The film itself is quite dependent on its lead actress. It's a film of questionable choices (those last five minutes, I'm just not a fan of... I think the information could've been delivered more efficiently, more fluently). As it is though, it's very entertaining. Again, I'm not quite sure showing us the assassination at the start was really all that needed (I guess to not fool people in what the film was really about) but it still offers as a different sort of beginning that maybe could've worked better in a different way. But the film is lucky that it has such a strong, capable actress at its core. Cate Blanchett is simply wonderful, stunning performance that has to hit a lot of notes and she succeeds completely.

Surprised that the user rating was only 6.3, I stumbled into this movie about a half hour after it began; yet, I feel qualified to write a review because I have taught film in a university setting and offer a free course in film appreciation at my local senior center.I didn't previously study the work of Cate Blanchett because I wasn't fond of the films she appeared in. I don't rate Gwyneth Paltrow highly because she is over-rated as an actress and rose to the top because of her father's success in film (nepotism), therefore, I skipped 'Shakespeare in Love.' What impresses me about actors is the way they can 'fake' an accent. Cate is Australian but did very well with an Irish borough. Al Pacino is good at developing an accent for his roles which is why he may have been chosen to portray Joe Paterno in an upcoming film.I read as many stories as I could about Veronica Guerin and the film tells the story with accuracy. One reader asks why anyone would want to kill Veronica. Answer: 190 journalists (according to the closing credits) have been killed since Guerin, the most famous to Americans being Daniel Pearl. Journalism is a dangerous profession, especially when on assignment in the middle east.Cate Blanchett is a great actress and Veronica Guerin was a journalistic hero. This film lost a lot of money, which is a shame.

I have been a journalist for more than a dozen years, so this film struck close to issues I confront. Veronica Guerin, the real woman, made the decision, for whatever reason, that "getting the story" and exposing wrong was worth more to her than her family and her life.I have confronted that same dilemma, though I do not choose to "get the story" at any cost. I honor her dedication, though I cannot imagine the blatant risks she took, and the extreme danger she put her family in, particularly her young son. It's like she acted as if she couldn't be touched, even after being beaten, shot and threatened. In my own career, I've had to confront writing, for example, tell-all exposes on violent gang activity, and have decided that I did not want to put myself in harm's way by doing so. I respect those who do, but if it comes down to it, I will pick safety over threats, caution over danger. Regarding the movie itself, I found Cate Blanchett, as usual, to be totally believable. She's a great actress. The other actors were excellent as well. The movie, however, had a kind of TV-crime series feel to it. It seemed contrived and stagy (such as the kids hanging out doing heroin, the huge amount of needles scattered all over the sidewalk in front of the tenement, etc.) I also didn't see enough of the motivation behind why Veronica was so compelled to pursue this dangerous story. Did she ever know a junkie? What was her background? Why was she so driven beyond everything else, even life? From my journalism background, I couldn't imagine her thinking she could interview criminals and addicts by just walking up and telling them she was a reporter. It doesn't happen that way, generally. Relationships have to be cultivated and nurtured. You don't usually show up in a ghetto or seedy bar in a nice, career dress and start asking questions. It's much more subtle. Also, common sense would indicate Veronica would have multi-sourced and verified anything said to her by her informant. He was such a shady character - why would she take him at his word? I read about the real Veronica Guerin and am not sure if this is true, but one piece said she was trying to bust drug dealers dealing, not in heroin, but in pot. This puts a whole other spin on this story, and makes it unbelievable that she would go to such risky lengths to expose pot dealers (ie pot is simply not as dangerous and as intense a drug as heroin).The movie made me think, which qualifies it as an interesting film, and one to contemplate, but it has a number of flaws. Still, I"m glad I saw it.

I just saw the film for the first time last night. The main impression I took from it was how incompetent the local gardai (Irish police) were. It seemed that they had no clue how to progress with the investigation, given the evidence of Capone-like behaviour in Dublin's gangland.Maybe Gerry Bruckenheimer (the film's producer) could show them how. After all, he has enough experience from the CSI detective series he produces.Apart from that, Blanchett's and Hind's performances were great. Paul