Posts
I just left the theater after seeing State of Play, the political thriller directed by Kevin McDonald (The Last King of Scotland) and starring Russell Crowe, Rachel McAdams, and Ben Affleck. The film was based on a BBC produced mini-series of the same title. To be honest, I went into the theater with low expectations having rented the BBC mini-series because I had heard it described as a British version of the HBO television masterpiece, The Wire. While the mini-series had some great moments and great elements (especially Bill Nighy's performance as the Editor-In-Chief of a London daily newspaper), overall I was underwhelmed by the show. It was certainly no rival to The Wire, which remains in my mind the best television show ever produced in the history of the medium. So, when my lukewarm reception to the BBC version was coupled with some very mediocre reviews for this new theatrical release, I wasn't terribly excited to see it. I expected a pat, uninspired version of decent-at-best source material. I was wrong.
"State of Play is equal parts love letter and eulogy to the fading art of journalism and the creative fictions it has inspired."
The story revolves primarily around three characters - a daily newspaper journalist, Cal McAffrey (Crowe), his younger, less experienced colleague, Della Frye (McAdams), and Stephen Collins (Affleck), a United States Congressman. In short, a scandal develops around Congressman Collins which involves sex, money, corporate espionage, and military profiteering. The story becomes more complicated when we learn that Cal has a personal history and friendship with the troubled Congressman, leading to conflicts of interest and questions of personal, professional, and ethical loyalty.
As you might expect, Russell Crowe is charged with playing the brooding, dogged journalist seeking to unravel a complicated web of deceit and duplicity. However, Crowe never succumbs to the furrowed-brow brooding which all too often passes for on screen intensity today (yes, I'm talking to you, Mr. DiCaprio.) His is a fully fleshed out character deftly tap dancing between hard boiled intrigue, rogue selfishness, and rough-edged charisma. Those are all traits that one must surely possess to achieve success in a cutthroat industry known chiefly for its dueling traits of self-righteousness and cynicism. McAdams turns in a respectable performance as the inexperienced newbie reporter (make that blogger) fighting for respect from the jaded Cal who resents what the blogging journalist represents to old-fashioned shoe-leather reporting. Affleck is also merely respectable as the embattled congressman fighting for his political life. Neither Affleck nor McAdams can ever match the fluid intensity of Crowe, which is one problem that keeps this really good film from being great. In the case of McAdams, I think she was was the victim of writing which offered few opportunities to do more that react to the flourishes of Crowe's protagonist. The only person who seemed equally matched on screen with Crowe was Robin Wright Penn as Anne Collins, the wife of the scandal-ridden Congressman . Wright Penn's quiet embodiment of the ubiquitous humiliated politician's wife was a needed human texture in the film's expansive political canvas. Helen Mirren was often fun to watch as the newspaper's Editor-in-Chief, but, like McAdams, seemed relegated to a one or two note performance. She had little opportunity to do more than vacillate between expressions of exasperation with either her sanctimonious reporters demanding time and resources or her corporate chieftains demanding money and profit. In fact, the crisis of contemporary journalism was the ever present subtext in this film.
I somewhere heard a critique of this film that accused it of wanting to be All the President's Men in an era where heroic journalism no longer applies. I could not disagree more. State of Play is dramatically aware of this history and, if anything, is equal parts love letter and eulogy to the fading art of journalism and the creative fictions it has inspired. McAdams' entire character arc is a nod to the decline of journalism and much of the film's diagloge and imagery expresses a melancholy point of view regarding the current state of reporting. In fact, I thought this film cleverly alluded to political realities without succumbing to ham-fisted speeches by its characters lecturing the audience (OK, maybe a line or two dipped its toe in those waters but never did the film take the full plunge.) One ingenious moment was a cleverly placed portrait of Dwight D. Eisenhower in the office of Affleck's fictional Congressman. Military profiteering is central to the film's plot, and is part of the scandal surrounding Affleck's character. As is well-known to history buffs and fans of the great documentary Why We Fight, Eisenhower used his last presidential address to warn against a looming military-industrial complex. Seeing his portrait in the Congressman's office offered clues regarding the character's motives and loyalties at a key moment in the film but was employed to very subtle effect. There were several other winks and nods throughout the film that will certainly be enjoyed by political buffs and news junkies. These devices never draw too much attention to themselves, and it's when director McDonald and the film's three screenwriters employ restraint that the movie is most effective.
Speaking of restraint, this film had a run time of 127 minutes, whereas the BBC series comprised almost six hours. The danger of these abridged adaptations is that they often result in broad-brushed renderings lacking the nuance and complexity of the original, only to be replaced by eye roll-inducing exposition. In the case of McDonald's State of Play, the result was a better-paced and more taut version of the original. In fact, perhaps that was the trouble with the BBC version. It spent hours and hours trying to develop characters unnecessarily instead of realizing that at its heart, this is a plot driven story. McDonald seemed to realize as much and trimmed the fat while still leaving enough juice in the important characters for a very respectable and very watchable film.
As you might expect, Russell Crowe is charged with playing the brooding, dogged journalist seeking to unravel a complicated web of deceit and duplicity. However, Crowe never succumbs to the furrowed-brow brooding which all too often passes for on screen intensity today (yes, I'm talking to you, Mr. DiCaprio.) His is a fully fleshed out character deftly tap dancing between hard boiled intrigue, rogue selfishness, and rough-edged charisma. Those are all traits that one must surely possess to achieve success in a cutthroat industry known chiefly for its dueling traits of self-righteousness and cynicism. McAdams turns in a respectable performance as the inexperienced newbie reporter (make that blogger) fighting for respect from the jaded Cal who resents what the blogging journalist represents to old-fashioned shoe-leather reporting. Affleck is also merely respectable as the embattled congressman fighting for his political life. Neither Affleck nor McAdams can ever match the fluid intensity of Crowe, which is one problem that keeps this really good film from being great. In the case of McAdams, I think she was was the victim of writing which offered few opportunities to do more that react to the flourishes of Crowe's protagonist. The only person who seemed equally matched on screen with Crowe was Robin Wright Penn as Anne Collins, the wife of the scandal-ridden Congressman . Wright Penn's quiet embodiment of the ubiquitous humiliated politician's wife was a needed human texture in the film's expansive political canvas. Helen Mirren was often fun to watch as the newspaper's Editor-in-Chief, but, like McAdams, seemed relegated to a one or two note performance. She had little opportunity to do more than vacillate between expressions of exasperation with either her sanctimonious reporters demanding time and resources or her corporate chieftains demanding money and profit. In fact, the crisis of contemporary journalism was the ever present subtext in this film.
I somewhere heard a critique of this film that accused it of wanting to be All the President's Men in an era where heroic journalism no longer applies. I could not disagree more. State of Play is dramatically aware of this history and, if anything, is equal parts love letter and eulogy to the fading art of journalism and the creative fictions it has inspired. McAdams' entire character arc is a nod to the decline of journalism and much of the film's diagloge and imagery expresses a melancholy point of view regarding the current state of reporting. In fact, I thought this film cleverly alluded to political realities without succumbing to ham-fisted speeches by its characters lecturing the audience (OK, maybe a line or two dipped its toe in those waters but never did the film take the full plunge.) One ingenious moment was a cleverly placed portrait of Dwight D. Eisenhower in the office of Affleck's fictional Congressman. Military profiteering is central to the film's plot, and is part of the scandal surrounding Affleck's character. As is well-known to history buffs and fans of the great documentary Why We Fight, Eisenhower used his last presidential address to warn against a looming military-industrial complex. Seeing his portrait in the Congressman's office offered clues regarding the character's motives and loyalties at a key moment in the film but was employed to very subtle effect. There were several other winks and nods throughout the film that will certainly be enjoyed by political buffs and news junkies. These devices never draw too much attention to themselves, and it's when director McDonald and the film's three screenwriters employ restraint that the movie is most effective.
Speaking of restraint, this film had a run time of 127 minutes, whereas the BBC series comprised almost six hours. The danger of these abridged adaptations is that they often result in broad-brushed renderings lacking the nuance and complexity of the original, only to be replaced by eye roll-inducing exposition. In the case of McDonald's State of Play, the result was a better-paced and more taut version of the original. In fact, perhaps that was the trouble with the BBC version. It spent hours and hours trying to develop characters unnecessarily instead of realizing that at its heart, this is a plot driven story. McDonald seemed to realize as much and trimmed the fat while still leaving enough juice in the important characters for a very respectable and very watchable film.
0 comments:
Post a Comment