it doesn't quite come together as an absorbing or gripping spy thriller, when really it should. Considering the talent involved, this is listless and ultimately frustrating. I really want to rate this higher - as I found plenty to enjoy - but can't bring myself to do so.

• Richard C

  
  B-

• Tony G

  
  In serious need of an editor. Long, slow and plodding.

• Jon L

  
  I don't remember this one too well. I remember liking it but also thinking about how long and slow it was. I should probably see it again to give a fair review, becuase this stuff is usually quite interesting.

• Sophie B

  
  The main story of this seemed really interesting with a great cast however, many parts were confusing in the way it skipped and jumped from one time period to another. It was difficult to follow.

• Thomas B

  
  Pretty good. Full review later.

• Anthony L

  
  A stylish piece from Robert De Niro with some nice supporting performances. That's about it though, the final scene is eerie and powerful but before you get there it's 2 1/2 hours of watching an emotionless (and un-aging) Matt Damon, with confusing editing and dull dialogue.… More
  A stylish piece from Robert De Niro with some nice supporting performances. That's about it though, the final scene is eerie and powerful but before you get there it's 2 1/2 hours of watching an emotionless (and un-aging) Matt Damon, with confusing editing and dull dialogue. Shame really. Best bit was 1 1/2 minute cameo from Pesci. It's almost makes it worth watching, almost.

• Ginny  

  
  Brilliant film, highly recommended! Pending Review, too tired to compose anything atdmo...

• Morgan G

  
  Difficult to get through, slow as a speeding snail, but fascinating in its scope and plot, directing and acting were excellent.

• Mark H

  
  At almost 3 hours, this period film about the beginnings of the CIA is an ambitious, but ultimately tedious spy drama. There are moments where the film shows signs of turning into a first rate thriller. It ultimately remains a character study of a very stiff and unemotional man,… More
  At almost 3 hours, this period film about the beginnings of the CIA is an ambitious, but ultimately tedious spy drama. There are moments where the film shows signs of turning into a first rate thriller. It ultimately remains a character study of a very stiff and unemotional man, inspired by the true-life story of CIA founder James J. Angleton. Intelligent and realistic, but not particularly exciting.

• Gordon A

  
  Ambitious tale of espionage across decades of American history which is held together by a bravely understated performance from Damon. Fine support from Jolie and Baldwin help the long run time fly by but the dour nature of the lead character takes the shine off somewhat.

• danny d

  
  incredible spy flick. matt damon is haunting, every performance is top notch. the film requires more than one viewing to soak it all in, but its worth it. deniro does a great job in his debut as a director.

• Jani H

  
  It's a fairly interesting film about the birth of the CIA. It mixes two different time lines and does it quite well. A spy movie without any action, I feel it's more of a research of the human complexity. The slow paced progression of the story and the length of the film… More
  It's a fairly interesting film about the birth of the CIA. It mixes two different time lines and does it quite well. A spy movie without any action, I feel it's more of a research of the human complexity. The slow paced progression of the story and the length of the film may scare some of the viewers away but I still recommend it to all who are interested in espionage films.

• Al S

  
  A spellbinding, riveting and electrifying edge of your seat spy thriller. A stunning and groundbreaking acievement. The best spy movie ever. Robert DeNiro in a fantastic directional debut. Chilling and unforgettable. A classic. It ranks with films like The Godfather or Traffic.… More
  A spellbinding, riveting and electrifying edge of your seat spy thriller. A stunning and groundbreaking acievement. The best spy movie ever. Robert DeNiro in a fantastic directional debut. Chilling and unforgettable. A classic. It ranks with films like The Godfather or Traffic. It's tense, intriguing, outstanding asnd exhilerating. A true masterpiece. An excellent movie. An outstanding all-star cast. Matt Damon is magnificent. He he truly steals the film giving a cold, memerising and completely dedicated performance. It's as powerful as it is devestating. It's extroadinary and deeply unsetteling

• Curtis L

  
  Time just wouldn't pass fast enough to get through this, so I stepped out after 2 hours...yes it kept going for much longer. I don't think they could have made a movie with characters that I could care less about.

Read all 20 featured audience ratings