State of Play

The plot is thin, and doesn't really hold up under scrutiny, and yet I'd guess lots of people will love this movie. I did not, and my problem goes beyond plot. My problem was with the casting. I love Helen Mirren. She always does a good job, and this film is no exception. I also love Russell Crowe, and as usual, he does alright, given what he has to work with. It's not his fault that his character is a complete caricature of a reporter. Robin Wright Penn also does alright with her role, which is very limited and one-dimensional. And then there's Ben Affleck, who should probably just give up acting altogether. He's exceptionally bad in this movie. But my biggest gripe with this movie is in casting Rachel McAdams as the cub reporter. Why does the cub reporter have to be a beautiful young woman? Russell Crowe has just turned 45 and looks it; it's one of many things I like about him. It's clear that he doesn't work out; he hasn't had his teeth whitened; his character is a slob, with both his desk and his apartment giving ample evidence of his disorganization...and yet he's a good reporter, and a good guy to boot. In other words, HUMAN and BELIEVABLE...so of course Hollywood decided to cast opposite him Rachel McAdams, who could grace the cover of any number of fashion magazines, were she so inclined, and who is 15 years his junior in real life but looks even younger; I didn't get the impression that her character was supposed to be 30. Would it work the other way around? Would George Clooney or Brad Pitt, all gussied up for the cover of GQ, and with an appropriately slick apartment, be believable as a hard hitting investigative reporter? I don't think so, and someone in casting didn't think so either; thus we have Russell Crowe, playing a slob, in the lead. So if the male lead must be gritty, why does Hollywood think the counterpart must be a beautiful, perfectly groomed young woman? I like Rachel McAdams and think she's a competent actress, but she simply wasn't believable in this role. There must be young actresses out there who just look like regular people. Why not cast one of them? For that matter, why does the cub reporter have to be young? Why couldn't she be any age, but new at reporting? This might have been a better film if the cub reporter had been a plain woman of any age trying to find her way working with Crowe and Mirren and their experience. I think that would have made this a much more interesting movie, and it's a movie that might actually be made somewhere, but not in Hollywood.

From PASTO, COLOMBIA-Via: L. A. CA; CALI, COLOMBIA+ORLANDO, FL ---------------------The ONLY Tony Kiss Castillo on FaceBook!------------ Tried to avoid having much in the way of expectations for STATE of PLAY, but it was hard to be oblivious to the all the general good buzz. Also, hard not to know beforehand that the cast is exceptional and that it's getting relatively high ratings and strong reviews. Still, other than that, didn't really want to find out any more! Watching a solid, well-done film like STATE, is like watching a good athlete or an outstanding performerThey all make it look SO EASY! Just take an interesting, dynamic story; convert that into a cohesive, believable sounding screenplay; do your casting well, so you get a cast that can breathe life into the characters; craft the music to heighten the mood/ambiance at hand; edit the scenes for maximum impact and always know where you're going and be sure you take the movie in the direction of your vision! Easy-PeasyJapanesey! Those are some of STATE's pluses. Like any movie it did have some minuses. I'll try and go over both. A powerhouse cast, that doesn't disappoint: Russell Crowe, Ben Affleck, Helen Mirren, Rachel McAdams, Robin Wright Penn, Jason Bateman, and Jeff Daniels WOW! Did the A-list want IN on this project, or what?!? Although Crowe does a fine job, he falls a little short of true excellence. A difficult task, attempting to shine when surrounded by ALL that talent! One surprise: Ben Affleck, not exactly on my favorite "actors" list, turns in a deviously devilish performance as the congressman who is keenly aware of his media image and how to protect it. But the big jaw-dropper here is Jason Bateman. His characterization fooled me completely! Had to wait for the credits to see who he was! His Uber- creepy-bottom-feeder-sleaze-ball was the film's real revelation! STATE falls down a bit because it is very light in the new and original Department. Still, it is a very well-crafted, entertaining movie! How's this for a chillingly ironic 10 year Date of authoring this review? SEP/11/2011 9********* STARS.... ENJOY!/DISFRUTELA! Any comments, questions or observations, in English, o en Español, are most welcome!

This movie was absolutely terrible. The movie dragged on with the plot barely moving for most of it and when it finally did begin to wrap things up it made ZERO sense. The guy who was the shooter at the beginning of the movie and turned out to be working for Ben Affleck's character? Who did he call right before he ground up his cell phone and put on his military uniform? Ben Affleck? If he did why would Ben Affleck have been stupid enough to still be in his office to get arrested? What ever happened to the majority Whip of Ben Affleck's party? Why didn't he get arrested? How was Ben Affleck behind everything if this guy helped set him up? That made no sense. Wasn't it awfully convenient for the killer of Ben Affleck's girlfriend and Ben Affleck (or whoever was behind the killing of Ben Affleck's girlfriend in the beginning) that she decided to stand in the ONE BLIND SPOT that the camera's had on the subway platform? STUPID, STUPID, STUPID MOVIE. Not bad acting, mind you, just a very, very bad plot full of holes. I want my time back as this movie's 127 minutes was a complete and utter waste of it. Do yourself a favor, DO NOT SEE THIS MOVIE!!!

Cal (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 gruff old-school reporter (Russell Crowe playing his A-game) becomes personally entangled in a breaking news story surrounding his old college buddy turned congressman (Ben Affleck, not as bad as you would think) and a young female aid who died under mysterious circumstances in the surprisingly plausible political thriller "State of Play" from director Kevin MacDonald who was previously responsible for "The Last King of Scotland". Though designed as a throw-back to paranoid investigative thrillers from the 1970's, relevance is gained when the massive cover-up revealed becomes a vehicle for the filmmakers to explore the death of print news at the hand of digital mediums. The twisty and engaging screenplay is credited to three scribes: Matthew Michael Carnahan, Tony Gilroy and Billy Ray. But it's Gilroy's fingerprints that shape the story with all the overlapping dialogue and conspiracy talk that will remind many of his "Michael Clayton". Adapted from a sprawling BBC miniseries created by Paul Abbott, the trio is especially deft in their condensing of the story into a fully digestible two hours. Even as new characters and twists keep coming, the audience is never left out in the cold. They also give the cast plenty to chew on with some great throw-away lines amidst all the posturing between the cops, reporters, politicians and sleaze-bags. Though it's Crowe and Helen Mirren as his sparring and quick-witted boss who shine the most, this is essentially an ensemble piece, and it's especially clever when Jason Bateman arrives on screen for a few pivotal scenes as a smug public relations guru who's too dumb to realize he knows too much. The cast also includes Robin Wright Penn as Affleck's wife, Jeff Daniels as the arrogant majority whip and Harry Lennix, who as a D.C. detective makes a compelling case here for the lead role in the Barack Obama Story. The only miscalculation in the casting is poor Rachel McAdams, lovely but annoying in her high-pitch as Crowe's blogging tag-along looking to kick it old-school and get something in print. By the third act "State of Play" overplays its hand in its attempts to be timely with too much talk of the privatization of the military, Capitol Hill sex scandals and traditional newspapers losing out in the digital age to bloggers more concerned with gossip than real journalism. It could've also been more subtle in its preaching about the importance of serious investigative reporting. It should be commended, however, for an otherwise smart screenplay that doesn't spell out all its twists and turns too early and the well polished cast who give the film a slick sheen. Even though it might be reporting on yesterday's news, "State of Play" still makes for solid rainy day entertainment and is worthy of blogging about.

I attended a pre-release screening of the new film, State of Play, with anticipation of seeing both quality work from actor Russell Crowe and screenwriter Tony Gilroy. I also entered the theater with a degree of apprehension about how well this feature length film would measure up to the brilliantly acted and crafted six-part BBC series that was the basis for the film. Crowe well-embodied the tenacious old-school investigative journalist that we've come to know from classics, such as "All the President's Men." However, the multifaceted ensemble of journalists, portrayed by a rich range of actors from the BBC series (John Simm, Kelly MacDonald, James McAvoy), is missing from this feature film where Russell Crowe does all the work. The complexity of the plot, which includes the competing professional interests and emotional needs of the characters in the British miniseries, is largely eliminated in this big screen version. Ben Affleck and Robin Wright Penn do not seem to appreciate and respond to the high stakes events that could turn their lives inside out and upside down. What this film shares with the miniseries is the glimpse into the mechanics of running a journalistic investigation under the pressure of time and editorial interference, but the personal stories suffer from not being fleshed out and made to feel real and compelling to watch. It is not fair to compare one piece of art to another, but when two productions are related, and you've seen the original, it is difficult to view the second production without prejudice. It is like trying to unring a bell. The new film, State of Play, is a convincing thriller, but it fails to also deliver as a richly defined character drama. Curiosity will drive those who saw the BBC series to see this film, and the rich pedigree of the film production will draw in those who know nothing about the original miniseries. Everyone will ultimately be satisfied by seeing both productions (miniseries is on DVD) so that they can make the comparisons and connections that any thinking film-goer will want to do.

Whether you loved em' or hated em', espionage thrillers made up a generous portion of cinema from the 1940-50's. With fast paced, edge of your seat story lines, plot twists, political undertones and dramatic personal struggles with morality, nobody did it better than Emeric Pressburger and Michael Powell. Their attention to character detail and it's purpose in conjunction with the narrative gave heart and humanity to this new string of movies which could have fallen into similar (yet shallower) alpha male characters such as James Bond. Never the less, we cannot forget that ultimately if it weren't for their vision and invention of the genre, Hollywood may have never capitalized on the staggeringly profitable Bond franchise that's still going strong today. In the mid 70's, due to the heat of the political environment at that time, the genre decided to go in the same direction. All The Presidents Men, brought to light the investigative strategies of Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein and tackled the Watergate scandal from the perspective of the Washington Post. As audiences, we shared in the thrill of being able to follow the case as it unfolded, interviewing witnesses and piecing together clues in order to make a 10 O'clock print deadline. We were part of the chase, the scandal and always privy to the evidence necessary to solve the mystery at hand...that is until a new piece of evidence arose and bashed in all of our original assumptions. State of Play may be the first film to pay homage to this Pakula classic while dually creating more poignant themes for today's political atmosphere. Crowe plays a reporter for the Washington Post and McAdams, an internet blogger, serving as our Woodward and Bernstein clones on the case of a Senator, Affleck, whose mistress succumbs to a rather untimely death VIA train tracks. To add insult to injury, it turns out that our reporter and senator are practically best friends. The plot unfolds, relationships falter and the real truth, to our pleasant surprise, blindsides us like a drunk driver on a narrow road. Director Kevin Macdonald clearly knows what he's doing here and along with a well written screenplay by Tony Gilroy, carefully crafts a neat, sharp and extremely entertaining thrill ride of a movie whose run time is 2 hours and 15 minutes, but feels like 30. State of Play never fails at keeping you guessing, does a fine job of throwing in a few curve balls, and leaves you with a clean taste in your mouth come end credits. What more do you want? Sure. It isn't the next Best Picture and Crowe won't take home an Oscar, but you'll enjoy some nail biting action scenes and there are much worse things to look at than Rachel McAdams on the big screen for a few hours. Helen Mirren is delightful in what little screen time she is given. Affleck is "good", although decided to play it completely safe in a role that even he really can't screw up. Lets face it, he needed to gain even a small amount of points since Hollywoodland and the flops that followed in his footsteps. Overall, you'll be as pleased and refreshed as I was to see a picture that has the finesse of an espionage thriller, the entertainment value of an All The Presidents Men political drama and the edginess that we should expect from a modern day piece of cinema that doesn't star Miley Cyrus.

Sex and politics make a very explosive mixture indeed. This is a well made movie also but not only about that. But a well made movie is not always a good movie. And this movie could be a good one indeed if it had kept the same trend since the beginning I mean a movie about political corruption and the facing and fighting of the privatization of internal security in USA by a private corporation to win billions of dollars with such operation. This could be even presented like it began to be, mixed up with a thrilling murder story and the fight of a heroic journalist to discover the true behind it in order to save his friend the Congressman who presided over a commission charged precisely to investigate the above mentioned foul business. Such ingredients would make the story more attractive. But suddenly and unexpectedly the story changes abruptly its direction and turns the movie into a mere crime story just only passable. Pitiful indeed.

Good thriller with some excellent performances. Russell Crowe is suitably grizzled as the been around reporter and Helen Mirren is wonderfully tough as his editor, the problem is the casting of Ben Affleck. He gives a good enough performance but is far too young to be believable as Crowe's college roommate or Robin Wright Penn's husband, not his fault but a major casting error nonetheless. Originally Crowe and Affleck's parts were to be filled by Brad Pitt and Edward Norton a far more simpatico pairing the obvious disparity in the leads ages distracts throughout the film. Jason Bateman shows up late in the movie to offer up a fun, out there performance as a sleaze. The story itself does move along and offers some nice tension and twists.

I would label this a "decent-but-unmemorable political thriller," something you'd probably enjoy viewing but a few weeks later had forgotten much of it. Usually, movies which star Russell Crowe are more dynamic, although Crowe still mesmerizes as usual. I liked the twists and turns at the end, but one has to wait about two hours for those and that's a little too long a wait. As slick a production as it was, and with acceptable acting from actor, it was many of the characters here that seemed more like Hollywood stereotypes than real-life people. There was Crowe with the hippie looks from 30-40 years ago and who has the daring of James Bond; the Washington newspaper editor being a foul-mouthed Brit (crusty Helen Mirren) who uses profane expresses the Americans wouldn't know; the neophyte blogster (Rachel McAdams) being drop-dead gorgeous and getting her way despite tough bosses; the bad guys being anyone connected with the military (man, is that getting old, from Dr. Strangelove to today's films - it never changes), the professional sniper/assassin conveniently missing the good guy (Crowe) although he could kill anyone else......you get the picture - a few too many liberal film clichés. The most realistic character was probably "Rep. Stephen Collins (D-Pa)," played by the least of the actors, Ben Affleck. As for minor characters, I thought "Dominic Foy," played by Jason Bateman, was fascinating, as was Robin Wright. Overall, for entertainment purposes it was okay; not something you'd yawn and fall asleep watching, although you might be confused here and there. Through the gimmicks of hyped-up music and sound effects here and there, the suspense was evident throughout the two-plus hours. It's also an interesting look at today's battle between old and new "media," meaning newspapers and the Internet, respectively. Overall, it's enough to warrant as a purchase at the rental store but not as a blind buy despite the "name" cast.