“Well written and intriguing! And you can quote me on that!â€
I had forgotten how fun a good murder thriller can be when done right. That perfect blend of character acting, focused storyline and interesting twists that makes State of Play a must see. Directed by Kevin Macdonald (The Last King of Scotland) and starring Russell Crowe, Ben Affleck, and Rachel McAdams it is more than just a political who-dun-it. I felt it a throwback to the notable newspaper films of the 70’s. Though a bit staged at times and agenda manipulative it still had the nuts and bolts to carry it through 2 hours without as much as a hiccup. The success is mainly due to the personable and comfortable acting of the main cast.Â
When the mistress of a U.S. Congressman (Ben Affleck) dies of apparent suicide a Washington news reporter (Russell Crowe) begins to connect the dots between her, the government, and a private military group being investigated by the same Congressman. Crowe is spot on as the salty, unkempt, seasoned reporter. He is manipulative with everyone around him without being obvious about it. There is a certain subtle slyness to his character that I liked. When he grabs a young, up and coming news blogger (Rachel McAdams) to assist him it is an amusing contrast of journalistic styling. All without being campy or forced. Â Â I appreciated the fact that they did not make this simply a rehashing of political affairs but instead let the dynamic of the newspaper world be the driving force.
The best moments in the film revolve around getting the story. As an audience member I found I was discovering the facts along with the characters and that seemed to engage me even more into the film. Surprising too is Ben Affleck as Congressman Collins. As Ben ages I can see him taking more and more of these characters on. There was always something about his romantic comedy roles that never set well with me. I think he is geared more for these type thrillers. Possibly it is due to him not having much to say or being in a supportive position. Whatever, it worked. Â Helen Mirren pulled off her job as the head of the paper though at times she seemed to be uncomfortable with the hard nosed character. But being the amazing actress she is she stepped up and swung for the fences and most times hit the mark. Â
State of Play is rated PG-13 for some violence, language including sexual references, and brief drug content. None of this was standout or abusive. Kudos to the writers for using just as much as was needed to move the story and develop the characters. Though a bit long and mentally adult it is safe for those 12 and up, though many youngsters will be bored to tears I am sure. Those of us who appreciate decent intrigue and a mentally absorbing storyline will find this an enjoyable time at the movies. I give it 3.75 out of 5 note pads. Engaging, well acted and only a few holes to trip you up. Go enjoy and let me know what you think. Â Â Â
Matt Mungle (matt@mungleshow.com) (4/15/09)Â
For additional reviews, interview clips and great DVD giveaways, visit the website www.mungleshow.com”Â
Review copyright 2009 Mungleshow Productions. Used by Permission.
9 users commented in " State of Play – Movie Review Now in Theaters "
Follow-up comment rss or Leave a TrackbackHere’s why I thought “State” missed a great chance at something more.
http://digg.com/u11GzJ
I’m stumpted about a pivotal moment in the film…. how did Annie Collins know that the mistress was being paid $26,000 a month to infiltrate Congressman Collins’ staff…?
HERE’S AN EXTRACT FROM AN INTERVIEW WITH BEN AFFLECK AND THE “26,000 QUESTION” BEING ADDRESSED FOR SOME ADDITIONAL CLARITY — WHICH AFFIRMS THAT HOLLYWOOD ACTORS ARE OFTEN JUST AS “OUT OF TOUCH” AND CLUELESS AS ARE THE DIRECTORS, WRITERS, AND PRODUCERS:
____________________________________________
You have a saying in the movie at the end. It was discussed about the $26,000. That was vague to a few of us. What was your take on her knowing about that?
Affleck: There was some issue. At a certain point there was some talk about making her complicit. That didn’t end up being the way we went. I thought it would be really bold actually. I really pushed for it with Kevin [MacDonald] and he was non-committal to my face, which means that behind my back he’s was like ‘Affleck’s crazy. We’re not gonna do it!’ [accent] ‘No! Shrek! Donkey!’ He talks like Shrek! No, he barely has an accent. He’s Scottish. The idea was that the money, I had told her innocently, and she had passed that on to Russell. She was a conduit of that information without knowing she was passing on something. In explaining to her ‘No, just this one time.’ and trying to make her feel more comfortable about what happened, that she was being paid. I gave her an amount of money she had been paid. She remembered it and tells Cal, and then Call realizes ‘He must have told his wife this.’ Trying to explain ‘Honey, you don’t understand. She got paid $26,000, it wasn’t like that, they gave her all this money.’ There is no way he could have told his wife. It’s basically me saying the $26,000 and him saying ‘How do you know that?’ except it was through Robin [Wright Penn].
_________________________________
ONE WOULD THINK THAT GIVEN ALL OF THE MONEY THAT’S PAID TO WRITE SCRIPTS AND PRODUCE MOVIES THAT SOMEONE WOULD BE ABLE TO CATCH THIS ERROR BEFORE THE MOVIE WAS RELEASED….
I was also troubled about the $26,000. I am not even sure how Stephen Collins knew about the amount of money that was being paid. It was a greast movie, except for that point. Did they mess up the editing?
I have some big confusion about Collins being on the take also? Roberts (is that his name/psycho killer) was hired by the defense company, correct? But then he realized that Collins who had saved his life was the one they were targeting? The movie broke down for me at that point which pivots around the $26,000 bit. Help please. I am not usually so obtuse, but here I clearly am…Thanks
I, too, was befuddled by the $26,000. I thought Roberts (not quite the right name) was hired by Collins when he suspected something fishy. Can you tell me what tv show this was based on?
Here’s the thing:
1. Yes, Robert the killer was hired by Collins. He was not hired by PointCorp; we just thought so for most of the film. He was hired by Collins, his old war buddy, to follow the girl, because the Congressman was suspecting that she was a spy. Collins may have told the guy to rough her up; that is not clear; but the war buddy kills her. He’ll do anything to help out the congressman because he (Affleck) saved his life in Iraq in the past.
Affleck’s character then basically uses Crowe’s character to pin the murder on PointCorp–thus covering up his own role in it.
Re the $26,000; apparently his war buddy (Robert) found out that Sonja was being paid that? in his investigations?; and told the congressman; who told his wife; but per Crowe the reporter, Congressman and wife are not supposed to know that info. So when Robin Wright Penn’s character says it, Crowe realizes that Affleck must be involved more than he said he was.
Crowe knows the amount because Sonja’s friend whom they inteviewed in the motel told him (and us).
That seems to be how it works… it is a bit murky….
Daphne, I want to thank you for that explanation. Now the ending finally makes sense to me. I was going crazy trying to figure it out but you nailed it. Thanks! Incidentally, I really liked this movie and I thought the entire cast did exceptionally well.
Why do you think the crazy soldier would know the exact amount of money that Sonia was being paid??? He was not sophisticated like that. Did he look at her bank statement? He didn’t torture her or question her to find out that information. He simply pushed her in front of a train.
It’s obvious to me that Sonja told Steven Collins the amount of money that she was being paid, and then he told his wife. Anne Collins inadvertently let it slip to implicate her husband.
Leave A Reply