Scoop

Everybody has a right to their own opinion however in my view this is one of the most gripping films I've seen. Gillian Anderson is brilliant as Emily Maitless and Rufus Sewell as Prince Andrew made the best of what must have been a very awkward part to play. The rest of the cast did a good job as well. The running time of 1 hour 42 mins passed so quickly. Once again Netflix triumphs so well done to them. It's not very often that there are decent tv and films around but thankfully this is definitely one of them in my humble opinion. I really found this production enjoyable. Well done to everyone involved.

The story of how Emily Maitlis came to interview Prince Andrew.

It doesn't exactly sound like a catchy plot, and indeed I thought it was an extremely bizarre recent event to dramatise, but it works.

The BBC hasn't exactly been covered in glory in recent times, but this scoop was seen as something of a revelation, the first time I and many others decided to tune into Newsnight, a show that's died away over the years.

It was an excruciating interview to watch at the time, it's one of the most bizarre things I've ever seen, that scene was perfectly recreated, Sewell and Anderson were both terrific, quality acting. I thought Billie Piper did a cracking job here too.

I'm not sure whether this film will have a broad appeal or not, the storyline is a rather curious one, but if you enjoy quality acting, try it out.

7/10.

The Scoop is one of those films that really requires the viewer to be alert and held captivated in an otherwise very dialogue-dependent story.

This is where you have many people fawning over the costuming, hair and makeup, and accents from the cast and crew. But it takes more than that to take a relatively unoriginal concept of 'talk, before they talk first' that the entire film is centred around. We all know the story: Prince Andrew had a friendship with Jeffrey Epstein that churned the rumour mills that he was partaking in illegal sexual activity with Epstein's trafficked young girls. It's easily Google-able and you can watch the original interview just about anywhere online.

With that said, the film itself clings to the nip-it-in-the-bud concept, which is not clever or unusual. Many journalists and news outlets use this tactic all the time to get a story. The film creates a buzz around the fact that they came up with this concept as if it's brilliant and has never been done before.

All the while, you are watching a film that must keep a bored audience attentive. This means there is a lot of hustle, and by that I mean physical hustling. People marching from one office to another. People walking quickly through crowded areas. People outright running to catch a great photo or trying to make it to the bus. Since there is no action, the film resorts to quick feet for just about all of the film to make it seem like it has its own brand of action. Coupled with the running and fast-walking is the dramatic music. In my opinion, the score is amazing. It almost seems wasted in this film because it only seems to shine during the running-in-heels moments.

As for the cast, you can't go wrong with Rufus Sewell. He must have thought he hit the jackpot to be caked with makeup to sit stiffly in a chair or standing stiffly in a room, barely using much effort to recreate the bumbling fool that Andrew is. Is the acting amazing? Maybe. But in my opinion, the dark contact lenses that the used on Gillian Anderson and the grey wig on Rufus Sewell to me isn't art. They were used because they had to, and the actors no doubt felt like their characters came alive as soon as they saw themselves in the mirror. Speaking lines is not great acting. In this case, it's mimicking who you are supposed to be. So even saying nothing at all can be construed as good acting if the person has the look and mannerisms down pat. Most of the actors knew the assignment and delivered it well.

But by and large, it's still an unoriginal concept of how journalists capture a story (which is based on reality, not from the film's writers), made to be a whole lot more interesting than I think it deserved to be.

If you already know the Andrew story, saw the interview, then nothing will surprise you with this film. The little side story of Sam and her balance between work and home life was peppered in to give the viewer something more, but was that even original or enough? Shades of Erin Brockovich were to be had with Sam, a single mother in leopard-print high heels, whose take-no-prisoners attitude is what ultimately gets the BBC their story. We cheer for the underdog, and Sam certainly was it.

The charge is led by women, and one whippet. The target is a perverted royal who didn't see it coming. In the end, we have great hair and makeup, costuming, and music. Forcing us to find it exciting was the tricky part, and I think that's why I gave it a 7, along with so many others who likely felt the same.

It's by no means a bad film. Overall, watching it is an enjoyable experience, But given the interesting subject matter, there is too much on matters that are irrelevant to the main issue

The interview with Prince Andrew captivated England at the time, and apparently much of the world too. If the film had concentrated more on how that came about , and the debates on both sides as to whether it should go ahead, I would have rated it higher. But the film lost its focus and concentrated far too much on the researcher who set up the interview. We see scenes with her mother. Scenes with her son. A debate about her son's girlfriend etc etc. If this was a fictional tale, maybe fair enough to flesh out other characters. But for a real life story, that wasn't what I was watching it for, and I felt it deflected attention from the main issues.

I like the way it's shown how out of touch the palace crew was, especially before the interview aired when they were saying Andrew did "wonderful."

I think it's just a fine watch, nothing mind-blowing. But it's interesting to get a peek of the supposed behind the scenes of that infamous Prince Andrew interview.

It's not some edge-of-your-seat drama though, which I think is great because not everything needs dramatization. Since it's based on a book of a real event, with some creative changes, don't expect any crazy MI6 agents busting in to shut the interview down or anything like that. It keeps things relatively grounded despite the subject matter.