I'm surprised by the negative reviews of this series. I've watched two episodes so far, I found it well written, well acted and very enjoyable. The contrasting motivations, of the two newspapers, cleverly provides extra depth to the characters who are both plausible and engaging. Charlotte Riley is outstanding as Holly Evans, an intelligent, hard working journalist with lofty principles but enough experience to know how to uncover the real story. Ben Chaplin is convincing as the world weary editor of the sleazier of the two papers with a set of pragmatic philosophies that give him an attractive earthy wisdom. I wonder if some of the IMDB reviewers are confusing an assessment of the series with an assessment of UK Journalists, whose shortcomings have been well publicised recently. For the sake of clarity, UK Journalists - not great, this series about UK Journalists - great. I hope that's clear.
52 Reviews
Brilliant TV!
aleesha-880406 February 2019
Has as much potential for success as failure
plummetingparadise13 September 2018
Surprised at the amount of negative reviews this show has garnered so far. I've only watched the first episode but complaints that the characters are two-dimensional seem unfair without allowing the show to build those characters past the first episode. Of course this is assuming they are laying groundwork for substantive growth of character, which they might not be doing. My point is simply that it has the potential to be a good show, and at a time when the way we get our news is rapidly evolving seemingly without deliberation I'm for even superficial examinations of that process. Anything to kickstart a real conversation.
So far, so good.
eiranova8 September 2018
I have just finished watching the first episode of this new BBC drama. As a former journalist who gave up the trade due to corporate media pressure (though I was never a scribbler for the "tabloids") I understand that -in addition to feeling such corporate media pressure- the writers employed by these outlets do or die by the entertainment appeal of their articles. So far, and judging by the first episode, I must say: "Well done!" For I found the writing quite compelling and the acting superb even by the minor characters. And because, as the episode ended, I felt it had reached a crescendo that has left me wanting for more. Hopefully, my expectations will be matched by future deliveries. Oh! On not such a surprising note, "Kudos to the Brits!"
What? Only 6 episodes?
jwpicton6 May 2020
I am enjoying this series no end; compelling storylines, great characters, great script, great acting, excellent comparative plots with current affairs - when I watch I'm completely absorbed.
Why are there not at LEAST 3 series?
Only 6 episodes in total?
What is wrong with this industry?
I don't get it. Bloomin line of duty has loads of episodes and was like watching angry amateur night compared to this; all of them stomping around, shouting at each other with grumpy faces - you'd be forgiven for thinking that being mind bendingly jilted (for whatever reason) is a prerequisite for being on the force!
The only nonsense is the flat share situation - in reality no person in their right mind would let that happen - big error on the writers part.
Banal writing.
blue-terry29 June 2019
It is easy to see what will happen, decades early. The only one who is realistic in their acting, is Ben Chaplin. That Holly Evans character would send me (and any other sane person) running for the hills. I could pick out several actors (male and female) who make me wonder how they ever got to stand in front of a camera. The moralistic slant hits like a sledgehammer, and a bit of subtlety would be appreciated.
Fun if you can stand the moralizing
bccpldt12 December 2021
Warning: Spoilers
I found Press to be a fun watch at the beginning but that it became increasingly annoying by the episode.
One interesting pattern I noticed. All the main women were great people doing the right thing. The men however were good and moral to the extent a woman had control over them. The men at the top were awful. The men who reported to women were ok so long as they supported/obeyed the woman in charge. The Ed character reported to a man so he was bad, but when he was around a woman he felt guilty and conflicted. Kudos to the writers for being so enlightened!
A part I found particularly annoying is when Holly joined the Post. On that day a story is blowing back on them. Suddenly all these veteran news people are big babies who don't know what to do. Luckily Mary Poppins... I mean Holly tells them exactly how to fix it. She also lets Duncan know how to fix his love life. All this while wearing her trademark blank stare on her face.
So it's fun if you can put up with some of that crap. Unfortunately, it had the potential to be great.
One interesting pattern I noticed. All the main women were great people doing the right thing. The men however were good and moral to the extent a woman had control over them. The men at the top were awful. The men who reported to women were ok so long as they supported/obeyed the woman in charge. The Ed character reported to a man so he was bad, but when he was around a woman he felt guilty and conflicted. Kudos to the writers for being so enlightened!
A part I found particularly annoying is when Holly joined the Post. On that day a story is blowing back on them. Suddenly all these veteran news people are big babies who don't know what to do. Luckily Mary Poppins... I mean Holly tells them exactly how to fix it. She also lets Duncan know how to fix his love life. All this while wearing her trademark blank stare on her face.
So it's fun if you can put up with some of that crap. Unfortunately, it had the potential to be great.
Wonderful. Why wasn't it recommissioned?
boophillips9 May 2020
There is so much drivel out there. So many tv series are poorly scripted, poorly acted and lack realistic plots. This was the exact opposite. The two central characters played by Charlotte Riley and Ben Chaplin are a master class in acting, perfectly matched and utterly believable. The story lines interesting and reflect what we see say to say in the British press. I can't understand why there is only one series??! Baffling. There is so much more scope for character and story development with the incredible ensemble cast of Al Weaver, Paapa Essiedu and Ellie Kendrick. What a waste!
Nice but The Newsroom is far better
her00026 September 2018
Under the radar
anne4022 October 2018
I'm surprised by the negative reviews for this series. I think with all the great dramas that are showing at the moment this series has slipped under the radar a bit.
Great cast and definitely worth a watch, I suspect it's uncomfortably close to the truth about what goes on the in the murky world of journalism
Interesting but not spectacular
qui_j17 September 2022
This series proved an interesting watch despite the fact that the whole news/media theme has been done many times before. This one has its own share of moralizing, but done in a way that's not its central focus. The plot starts to lose steam about midway through the series, things start to drag a bit, and the last episode seems a bit rushed to wind up things quickly. Not an easy feat given the number of subplots that were included. It appears they had some warning that there would not be a second season. The final episode is therefore a bit "wishy-washy" as everyone ends on a happy note.
It's not that realistic apart from the fact that some of the tabloids do publish more for entertainment value, and less for truth. That is becoming more apparent these days given the increasing number of lawsuits brought against the tabloids, where plaintiffs actually are awarded money. Does not say much for any association between tabloid journalism and the truth!
Overall, it is worth the watch as it does provide entertainment.
It's not that realistic apart from the fact that some of the tabloids do publish more for entertainment value, and less for truth. That is becoming more apparent these days given the increasing number of lawsuits brought against the tabloids, where plaintiffs actually are awarded money. Does not say much for any association between tabloid journalism and the truth!
Overall, it is worth the watch as it does provide entertainment.
Enjoyable
MaxmillianM8 October 2018
This is clearly a take on Guardian vs The Sun (or Mail) and it is entertaining and the characters are believable. A very entertaining show.
Ben Chaplin really can play a ruthless man very well, and I thin Charlotte Riley is just fabulous and very versatile. I hope they will renew this.
Good story, patchy script
thisguysthelimit13 January 2019
Let me start by saying I enjoyed this series about 2 newspapers in London. The ethical impoverished one makes me think of the Guardian. The other, red top, couls be the Mirror or the Sun.
I watched all 6 episodes and fiund some of the writing compellingly and some utter drivel. In my opinion the good outweighs the poor so i look forward to the second season.
Sad fantasy
cameragod4 February 2019
I've worked in the news media for over 30 years. So had some hopes when I started watching BBC mini series "Press" (cool name) but kind of lost interest in the second ep in when the multi millionaire who owned one of the papers claimed he didn't care if the paper made money only that it did quality journalism... I mean I can suspend belief to dragons and elves but that is pushing fantasy a bit too far.
Its well made but badly let down by the writing.
TOO SHORT
aurasbob5 November 2019
It was a very interesting program, only wished it was longer. It ended just when it started getting similar to what is going on now here. Reminded me of Newsroom program. Hope some sharp Producers pick this idea up to monitor Our current Political battle in the U.S.
American TV Never Gives Us This!
gsandra-2687611 October 2019
Riley and Chaplin were riveting in this wonderfully crafted, intelligent script about the dog-eat-dog business of the newspaper business. I think this story was a take on the British tabloid versus "good journalism" competitors in the UK, but it was also an interesting story about human nature.
The acting was superb. Chaplin and Riley should get awards for their terrific work in this series. They were the heart and soul of the story. I couldn't wait to see what happened from one episode to the next. The ending was a little soft, but the points were made about greed, ambition, and the counterweights of altruism and truth.
The acting was superb. Chaplin and Riley should get awards for their terrific work in this series. They were the heart and soul of the story. I couldn't wait to see what happened from one episode to the next. The ending was a little soft, but the points were made about greed, ambition, and the counterweights of altruism and truth.
I absolutely loved this!
lynnpd9919 October 2019
I have now watched all six episode of PRESS twice and I loved it better on the second viewing. I sure hope that there will be a second series.
Yes, it is a bit dated in some respects, BUT since the print business as is all media related businesses go, the times are rapidly changing.
I loved seeing behind the scenes at a newspaper and the British press in particular as they are more ruthless even than are the American press.
One criticism, 6 episodes just isn't enough; please make at least 10, if there is a season 2.
I would LOVE to see a season 2 PLEASE!!!!!!!
Yes, it is a bit dated in some respects, BUT since the print business as is all media related businesses go, the times are rapidly changing.
I loved seeing behind the scenes at a newspaper and the British press in particular as they are more ruthless even than are the American press.
One criticism, 6 episodes just isn't enough; please make at least 10, if there is a season 2.
I would LOVE to see a season 2 PLEASE!!!!!!!
Superbly-acted 6-part portrayal of donwsides that builds and builds to reach a very well-plotted season finale
jrarichards4 July 2020
Warning: Spoilers
Those who have seen the BBC offering "Doctor Foster" (2015-2017) will not be surprised to see that "Press" has two key figures in common with it, i.e. writer Mike Bartlett and Director Tom Vaughan. So, while "Foster" worked to deconstruct the myth of the stable and reliable and decent middle-class, "Press" homes in on the world of today's newspapers with a mission to reveal how the "journos" will stop at nothing, have no scruples whatever, and compete with each other on a cut-throat basis.
A difference here is of course that we in the audience hardly need telling these truths about the print media, because we are aware of these truths already!
In essence, The Herald and The Post are two titles operating respectively out of old and flashy new bases in the same London square (in real-life Clerkenwell). The Herald is failing at trying to set a slightly higher standard and moral tone, while The Post is thriving by going with salacious stories and a stop-at-nothing approach. Needless to say, the proximity ensures interaction between the two, and - less predictably - The Post does not quite enjoy carte blanche as its proprietor (played chillingly well by the great David Suchet) wants to keep in with the powers-that-be - the British PM in particular - so there ARE in fact some places it can't go. While the "Press" star at The Herald is not actually its Editor but senior journalist Holly Evans (Charlotte Riley), the key figure at The Post is indeed its Editor Duncan Allen (Ben Chaplin). Amazing quality scenes ensue when Suchet and Chaplin share the screen, while the various chemistry-filled interactions between Evans and Allen are of amazing emotional clout.
It will be clear from this that Chaplin's portrayal is a superb one, of a man far deeper, more complex, more intelligent and more troubled than he appears to be at first glance. While the character remains hard or impossible to like throughout, he makes regular switches from dominant, callous and unyielding to somehow-lost and near-pathetic with amazing ease; and we can at least feel some kind of sympathy at moments. His plotting and counterplotting (but also clear fascination) with Holly is splendid, but - though also ruthless and at times lacking in morals - Holly is in the end a more straightforward character - we know what drives her. In contrast, Duncan Allen is mysterious and sad and unknowable, even though a relationship with his yong son really matters to him, hence the desire on the part of several people to use this apparently single weakness against him.
While each episode focuses in on a separate storyline, in this way illustrating various well-known worst sides of the press (rarely we do see any redeeming features), there is also a main-thread story that comes to its climax in episode 6 and really serves to raise the pace - and the stakes - yet further. Hence the series comes to a fine crescendo in its final episode, and it is unlikely any viewer cold or unmoved by what is going on there.
Interestingly - and unlike in "Doctor Foster", at least one character here - the hitherto-unlikeable and immoral Ed Washburn (played by Paapa Essiedu) does make a morally-motivated decision towards the end of the finale, and that makes us feel a bit better, even as all around him have done what Ed usually specialises in, and been largely self-centred, callous and uncaring, irrespective of whether the tone is theoretically one of the moral crusade or the desire to break or ruin certain people on more or less of a whim.
Quite an achievement then, and certainly a rivetting watch in a yucky kind of way.
A difference here is of course that we in the audience hardly need telling these truths about the print media, because we are aware of these truths already!
In essence, The Herald and The Post are two titles operating respectively out of old and flashy new bases in the same London square (in real-life Clerkenwell). The Herald is failing at trying to set a slightly higher standard and moral tone, while The Post is thriving by going with salacious stories and a stop-at-nothing approach. Needless to say, the proximity ensures interaction between the two, and - less predictably - The Post does not quite enjoy carte blanche as its proprietor (played chillingly well by the great David Suchet) wants to keep in with the powers-that-be - the British PM in particular - so there ARE in fact some places it can't go. While the "Press" star at The Herald is not actually its Editor but senior journalist Holly Evans (Charlotte Riley), the key figure at The Post is indeed its Editor Duncan Allen (Ben Chaplin). Amazing quality scenes ensue when Suchet and Chaplin share the screen, while the various chemistry-filled interactions between Evans and Allen are of amazing emotional clout.
It will be clear from this that Chaplin's portrayal is a superb one, of a man far deeper, more complex, more intelligent and more troubled than he appears to be at first glance. While the character remains hard or impossible to like throughout, he makes regular switches from dominant, callous and unyielding to somehow-lost and near-pathetic with amazing ease; and we can at least feel some kind of sympathy at moments. His plotting and counterplotting (but also clear fascination) with Holly is splendid, but - though also ruthless and at times lacking in morals - Holly is in the end a more straightforward character - we know what drives her. In contrast, Duncan Allen is mysterious and sad and unknowable, even though a relationship with his yong son really matters to him, hence the desire on the part of several people to use this apparently single weakness against him.
While each episode focuses in on a separate storyline, in this way illustrating various well-known worst sides of the press (rarely we do see any redeeming features), there is also a main-thread story that comes to its climax in episode 6 and really serves to raise the pace - and the stakes - yet further. Hence the series comes to a fine crescendo in its final episode, and it is unlikely any viewer cold or unmoved by what is going on there.
Interestingly - and unlike in "Doctor Foster", at least one character here - the hitherto-unlikeable and immoral Ed Washburn (played by Paapa Essiedu) does make a morally-motivated decision towards the end of the finale, and that makes us feel a bit better, even as all around him have done what Ed usually specialises in, and been largely self-centred, callous and uncaring, irrespective of whether the tone is theoretically one of the moral crusade or the desire to break or ruin certain people on more or less of a whim.
Quite an achievement then, and certainly a rivetting watch in a yucky kind of way.
Worthy of a Good Binge Watch
untilnow9931 March 2019
Warning: Spoilers
Excellent casting, great writing, terrific acting.
I'm no expert on journalism, but I do know a good series when I happen upon it. There is just enough edginess to keep you guessing and wanting more. The characters all find their way into your head, one by one. It's difficult to pick out a favorite, but somehow I ended up slightly smitten with (in a platonic way) Leona/Ellie Kendrick.
At first I thought Leona's character was a bit of a drip, but she grew on me. By the end, I was thrilled to see her get more time on screen. Ellie Kendrick is wonderfully talented and highly watchable. I do so love great acting.
If you've got the time and you want to see something loaded with intrigue and some fun twists and turns, I recommend "Press." (Not sure I got the bison/buffalo joke, but I think it has to do with "bison" sounding like "basin.")
I'm no expert on journalism, but I do know a good series when I happen upon it. There is just enough edginess to keep you guessing and wanting more. The characters all find their way into your head, one by one. It's difficult to pick out a favorite, but somehow I ended up slightly smitten with (in a platonic way) Leona/Ellie Kendrick.
At first I thought Leona's character was a bit of a drip, but she grew on me. By the end, I was thrilled to see her get more time on screen. Ellie Kendrick is wonderfully talented and highly watchable. I do so love great acting.
If you've got the time and you want to see something loaded with intrigue and some fun twists and turns, I recommend "Press." (Not sure I got the bison/buffalo joke, but I think it has to do with "bison" sounding like "basin.")
A complete misunderstanding both of drama and of newspapers
Laight16 April 2020
Somehow the people behind this program have entirely missed what makes a drama work, and what makes their chosen setting work. Re the latter: in the short space of time in which this show takes place, the writers try to stuff about ten years of events that might happen to one paper. It's totally unbelievable. Additionally, the supposedly professional reporters keep leaving all their most important papers in front of their rivals who can thus subvert them -- which leads to the point about how badly the writers misunderstand drama. Instead of a show driven by character, this show is driven by coincidence, overheard conversations, and papers that are constantly being left behind. Each of the six episodes has several plot points, and the characters are forced to get there even when it makes absolutely no sense. (In fact, throughout the series timing seems to be something that no one cares about -- things happen in the space of minutes rather than hours, or in days rather than years; most weirdly: a character who gets divorced and then finds a new partner in what seems to be less than a week.) All in all, this is a sloppy, badly produced show that wastes its very talented cast -- especially Ben Chaplin, who is wonderfully evil throughout.
Pure Entertainment, A Gripping Watch
martimusross20 January 2019
This was a very well crafted drama, everything was in place and it really was quite gripping. Ben Chaplin showed brilliant promise in 1995 with the comedy Game On, he then was stolen by America to our loss. He is one of the finest talents, he brings an intensity to the screen that cannot be ignored with just everything going on behind the eyes.
I am never sure why Mr Chaplin was not a mega star of the movies years ago, perhaps his time has come now.
I liked the mixture of episodic stories mixed with longer running issues as this created quite an impetus. Great ensemble playing.
If I was to make two criticisms, no one was happy in their jobs and the office-banter was missing. And the Resonance story just didn't cut it, we all know that our surveillance is done be GCHQ and that only exceptions are read by humans, everything else is a computer algorithm, so we have privacy, and the idea that this surveillance could be subverted is absurd.
I look greatly to season 2
I am never sure why Mr Chaplin was not a mega star of the movies years ago, perhaps his time has come now.
I liked the mixture of episodic stories mixed with longer running issues as this created quite an impetus. Great ensemble playing.
If I was to make two criticisms, no one was happy in their jobs and the office-banter was missing. And the Resonance story just didn't cut it, we all know that our surveillance is done be GCHQ and that only exceptions are read by humans, everything else is a computer algorithm, so we have privacy, and the idea that this surveillance could be subverted is absurd.
I look greatly to season 2
Acting , Story , Characters
jmccrmck-6517219 March 2020
When you get the three elements I refer to above and they are well put together you get a series that is heads above so much other content out there, I streamed it on PBS Passport , it was the second best series I 've watched there, second only to Wolf Hall and that if you know it truly is a Masterpiece.
Excellent
sallyfryer118 November 2018
So interesting
anamariajobs14 May 2021
Very well done
pjdickinson-278222 May 2021
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
