Geoffrey DeLeons The acting, screen-writing and inter-personal dynamics are very good in this movie. The plot is cohesive and mostly coherent and no scenes were wasted on trivial "fluff". The only thing I wish had happened was for William Hurt's character to be more developed. This was an over-sight in the film's script, in my opinion.Tom Grunnick is too-nice-of-a-guy to be the malevolent, shallow, sensationalist manipulator of the public that both Albert Brooks' character and Holly Hunter's (eventually) make him him to be. It seems like the director wanted to have his news and read it, too:A mellow, likable, moderately-intelligent, but good-looking sports caster is thrust into the role of anchorman, probably on his looks and connections, and is then accused by some of his closest workmates of shallowness and sensationalism, but we are given only one instance of Grunnick embodying and displaying this propensity.What we needed was to meet Tom Grunnick. We are never given much indication of what is important to him and what he considers good news casting/reporting. This is a problem with many movies, where character development is minimal or absent. At the very least, Jane should have asked him (in the car) "What made you choose the subject of date-rape as your first original piece? Why is that important to you?"Why didn't she ask to collaborate on this piece, given her alleged social altruism?We see, here, that Holly Hunter's character needs development, too. We know she is ambitious and her timing and inter-personal skills are good, but what are her ideals that Albert Brooks' character alludes to toward the end of the movie? Jane Craig is much more moral and substantial than Tom Grunnick? If so, we need to see and explore this. Director and screen-writer James Brooks should have spent more time illustrating and emphasizing this dynamic.Albert Brooks' character may have been the best part of the movie. His even-tempered caring for Jane, covering a simmering passion and sometimes anger, were acted in an excellent manner. With the theme of date-rape in the movie, we half-expect Aaron Altman to take advantage of Jane at some point, but he never does. I found his humor and self-discipline very well displayed.All three; Brooks, Hunter and Hurt do great acting in this movie and the dynamics are excellent. A little more character development would have gone a long way.

Alana Fu As a big fan of James L Brooks and the many TV shows and movies he has created, I hated this movie. It is like he stuffed the "The Mary Tyler Moore show" into a simmering pot: the intimidating, annoying, OCD producer "Mary"(I really like Holly Hunter but hated her in this movie); "Murray" the sensitive, affectionate, humorous colleague who's trying to get promoted; an actually professional and charming tho still style over substance anchorman "Ted Baxter", and even a "Sue Ann" with a big closet. (More precisely, the last 3 seasons of MTM, when the show sort of turned into "The newsroom show" itself. ) A great deal of the plot resembles the TV show: "Murray" falls in love with "Mary", "Mary" gets a big promotion, and the dramatic ending too (not to spoil too much)! He added some this and that, spiced everything up, gave "Mary" a little more character, put in some more romance etc. After that, he puts on the "head" and "tail", and that's it.Let MTM aside and speaking the movie itself, the opening "childhood" scenes seems unnecessary and irrelevant, (Although the opening does do a great job at arising my interest in the movie, it's cute and sort of a joke on the people that work in news) none of the characters reflected any of the scenes later in the movie. The ending is corny and doesn't really add anything to the movie or whatever it is that it's trying to express. The rest, the plot, is complicated and confusing: At first I thought this was a movie about the "newsroom", the news staff family and the excitement of broadcasting news. Which makes sense because the name is "Broadcast News". And indicating from the opening scene, the three characters are identified by their professions, instead of "future girl in love" "future best friend of girl""future man the girl's in love with". Then, I thought this is a love story: he loves her, but she loves him, and he loves somebody else...then, I thought it's really about friendship: she's been in love with the wrong man the whole time, maybe she will go to the one who really loves her...I thought I'd found out in the end, but the ending doesn't explain or define anything.It's none and maybe all of them, and it doesn't do any of them well. There's no clear plot, just random events happening and emotions flying around. In all it's flavorful but hard to swallow.I wasn't inspired nor touched perhaps a little stimulated by the intensity of the news room, which I expected but not getting nearly enough. And comedy? Yes there were one-liners and a mild slapstick scene, but then I might as well just watch the MTM.

millerc-24308 Very entertaining movie with some great journalism value! It keeps viewers interested with love interests and drama, while accurately representing what it is like to be a broadcast journalist by showing how much work goes into it and how stressful it is, but also shows how much the people doing it love it. It also brings attention to whether or not broadcast news should be purely news or a source of entertainment. This is a debate that journalists everywhere struggle with because if your news isn't entertaining, people most likely won't read it. On the other hand, if it is purely entertainment it might not be news. It also shows how important it is to have credibility as a reporter and for all of the news to be accurate and not tampered with (when Tom fakes the tear and Jane catches him in the end).

Maria Gallegos Thought the movie gave an interesting insight into the life of a news broadcast company and how hard the people work in it. I thought the characters were lively and entertaining and each one had his or her own personality. However, I thought the ending was pointless and was a real let down. I wish she would have ended up with one of them because the whole movie portrayed the love triangle playing out. I thought it was strange that they all just met up at the end 7 years later and she wasn't with either of the two men. I thought the movie was funny and made me try to process all of the work a news station had to put into making one little clip. They did a good job making the journalism setting look stressful but well worth it in the end. The actors were able to portray their character well. Overall, a good story with a bad ending.