State of Play

Too bad that the screenwriters focused so much on the journalist plot, which is not that important for the audience. The editor-in-chief character, played by Helen Mirren, and her effort to publish the best article just slows the film down. The viewer is not interested in newspapers, but in revealing secrets, developing relationships between superbly played characters and the threats to their lives in a dangerous high-stakes political game. Wouldn’t Russell Crowe be enough for the journalism plot? Otherwise, however, State of Play is a very decent film, Ben Affleck is fine and the emotions between Crowe and Robin Wright Penn are completely believable. (06/07/2009)

A solid political thriller with great actors, good direction, but a problematic script that results in several characters and scenes feeling empty, and a resolution that is too concise, to the point that after one viewing I’m not entirely sure that everything fits properly. That wouldn’t be a problem in a sci-fi mystery movie, but in a political thriller, which should rely primarily on the plot turning flawlessly and the effect of the final twist, this is a pretty serious shortcoming. 6+/10 (05/28/2009)

If you can already guess what’s going to happen from the trailer, something is wrong. State of Play is undoubtedly an excellent thriller. This is especially true for those of us who like conspiracy theories and enjoy unraveling them together with the film's characters. Unfortunately, the same doesn’t apply to those viewers who have already watched many films like this. Kevin MacDonald tells the story cleverly and very ingeniously lays out the clues, and it's great fun to watch the hard-working actors looking for individual crumbs out of the mysterious forest. Yet, somehow, the entire plot is put together without any stronger vigor or a stronger authorial decal. As a TV craftsman for HBO, he would score points with this film, but in an A-movie thriller, he loses out because of the clichés. I’ll give the film a net 70%, but I just can't round it up to four stars. (08/19/2009)

Very nice directing and good actors, but the script hardly traverses the three levels of the story: thriller, political-journalistic moralizing and personal drama. The introduction is excellent, full of the unique and very rhythmic direction by Macdonald, but then everything somehow shatters, shreds, evaporates... the legible transnational conspiracy tries to compare with the more serious mental matrix, but it is tedious and quite protracted. The final twists may come as a surprise, but they do not fix the shoddy impression from the previous storytelling. In the end, State of Play is neither an original thriller nor a film that would appeal to us with any message. It has a little bit of both and not enough of either. Nevertheless, mainly thanks to the directing and the actors, it holds up more than honorably. [70%] (05/18/2009)

Politics is a dirty game. Journalists are buggers. Classic journalism is almost a thing of the past. Tony Gilroy is a good writer. Kevin Macdonald has a nose for interesting, current material. Russell Crowe has charisma even with his dad-bod belly. Helen Mirren can take over even when given a minimum of space. Jeff Daniels has his best years behind him. Rachel McAdams is completely uninteresting. Simply old, familiar truths that are also completely true here. The only truth that doesn't apply here is the one about remakes being redundant, because this one is anything but redundant or bad. It does not tarnish the good name of the British original, rather the opposite. (05/29/2009)

A professionally shot thriller, in which Russell Crowe stands out as usual in the role of a journalist, who is passionate about the truth and a good story and is willing to risk even his life for it. Unfortunately, words of praise cannot be said about his partner Ben Affleck. His average acting might have been hidden in a different film and under different circumstances, perhaps behind the production, special effects, or pace, but compared to Crowe, the difference in quality is painfully evident in some places. The fourth star has escaped the film for other reasons - mainly due to shortcomings in the script. The producer wanted to follow the usual formula and attract viewers with a dramatic twist, after which the perspective on the characters of the story changes, but the screenwriter did not avoid logical errors and inconsistencies - see the final encounter between Crowe and the assassin. The expected victory of good and a free press over human filth and intrigue somehow fits into the idea of American studio production, but my sympathies usually go to films that attempt to break or at least avoid established clichés. Overall impression: 65%. (02/26/2013)

Who was the good guy and who was the bad guy? Who made a mistake and who didn’t? Politics is a dirty game and journalism is too, mostly, and when good people get involved with either of them, it changes them, usually in the worst possible way. That’s more or less what this outstandingly acted detective drama is all about. Crowe gives a standard performance and Ben Affleck is getting better and better. The only thing I don’t understand is the Czech title of the movie. This movie certainly isn’t destined for slaughter. (08/23/2009)

It is important not to expect a gripping espionage ride, but rather a lightly sarcastic thriller with a sharply eloquent Russell Crowe and an unremarkable Ben Affleck, again. While watching, I had a feeling that I’d already seen hundreds of films like this, and it is quite possibly true. I recommend it more to fans of the investigative subgenre, the uninitiated will not enjoy it, they will be bored. (11/14/2009)

Journalism with not a drop, but rather a hefty bucket of everything I dislike about current Hollywood production. Reporters who get in everywhere, incompetent cops, a stupid shootout during which a complete amateur escapes a professional, a soulless script culminating in a very expected ending, pervasive naivety... There’s nothing enthralling or at least entertaining and truth be told, an hour and a quarter into the film I was ready to turn it off. Misery, misery, misery. (06/01/2013)

Take out Affleck's dull, inarticulate expression and Helen Mirren's superfluous character of a principled journalist, and you are left with the best you could wish for in a conspiracy political thriller: a great plot, a dense atmosphere sculpted by tons of political dirt and forbidden machinations, a terrific score, and four or five excellent actors who we trust to live and breathe their characters. But be warned, it's still nothing but highly stylized and cleverly twisted Hollywood entertainment with an intrepid Crowe and an attractive McAdams, where the spectacular pursuit of justice far outweighs the honest themes of classic conspiracy films. But you have to get used to it, because you can't do better than this in the genre today – and personally I’m not complaining. 80% (05/10/2014)

I didn't expect much from this movie, I probably didn't trust it much either, but in the end, it pleasantly surprised me that it is a pretty well-played thriller, slightly political, actually a bit more, which works despite the presence of Ben Affleck. It's not a great masterpiece, but in terms of film and genre, it's more than solid. The script doesn't limp much, and Russell Crowe successfully carries the film. (04/28/2014)