State of Play

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. (14/11/2009)

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. (30/05/2009)

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. (23/08/2009)

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%. (27/02/2013)

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% (10/05/2014)