I watched The Good Shepherd and I liked it. 3/5
–
The Good Shepherd (2006), directed by Robert De Niro, is an ambitious and sprawling historical drama that delves into the early days of the CIA through the lens of one man’s journey. A heavy, brooding piece of work, the film explores the moral and ethical costs of power and secrecy, focusing on themes of loyalty, sacrifice, and personal disintegration. The movie earns a solid 3/5, primarily for its impressive production values, strong performances, and historical context, but is hindered by pacing issues and its often overly distant and cold narrative.
At the center of the film is Edward Wilson, played by Matt Damon. Wilson is a Yale-educated, upper-class intellectual whose life is shaped by his involvement with the CIA from its inception after World War II. We see him as an idealistic young recruit in the 1930s and follow his rise through the ranks over the course of several decades, eventually becoming one of the key figures in shaping American intelligence operations during the Cold War. But as Wilson climbs the ladder of power, his personal life unravels. He becomes emotionally estranged from his family, particularly his wife Margaret (Angelina Jolie), and loses touch with the values that once guided him.
Damon’s portrayal of Wilson is restrained, almost eerily so. The character is stoic, methodical, and emotionally guarded, which fits the tone of the film but also creates a disconnect between the audience and the protagonist. While this coldness may be intentional, meant to mirror Wilson’s own internal alienation and repression, it does make it difficult to truly engage with him as a character. For a film that spans decades and so deeply investigates its main character’s psyche, Wilson’s emotional opacity becomes a barrier to the story’s impact.
On the positive side, The Good Shepherd is visually impressive. The cinematography by Robert Richardson captures the period detail beautifully, from the academic halls of Yale to shadowy, rain-soaked European streets. The film’s visual style evokes the feel of classic espionage films, emphasizing atmosphere and mood over action. The score by Marcelo Zarvos also complements the film’s tone, often haunting and subtle.
The cast is packed with talent. In addition to Damon and Jolie, the supporting cast includes heavyweight actors such as William Hurt, Alec Baldwin, Joe Pesci, and Michael Gambon. Each gives commendable performances, though some are underutilized given the expansive narrative. Jolie, in particular, shines in her limited screen time as the increasingly disillusioned wife, but the script does not give her the depth she deserves. Her character seems to exist more as a symbol of the personal cost of Wilson’s work than as a fully fleshed-out individual.
Where The Good Shepherd falters most is in its pacing and length. At nearly three hours, the film unfolds at a glacial pace, which can be taxing. The narrative jumps between time periods in a non-linear fashion, which is not inherently problematic, but the lack of urgency or forward momentum makes the film feel like a slog at times. The movie’s focus on the ins and outs of espionage, while interesting in a technical sense, often comes at the expense of more dynamic storytelling. There’s an overwhelming amount of information about secret operations, code-breaking, and betrayals, but the human drama often gets lost in the labyrinthine plot.
Thematically, the film is rich, tackling issues like trust, paranoia, and the compromises made in the name of national security. Wilson’s journey from idealistic recruit to emotionally deadened spymaster is a chilling one, and the film does raise important questions about the ethical compromises required by espionage work. However, these themes are sometimes handled in a manner that feels overly self-serious and ponderous, lacking the tension and suspense that could have elevated the film.
The Good Shepherd is not without merit. As a historical examination of the early CIA, it is thorough and fascinating, and it features moments of real tension and intrigue. But ultimately, its overly detached approach and excessive length prevent it from being truly great. It’s a film that will likely appeal to history buffs and fans of slow-burn dramas, but for others, its coldness and narrative sprawl may leave them feeling unengaged and indifferent.