State Of Play Movie
Storyline
TAGLINES PLOT SUMMARY
This is a movie version of the original TV serial. The action takes place in Washington D.C. Stephen Collins (Ben Affleck), a US congressman accidentally dies near a subway station. At the same time a woman gets shot. These seemingly unrelated events are just the upper part of a huge iceberg of political intrigues that two Washington Globe journalists are going to discover. One of them, Cal McCaffrey (Russell Crowe), sticks to old-school methods: he digs for the info through the police and other personal connections. The other one, Della Frye (Rachel McAdams), is an active Internet user. While working on the story together, they both realize that they got involved into a dangerous and complicated play.
| Russell Crowe | Cal McAffrey |
| Ben Affleck | Rep. Stephen Collins |
| Rachel McAdams | Della Frye |
| Helen Mirren | Cameron Lynne |
| Robin Wright Penn | Anne Collins |
| Jason Bateman | Dominic Foy |
| Jeff Daniels | Rep. George Fergus |
| Michael Berresse | Robert Bingham |
| Harry Lennix | Det. Donald Bell |
| Josh Mostel | Pete |
| Michael Weston | Hank |
| Barry Shabaka Henley | Gene Stavitz |
| Viola Davis | Dr. Judith Franklin |
| David Harbour | PointCorp Insider |
| Sarah Lord | Mandi Brokaw |
| Kevin Macdonald |
7.30 out of 10 (30044 votes)
Visitor Reviews
Finally a great adult suspense movie
posted on 31 Aug 2009Finally a great adult suspense film about several timely subjects . It 's about the dying newspapers and political corruption.
Russell Crowe is excellent as an overweight ,slightly shabby journalist ,who is flawed personally,but an excellent journalist.
Helen Mirren is good as his stressed boss.Ben Afflek is surprisingly good as his old friend and US congressman. Rachel
McAdams is fine as the new face of the news,a blogger for the newspaper. There is suspense, that grabs you and holds you til the end. I saw it with friends and discussed it through and after dinner. Always a sign of a good movie. How in the world does Crowe manage to be so appealing in messy clothes and overweight? I highly recommend this movie.
...not great but entertaining nonetheless
posted on 31 Aug 2009I have not seen the UK series. 3.5 stars.
You won't walk away saying this is a great film..it get's jumbled along the way.
We don't really care about anyone except maybe..Rachel McAdams (I have a crush on her..she's Canadian). Helen Miran's character is most unforgetable.
Even Crowe Can't Save This Underwhelming Suspense Film
posted on 31 Aug 2009Russell Crowe usually gives a movie his all and manages to pull it off. He tried here but he single handedly could not save this film. It has way too many characters for him to be able to dominate this movie (like a stage play) and cudgel everyone else into submission. First big problem: this is based on a UK miniseries for tv. I saw the UK series and it was excellent. So this film tries to shoehorn an entire television series into a feature film length. This was managed with TRAFFIC but not here. Second big problem: the other major character is played by Ben Affleck. Supposedly his character and Crowe's roomed together way back when in their salad days. It must have been like ODD COUPLE'S Oscar (Crowe) and Felix (Affleck) judging by their personal hygiene habits in the movie. I cannot picture these two as buddies in any circumstances. Crowe is a journalist and Affleck is a politician. Affleck's assistant is murdered and Crowe uncovers an affair between Affleck and the victim. Affleck's career is now in great jeopardy and he is also a suspect. We could care less since Affleck adds nothing to this movie other than smarminess. Crowe has a journalist sidekick, a female. She is cute and ok but they do NOT become like Cary Grant and Rosalind Russell in HIS GIRL FRIDAY, an excellent, earlier journalism-murder movie. No, romantic chemistry and sparkle are missing here. Worse, this is aiming to be like ALL THE PRESIDENT'S MEN and it doesn't even come close to achieving the suspense and taut energy and crystal clear plot line of that film. I held in there and watched this film till the end, strictly for Crowe, and I wish I hadn't. He was wasted here despite his efforts to save it. I can't recommend it.
Outstanding Performances
posted on 30 Aug 2009The performances in this film were great. Russell Crowe is very believable and takes the lead. Some people complain about his appearance, but his character is supposed to be a mess as a foil to Affleck, who surprisingly did not suck. I will never find Ben Affleck to be a good actor, but for the most part he did okay... Some of his more emotional scenes were kind of off, but other than that he was pretty good. Rachel McAdams was perfect. She performed all of Della's sides brilliantly. While it wasn't really a showy role, as far as I was concerned McAdams really was an aspiring reporter. She makes Della inexperienced and eager but at the same time makes her smart and strong. Her chemistry with Crowe was remarkable by the way. I think her character was actually one of the most interesting in terms of evaluating the media. Helen Mirren was very believable as well, how anyone could think otherwise is beyond me because she owned that newsroom. Jason Bateman makes an interesting turn... It was a little strange but a very good performance. Robin Wright Penn made the most out of her little screen time.
Intriguing stew.
posted on 28 Aug 2009"Society bristles with enigmas which look hard to solve. It is a perfect maze of intrigue." Honore de Balzac Political thrillers come and go, most just fade quickly, unlike greats such as the Manchurian Candidate (the 1962 version), Three Days of the Condor, and more recently Spartan (unforgettable of course is All the President's Men, more history than thriller). So I was pleased to enjoy State of Play, a stew of political intrigue wherein Congressman Stephen Collins' (Ben Affleck) mistress has mysteriously died, much to the chagrin of his wife, Anne (Robin Wright Penn) and the important investigative committee he chairs. Based on a six-hour BBC series, without the quirky character-depth, it all works well enough although it's boilerplate right down to the last clue disclosure.The shabby, overweight but competent Washington Globe reporter Cal McAffrey (Russell Crowe) does the Washington-Post Woodward/Bernstein snooping, and cub reporter Della Frye (Rachel McAdams) handles the new journalistic wrinkle, blogging and on-line. Besides Crowe's undeniable charisma even when his long hair gets in the way of his fatty food, the relationship between the two reporters evokes in a small way the old screwball comedy repartee of Cary Grant and Rosalind Russell, in which the exhilaration of the job comes long before any emotional connection.Although the usual low drum rolls under scene changes, not everyone is as he seems, editors push deadlines, and political power brokers are the nexus of evil—it's all been done before, yet director Kevin Macdonald shows a sure hand at keeping the twists credible and ample. Allegorically the malicious company at the center of the investigation, PointCorp, hired to do heavy killing in the mid-east, is as close to Blackwater, or maybe Halliburton, as could be.That all these suspicions could be so neatly figured out by these two reporters contending with a corporate machine more crooked than a government headed by, say a Dick Cheney, is my most serious complaint about an otherwise entertaining crime story. The halls of Congress are a slippery slope and reporters are not always solid citizens, but, hey, we knew that from other movies.Relax and enjoy; reality is much scarier.
A Here Nor There but Effective Story Telling !!!
posted on 28 Aug 2009Not the most original as some of us would call it. Nonetheless extremely entertaining, especially for someone, who hasn't seen the BBC series by the same name. Contemporary setting along with a stellar cast led by Oscar Award Winners Russell Crowe, Ben Affleck, Oscar Award Nominee Helen Mirren & a very capable support cast carry the not so loophole proof screenplay, aptly. Crowe did what he does best. Sleep walk through the role looking very convincing as a tenured journalist for the fictitious daily "Washington Globe". Rachel McAdams looked the part and did a fine job as well. It is not the first of it's kind narration that primarily involves the aftermath of an event. What stands out for this enterprise though is that, it is an extremely cautious mix of tricks and turns, which neither gets too predictable nor too surprising at any given moment. This could also be the very reason why this movie may never attain any spectacular heights (critical appreciation) or break any paths. Nevertheless, myself being the classic rock fan that I am, lapped up every moment of the ending credits with glee as CCR's "As Long as I can See The Light" played on. Recommended for a week night viewing at a theater near You. I am expecting it to do better when it airs in prime time television. Overall : 7/10
Not Worth The Plastic It's Recorded On
posted on 24 Aug 2009Sometimes a movie tries to do too much and its screenwriters try to make the movie appeal to too wide an audience. This is one of those films. The plot is complicated beyond belief and stretches credulity to the breaking point shortly into the film. The behavior of the characters is predictable. The screenwriters of this film would have done well to first have watched "All The President's Men" before submitting this screenplay. Sometimes less is more. All the acting in the film is second rate. The one (and bright) exception is Rachel McAdams, who plays the feisty cub reporter Della Frye. She is a bright light and one to watch for future performances.
okay but lacks that certain "punch"
posted on 24 Aug 2009State of Play was a reasonably good political thriller. It kind of plods along slowly, picking up speed toward the middle and then kind of dies a little at the end. It lacks that "punch" of a great thriller and you kind of saw well okay in the end instead of wow. Russell Crowe is as usual great in his role and Helen Mirren really does a good job. I wished they had used some of the other minor characters more, especially Justin Bateman and Robin Wright who give fabulous performances. It's only when Afleck is on the screen that you really want to cringe. Why doesn't this guy just give up acting? He should direct or run for public office or something, just stay off the movie screen, please.
State of Play is not bad,but it is mediocre
posted on 22 Aug 2009A remake of a British mini-series seems like a doubtful proposition,starting by the arrogant narrative decision of extirpating the story off London,to set it in Washington.What is more,the cast of solid character actors from the mini-series have been replaced by Hollywood stars who will undoubtedly attract more spectators,but at the same time,steal the atmosphere of anonymous intrigue.Having said that,I have to admit that the six hours from the mini-series were a little bit tiring to me,specially when the story turns its attention to the personal lives from the people who were involved on the political scandal.So,I had some hope that a certain grade of condensation in the story would result on a more interesting movie,with a better rhythm and enough deepness.In the film State of Play,co-screenwriters Tony Gilroy,Matthew Michael Carnahan and Billy Ray condensed the story,although they made it to lost some honesty and deepness.But now,I will stop comparing this movie to the original mini-series,and I will evaluate it by its own merits.And also using that judgment,I found State of Play to be a mediocre movie.On some aspects,this film tries to emulate the atmosphere from All the President's Men,with its combination of political intrigue and conflicts of conscience between reporters who have good intentions,but who have a doubtful ethic on their methods.I also detected some small tributes to the extraordinary JFK.However,the biggest influence from this movie is on the recent wave of similar political thrillers which denounce some aspects of the terrorism on the Middle East,or the war for the oil.But,in spite of its good intention,State of Play suffers from anachronism.It is true that the subjects which are examined on this movie will keep being relevant for years (maybe decades)...but they were more interesting to the general spectator five or six years ago (like when the original mini-series was released).Nowadays,with more urgent preoccupations in the global conscience,the lies from a North American company are less relevant than the virus which are floating on the air or the labour insecurity occasioned by the worldwide economical collapse.Movies should start to define new villains who are more appropriate for the worldwide situation (like in the movie The International),because if not,it will be difficult to wake up the spectator's imagination with tiring comments about a war whose revocation has expired,not on the real life,but on the short attention from the public opinion.It may not be fair to evaluate a movie for the historical context which rounds it,but I mentioned it because that was my perception when I was watching it.On the screenplay from this film,there are various elements which feel very forced.On State of Play,there are not any bad performances; everybody has an adequate development on their roles.But,I could not find passion on any of the actors...the only thing I saw on them was technique.I think that happened because director Kevin MacDonald's work lacks of energy and enthusiasm.I also feel this movie should have had more suspense,instead of a warm parade of scenes and situations which are connected by an old narrative formula (brave reporters looking for the truth),and not by the stimulating discovery of hidden connexions and scandalous secrets.In summary,there are too many coincidences,too many characters with a doubtful narrative value and too many redundant scenes which repeat what we already know...I think all this is a consequence to the previously mentioned condensation of the series.Instead of all my complains,I did not dislike State of Play.I cannot deny it kept me moderately entertained and that,near the ending,the film generates a good level of tension.But,the final experience I had with this movie was mediocre and completely forgettable.I think I can give a slight recommendation to this movie for the fact that it is not boring.
Excellent Thriller
posted on 22 Aug 2009State of Play is an enjoyable and intelligent thriller. However, I preferred the original BBC mini-series on which it's based. The BBC version was about British politics and was riveting. The film Americanizes the plot and introduces stock Hollywood stereotypes. The conspiracy now involves a shadowy-Blackwater type company with ties to the military. Cal McAffrey (Russell Crowe) is now a grizzled investigative reporter. Stephen Collins (Ben Afflek) becomes a former war hero. These changes make it seem like your bulk standard Hollywood thriller. However there is enough of the series to make it worth watching.The strength of the film is in the acting and the cast generally deliver top drawer performances. Helen Mirren and Jason Bateman are particularly memorable. Russell Crowe has a commanding screen presence but he seemed miscast as McAffrey. He was too old and overweight and disheveled to be truly believable as Ben Affleck's best friend and Robin Wright Penn's former lover. Crowe smirked a lot and managed to dissipate any tension the film generated, he was just too laid back. In the BBC series McAffrey almost hero worships Stephen Collins, but there was none of that dynamic here. It's a good movie.
Taught press thriller
posted on 22 Aug 2009Not at all bad. Crowe is a grizzled, overweight reporter with the Washington Globe who can smell the big kill of a story behind the various countermeasures being thrown in his path. The sub-content of the movie is meant to concern the relevance of print journalism in a world that has a surfeit of blogs, 24 TV news, etc. but this never really catches in the imagination. That said the end titles run over a montage of a modern printing press doing its thing. An engrossing two minutes, the labour in it is an appropriate coda to the substantial investigative journalism that has gone before.It's a healthy cast of A listers: Rachel McAdams is the rookie chasing Crowe's tail (she's also cast as a 'blogger' for the paper, and as I've said, this is superfluous); Ben Affleck does a solid turn as a shifty politician-husband and Robin Wright Penn is his wife (I suspect there's quite a bit of her on the cutting room floor); Helen Mirren 'is' Perry White. Tehre's a good cameo from Jason Bateman.It's hand-held-o-rama most of the time, the script's fine and it keeps you guessing. 6.5/10
solid, intelligent thriller
posted on 22 Aug 2009"State of Play," directed by Kevin Macdonald, is a smart, topical political thriller whose cast of characters includes a congressional aide who dies under mysterious circumstances; a scandal-plagued Capitol Hill legislator; a seasoned reporter for a mainstream newspaper; an unseasoned cub reporter for that same paper's on-line blog; and a Blackwater-type quasi-military organization that will seemingly stop at nothing, even murder, in its effort to privatize the War on Terror for power and profit.Ben Affleck is the congressman from Pennsylvania whose affair with the murdered woman threatens to bring to light some serious behind-the scenes skullduggery on the part of the company that is currently under investigation by Affleck's committee for alleged acts of brutality and terror in Afghanistan and Iraq. Russell Crowe is the journalist for the fictional "Washington Globe" who's investigating the case even though his lifelong friendship with both the congressman and the congressman's beautiful but long-suffering wife (Robin Penn Wright) may represent a major conflict-of-interest for the paper. Rachel McAdams is the wet-behind-the-ears blog reporter who joins Crowe in his investigation, and Helen Mirren is the no-nonsense editor-in-chief responsible for making sure that the two mutually antagonistic reporters work in tandem, rather than at cross purposes, in their effort to get the story.The script (based on a six-part British series) is complex but relatively easy to follow as it deftly twists and turns its way to its irony-drenched conclusion. As a sidebar, the movie examines how compromise has become the order of the day in journalism, now that an ever-dwindling number of "legitimate" newspapers are being forced to compete with sensationalistic tabloids and blogs for readership and revenue.The performances are fine throughout, with Crowe, Affleck and Mirren the obvious standouts.
At last, a thriller that is about morality, not choices....
posted on 22 Aug 2009Definitely one of my favorite thrillers of the decade; not because of guns and actions (there's almost none) or chases (there's almost none) or children being kidnapped (there aren't any) but rather a rock solid decent plot, great acting, and above all a moral vision.By that I mean someone does good and sticks to good and their principles even as they are themselves crumpled and on the way out.Not many thrillers are also inspirational but State of Play is. Up against a Haliburton type organization Russell Crowe plays an investigative reporter out to find out what's going on.At 2 hours long this should drag but never does; but it rarely resorts to action to do so, instead it engages the heart and mind and shows us the Beltway.All in all this is a real success and one I would warmly recommend.A good movie.
State of euphoria? Well, that's a bit too strong but this is a terrific film with a great cast!
posted on 20 Aug 2009Cal (Russell Crowe) and Stephen (Ben Affleck) have been buds since their college days. They still stay in touch, but their lives have taken two different paths. Stephen is an up-and-coming politico who has acquired the beautiful wife, Anne (Robin Wright Penn), the spiffy mansion, wealth and prestige. On the flip side, Cal works as a respected but hardly rich reporter for the Washington Globe, where publisher Cameron (Helen Mirren) reigns supreme. One day, as Stephen, who has been investigating the possibly nefarious doings of a Blackwater-type marines-for-hire group, is about to give a press conference, the gallery informs him that one of his committee members, Sonia, has been found dead near the DC subway. Beginning to cry, Stephen stumbles out of the press talk in a daze. That's because, it seems, red-haired, pretty Sonia was having an extra-marital thing with Stevie. Cal and fellow reporter, Della (Rachel McAdams) begin to investigate the case and also the death of two other gentlemen in the region whose demises may be connected. But, will the personal relationship and past that Cal has with both Stephen and Anne get in the way of the search for truth, especially when it comes to the billions of funds made by the "hired guns" Stephen was trying to explore? This is a top-notch thriller which may put fans of the genre into a state of euphoria. The script is flat-out terrific, based on a British miniseries, especially in its uncanny skill in blending a great deal of humor amid the chills and thrills. Likewise, the cast is most wonderful, with Crowe, McAdams, Affleck, Mirren, Jason Bateman, Jeff Daniels, Penn, and many others delivering strong, strong performances. Special words of praise should go to Crowe, for his head-turning but carefully nuanced role as a man caught in the middle. As for the movie's production, the sets, costumes, camera work and direction are nearly flawless, except for a ruffled blouse that some fashion diva thought would enhance McAdams' look but which hits 100 on the hideous meter. But, that's small peanuts, as they say. All in all, if you love thrillers, especially ones that include the juicy realms of politics and secret government operatives, you would be wise to head to the nearest theater and fork over some cash for this one. It is a definitely one fertile "playground" for the cinematic enthusiast.
A Nutshell Review: State of Play
posted on 18 Aug 2009I'm a fan of a good investigative thriller, and State of Play combines that with some good old fashioned action from the newsroom with dogged reporters seeking perennial truth. Written by Matthew Michael Carnahan, Tony Gilroy and Billy Ray, you know you're in for one gripping ride with relentless twists and turns, as between them they are responsible for stories such as Lions for Lambs, The Kingdom, Michael Clayton, the Bourne franchise screenplays, Proof of Life, Breach and Shattered Glass. Whew! Imagine all the going points about those films all combined into one!I thoroughly enjoyed how Conflict of Interests, as a theme is examined in the film. There's hardly a black and white answer, especially when one's moral authority gets put on the line because of the conscious decision to pursue personal or professional gain above all others. Simple things, like romantic entanglements, having to investigate and dig into the dirt of friends, code of conducts violations and the likes make all the characters here susceptible at one point or another to question their own beliefs, be they misguided just because they're pursuing something for the greater good, or to make compromises for the lesser of two evils.And of course this will somehow lead to a corruption of the process. Do leads get released to the authorities for thorough investigations, or should the press (with press freedom firmly exercised of course) be trusted to exhaust those leads in a bid to starve off investigative leaks for that one big scoop to bring glory to themselves and their paper, in the name of truth-seeking. Or would parent companies be pressured to force the hand of their employees to come up with half-truths for fueling the need for readers to continue picking up the papers for the latest, which translates to profits?For Russell Crowe's Cal McAffrey, his journey here is never easy, with personal friendships, moral ambiguity and professional pressure all lead to one crazy navigation through choppy waters, which includes having his life put on the line and at risk when faced with any one accidental move on the chessboard. It's never easy digging and dishing out dirt, not when folks tend to shy away from a reporter and not want to be on the record, but when you think you have conflict of interests all straightened out, they will all come back to haunt you.Thankfully for him, help (or adversity in the first place) comes in the form of Rachel McAdams' rookie reporter and online columnist (read: Blogger) Della Frye, who gets hired by the Washington Globe just because of their recognition for an online presence, and the ability to shoot straight from the hip without reliance on the presses for production for the next day. This tussle between old school investigative journalism to check everything and follow up on leads, and the new age modern mindset of quantity over quality, spawned a superb subplot and theme, with the battle of two different paradigms, though at the superficial level, a fight between thoroughness and speed, between a veteran and a new bird, and even up to the relevance of newspapers in this day and age.Director Kevin Macdonald weaved so much into a film just over two hours, that it deserves a second watch. While it's something like Ron Howard's The Paper or even the recent Japanese film Climber's High with their take on the journalism profession, the story ensures that what would seem like a series of random events of an apparent suicide and two night time killings, would string together an intricate web of political intrigue as well, touching on defense contractors, outsourcing/insourcing, and that of a politician's battle against opponents when he crafts bills or heads inquiries. I thought Ben Affleck adequately did what he could with the role as a Representative, together with supporting cast such as Helen Mirren, Robin Wright Penn, Jeff Daniels, and Jason Bateman in a somewhat hilarious role of a middleman who's stuck in the middle of the whole mess.State of Play is one intense roller coaster ride that didn't shift down from fourth gear throughout, with foot firmly on the pedal all the way to the finishing line. Great score, great ensemble cast and an engaging story all contribute to make this a film that I would consider breaking into my top 10 favourites of the year.
cowards!
posted on 18 Aug 2009State of Play is almost as bad as people say it is.After being led on a particular direction for some 110 minutes, we are suddenly thrown for a loop that reduces the tension of the story we thought we were watching to the tawdry dimensions of a sex scandal burdened by a overly zealous psycho-killer - ho hum.This might be forgivable were the main text really all that tension-filled - but it isn't. In fact the pacing is terrible, and the movement from scene to scene difficult to follow, until it at last sinks in that the scenes are never going to really add up to anything like an interesting whole. It's not simply that threads are left dangling - they were never intended to be tied together in the first place. The whole film stinks of red herring - or more accurately, dead herring.Meanwhile, clichés abound, unrelieved by any new insight or point of view.As for the visual jokes in the background - like the poster of the blonde seen through a window with a ketchup stain so she looks shot through the head, or the fact that the Crowe character is dressed to remind us of the detective he played in American Gangster, while the black detective is as dapper as the Denzel Washington character in that much better film - oh, please - these were just annoying and pointless.Finally, in a film that should have been about the lack of accountability that plagues both our political system and our media, the final notice of the film is the film-makers' own denial of responsibility, an unwillingness to take a final stand on any of the issues it presents.A truly cowardly and depressing piece of film.
The Ideal Thriller
posted on 16 Aug 2009So I gave this movie a 10, but that's coming from a thriller fan. With most thrillers, this movie has it's faults. Some exaggeration, implausibilities, annoying twists, but the film transcends other thrillers on all other levels. Even with the overly dramatic plot and scenarios, I felt this film was a very realistic portrayal of journalism and posed an interesting argument between old fashioned print journalism and the new age of the internet. Of course, for the "thrills" they'll have to make some cliché twists, but it goes beyond the generic nonsense thriller to making a mild statement about the media today. In addition, the cast was fantastic. I couldn't be more relieved that Russell Crowe took over Brad Pitt's role, Pitt would have been a terrible choice. Russell was a much better fit for Cal. However, I kind of wish Edward Norton remained with the role of Senator Collins... Affleck and Crowe didn't have the greatest chemistry. However the many supporting players were fantastic. Rachel McAdams did a fine job. Not exactly the meatiest role but she played the revised role of Della as a young popular blogger greatly. Rachel brought that playful naivety but at the same time made Della intelligent and respectable. Helen Mirren was perfect, and perhaps a little underused. There is also a plethora of strong performances from the minor supporting players. Jason Bateman gave my favorite performance out of all of them, Harry Lennix was another who was underutilized, and Robin Wright Penn continues her reputation as one of the most consistent supporting actresses.But as a thriller, it really was a fantastic and entertaining movie. I've never seen the BBC series and could only imagine how much better it could be with more time to develop characters and stories, but the film does the best it could and that's enough. It isn't your typical mindless thriller though, which is what I respect about it most. It is paced well but if you don't pay attention you may get lost, but seeing as the film really does keep you on your toes, it shouldn't be that hard. What makes this thriller so much better though is that it makes you think, even after leaving the theater. It isn't just some formulaic story with mindless twists and turns, it's actually saying something about the world today that is very relevant, which not only makes a great thriller, but a great film as well.I've read some complaints about the ending, but I don't understand what the big deal was. I don't want to give anything away, but I think it's an ending that could be taken in different ways depending on the viewer.
Ugh! Is this Russell Crowe's worst movie?
posted on 16 Aug 2009Is Hollywood joking or what? Even by Hollywood's abysmally low standards, this movie is dumb. If one accepts the premise of this movie at face value, one will reasonably conclude that the only person who can solve a complex crime is a ... newspaper journalist! Ugh! Also, this movie is proof that you cannot have a character actor, which is what Russell Crowe has become, playing the lead. After his mind-numbing performance as the boxer James J. Braddock, in a movie that had to be one of the worst sports movies ever made, (Mr. Braddock was married, had children, had financial difficulties, actually had a REGULAR job, lived somewhere in New Jersey ... wow, what a story!), Mr. Crowe has never been the same. It's a shame because he is a great actor. Oh what a crummy movie. Why was this movie made? This movie challenges even the most intrepid movie buff to stay awake. If this movie is trying to be another All The President Men, it fails. This has to be Russell Crowe's worst movie. Nothing in this movie is good. Dumb story, poor acting, clichéd, contrived, unoriginal and above all, BORING. Russell Crowe proves that he is no Robert Redford and that the political who-done-it genre is passé. A murder? Call the police, not a reporter. This movie is no Chinatown. How could the actor who was so great in The Gladiator be so mediocre in this movie? Mr. Crowe's character was scruffy, annoying, non heroic, uninspiring and superfluous. This dismal movie merits no further comments.
9th rate ending
posted on 31 Aug 2009This has all the promises of a great flick.
The plot is taut, relevant, and suspenseful. We know the company the film really refers to.
There's also great cast. Hard to go wrong, but it did.
You would have thought that with all the sophisticated test screening, market research ... etc. to protect their investments, the people who made this film could come up a with a better ending comparable to something like Michael Clayton. But they didn't.
Either the research company the producers hired was testing the film at a wrong audience, or the real event this film is based on has still not fully run its course.
One way or the other, the producers should fire the market research company that tells them the film will do well.
Hope they can correct this if ever there's going to be a director's cut.