Diagonaldi Very well executed

TinsHeadline Touches You

Kailansorac Clever, believable, and super fun to watch. It totally has replay value.

Bluebell Alcock Ok... Let's be honest. It cannot be the best movie but is quite enjoyable. The movie has the potential to develop a great plot for future movies

bandw Scene-by-scene this thriller/drama really sucked me in. Once engaged it was hard to stop watching--it's the movie equivalent of a book you can't put down, since you want to know what is going to happen next. The production values are high in all categories. I particularly liked the framing suitable for wide screen viewing with the characters posed against backgrounds that make great use of color to accentuate the mood.The story of a newspaper reporter digging into a murder that ultimately involves high-level politicos requires close attention but, with a six hour run time, things unfold at a pace that can be digested.The ensemble cast is beyond reproach and Bill Nighy is simply superb in is portrayal of the editor of a large London newspaper. The score is not overly intrusive and it complements the action to engage you emotionally.The problem is that when it was all over I felt a bit letdown. In order to tie up some lose ends I think I could benefit from a second viewing, but the six hour time commitment has prevented my doing so. And maybe my sense of letdown was due to the fact that something that I had enjoyed so much was over.

Matthew Kresal It isn't often that something literally comes along and changes the standards of a viewer for an entire genre. By the time I got through the nearly six hour of State Of Play the first time around, that was exactly what had happened to me. Having watched it again in virtually one sitting I am once again surprised not only by how well the mini-series holds up during a second (or in my case third) viewing but just how high the quality of the mini-series really is.To begin with, the series features one essential element for any good story: good and believable characters played by fine actors. The cast of the series is top notch and is led by John Simm as newspaper reporter Cal McCaffrey and David Morrissey as British politician Stephen Collins who both give two incredibly gripping yet believable performances. While this is true of the entire series this fact is especially true during the final minutes of the series when things effectively become a two-hand play between Simm and Morrissey and their respective characters. It's easy to imagine how these characters could have been played differently but here, in this series, these performances are (to use words I don't sue very often) absolutely perfect.That's not to say that the rest of the cast is lacking by any means, far from it in fact. The supporting cast features fantastic performances that are just as gripping and believable as the performances of the mini-series two leads. The cast ranges Kelly Macdonald as reporter Della Smith, James McAvoy as reporter Dan Foster, Polly Walker as Coliins wife Anne, Stuart Goodwin as the mysterious Robert Bingham and the ever magnificent Bill Nighy as newspaper editor Cameron Foster. There is many more of course many others, but these are just a few of the fantastic performances to be found in State Of Play.There are also the production values to consider as well. One of the best things about State Of Play is the fact that one could believe that this could whole sequence of events is really just a headline away at any moment. Much of the credit of that goes to the production design of Donald Woods and the costumes of Claire Anderson both of which anchor the series firmly in reality. Then there's the incredible fly-on-the-wall cinematography by Chris Seager which manages not only to compliment the reality of the production design and costumes but gives the entire mini-series a documentary feel as well, all of which is helped by the editing of Mark Day. There's also the sparingly used, but highly effective, score by composer Nicholas Hooper which does what a good score is supposed to do: give additional emotional depth to any scene it appears in. All together the result is some of the strongest production values you're ever likely to see in a TV mini-series.The real success of the realistic feel of State Of Play lies not in how good the production values are but in the writing of scriptwriter Paul Abbott. Abbott has created a story that feels as though it could be ripped from tomorrow's headlines in a cautionary tale about the sometime fuzzy line between major corporations and those in government whoa re supposed to oversee them, in this case the corporation being a fictional but plausible British oil company and its lobbyists. The mini-series also takes a look at the modern news industry, how it gathers news, where it gets its information from and how pressure can be brought to bare if there's a story too damaging to those in high and powerful places. To do all this successfully and believably, Abbott forgoes many of the thriller clichés of rather tired action sequences and instead (and rightfully in my humble opinion anyway) focuses on the characters and their dialogue which leads to close six hours of fantastic dialogue and an incredible plot. If anything makes State Of Play worth seeing it is the plot which sets a new standard in just how many twists and turns one can fit in a seemingly easily clichéd plot. The result is a complex a mini-series that leaves a first-time viewer ever seeking answers and those who've seen it before looking and finding new clues with every viewing. In short: it's a first class script without any doubt.So what is State Of Play? It is a fantastic thriller containing some truly fantastic yet believable performances, fine production values and a first-rate script that never sinks into clichés. Yet it also something that is increasingly rare today. By doing all of those things it succeeds in doing something truly spectacular: it changes and raises the standards for an entire genre with it. If you can say nothing else you can say that State Of Play is what a good thriller ought to be.

patrick powell I read somewhere that Paul Abbott wrote the screenplay for State Of Play on the hoof. And unfortunately it shows - and, at the end of the day, it is to the detriment of the piece. Like the Grand Old Duke Of York, he marches us up to the top of the hill, and then marches us back down again, before once more we are marched halfway up and then — well, what? This series has been lauded to high heaven and impressed the money men in Tinseltown so much that it has now been turned into a movie. But am I the only one who feels just a little let down by the denouement? And am I the only one who feels, just a day later that the plot is so full of holes that something akin to a con trick? Let me give some example, and I trust you have already seen the piece or else my comments will be substantial spoilers. It is hinted throughout that there a huge conspiracy is afoot, and that it is so deep and so serious that the government would even resort to murder to avoid the truth coming out. In fact, this fact - a probably government conspiracy - is the whole raison d'etre of the thriller, from its title - State Of Play - on. So, for example, the hit-man is shot by police marksmen who turn up and whose actions take even the coppers on the case by surprise. The strong suggestion is that he must be silenced. Then there is the question of who and why the autopsy report on the alleged black drug dealer was altered to make it seem that he was indeed a druggie, which his family insist he wasn't. And on it goes. Just why was the government so keen, apparently, to protect Stephen Collins? We are never told, but we are given the impression that it is not so much protecting Collins but itself. At one point Collins is told that Andrew Wilson was not his enemy, the implication being that he had several rather important ones. There are several wild implausibilities as, for example, when the hit-man takes a shot with a laser-sighted sniper's rifle to eliminate a witness who happens to be in the stairwell several floors up or down in a hospital. Just how could the killer or killers - we don't yet know it is only one - know where he was? That, and several other crucial plot strands, are left to sort themselves out and are left worryingly loose by the end of the final episode. Finally, of course, there is the character of the hit-man himself: why are we supposed to accept his actions and given no back story, no fleshing out of his character and motivation? And would not the cops have established the link between him and Collins rather fast - looking at the records of jobs done by his firm, for example? Then there is Collins himself who surely would, under the circumstances have chosen to keep his head down knowing that if everything were revealed, he would be implicated in the two murders. And on it goes, more or less ruining what was at first blush a great and thrilling series. Thankfully, there is more to SOP than just the story. The ending might more of a whimper than one might wish for, but the journey there is a hell of a ride, with more twists and turns than a Cornish lane however implausible and downright contradictory they are shown to be later. And for that we should be grateful. If someone were to ask whether I recommend this as a good way of spending six hours of their life, I would say 'well, why not, but don't go expecting genius'. As for the portrayal of newspaper journalism, it was hit and miss to say the least. I have spent the past 35 years of my life working for newspapers, and the past 19 working for newspapers of the stature of The Herald. And I must say that they get a lot of small details right — the newsroom looks pretty authentic, as does the slight chaos and the mouthy newsdesk secretary. But they also, unfortunately, get quite a bit wrong. As the editor, Cameron Foster would most certainly take a hands-on interest in the story, but he would not do so exclusively, and has plenty of other things to do. Most likely a deputy or associate editor would be delegated to oversee the story. Nor, on a British newspaper (and I'm sure this is also true of the U.S.) would the editor deign to mix it with the troops. Inviting them all, except those essential to getting out that night's paper (which on a morning paper would be all of them) to drop everything and join him for a drink down the pub is — well — pure fantasy. The reporters were reasonably convincing, except that the Lobby correspondent would have spent 99 per cent of her time at the Commons and would merely have been consulted — she would not have taken such an active part. Dan Foster convinces more than Cal McCaffrey. Dan is just the right kind of amoral, young go-getter who doesn't give a stuff except getting what he wants. Cal is too much of a maverick to last more than a day on staff and would never have got so involved personally with Stephen Collins fate. But Della is spot on. So there you have it: an exhilarating ride and some extraordinary large holes in the plot which simply cannot be explained away. Other reviewers have, as usual, rather gone way over the top with their comments, claiming this is the best drama on TV ever, that it is utterly brilliant, top notch, extraordinary, masterpiece ... Not a bit of it, but take a look anyway.

goha First two episodes were excellent. Pacey, dramatic, great interaction between journalism, politics and police investigation. What happened in episodes 3,4,5 ? The Police and their ongoing investigation were dropped from the show. The affair between the politician's wife and the journalist took up (seemingly) hours of time. You never learned anything about any of the characters inner life or emotional state. And the most ludicrous character Dominic Foy wasted everybody's time with a pathetic accent, overacting and irrational behaviour. This should have been an excellent 3 or 4 part series, not 6. Episode 6 was too talky and unrealistic. The only saving grace of the final part was the excellent comedy turn of Bill Nighy. Even then, none of the behaviour rang true of real life journalists, politicians or police.And then there's the way it was shot. If you want to know why the latest Harry Potter movies are not very good, look at the uninventive directing of David Yates in State of Play. No idea how to frame a widescreen frame. No idea how to edit for drama, action, tension or speech. The only idea for edginess seemed to be using a hand-held camera with resulting shaky-cam effect.*SPOILERS*And in the end, the political games turned out to be weak, the oil company revelations were less than sinister, the politician's wife had no impact on the outcome and the big revelation was inconsistent with the two big plot turns at the beginning. 1. Who changed and classified the autopsy report ? 2. Why did the police recklessly shoot dead the assassin ?Watch The Wire for comparison of a better TV series, better drama, more real characters, better writing, better directing, better editing.Watch All the President's Men for filming in an open plan newspaper office. Watch Parallax View for journalism, company and political tension.David Yates is no Alan J Pakula.