a pile of hemorrhoid and uncomfortable crap . there be so much wrong with this that i do not know where to start . the direction be all shaky camera and weird angle and mono cut to colour etc . nothing wrong with that you may think and expect that this be not between scene or to add sense of perspective . this be just to say that amy goodness and life in a newspaper office be a fast paced and chemically fuel trip do not you know . i have in the past despaired at those daily mail type who moan every time a shaky camera be use but induce headache amongst your audience detracts from the content . move everything around constantly and and i mean constantly and only draw attention to the fact that there be nothing worth watching at the centre . by not allow the audience to watch the actor you be force to listen to the god awful script . the script or lack thereof be the other major fail . the director and mary mcgurkin and inform u that the script be improvise but presumably the idea of a fleet st editor and shag the proprietor wife and the ensue power struggle for the direction of the paper be the basis for the funding . some filmmaker can use improvisation to develop performance and create something great and mary unfortunately can not . the problem be that the narrative be more akin to a jeffrey archer novel than a bite piece of satire . armando iannuci and bird and fortune etc clean their shoe with script like these . i would honestly say this be one of the most annoying and self knowing and sanctimonious film for sometime and possibly ( but probably not ) all time . i have never see so many walkout and ( this be a gala premiere remember ) especially when the content be not in the least bit shock or challenge . there be a kernel of a funny satire but it be and like most kernel of corn and it be trap in crap . just another rubbish british comedy .