Primary Colors - DTS

Rating:
Summary: Why did this movie get overlooked?
Review: Mike Nichols' 1998 take on Joe Klein's (oh, I mean, Anonymous') 'Primary Colors' was a pitch-perfect political roman à clef about the Clinton 1992 presidential campaign. You could draw direct lines from the book's protagonists to Bill, Hillary, George Stephanopolous, James Carville, Mandy Greenwald, Betsy Wright, Paul Tsongas and many, many more.

The casting was superb - Travolta channeled Bill to a 'T', right down to the clumsy dancing (a notable feat, given this is, after all, Tony Manero, the man in the white suit who became a cultural icon with 'Saturday Night Fever'). Cambridge grad Emma Thompson wrestles an American accent to death. We'll call it a tie. Her performance pales next to Adrian Lester's narrator, Henry Burton. You'd never know Lester was an Englishman. He's perfect here as the master of the War Room.

Nichols' scene of Travolta's Jack Stanton connecting one-on-one with 'Danny Scanlon' a Krispy Kreme clerk is, in my mind, one of the most evocative scenes you'll see in any movie. It's the film's signature moment - it gets to the heart of Stanton/Clinton...there's absolutely no one else around, but he's still campaigning, still connecting. And it's real. Nichols shows that Stanton isn't just talking. It's clear he enjoys the man and the encounter. It's great moviemaking.

Which is all a long way of saying: why did this movie flop at the box office? The egregious marketing campaign surely didn't help (tagline: "What went down on the way to the top." Ugh. Please.) But there's something greater afoot here: maybe just a rejection of political movies by the American public, or an oversaturation at the point of the 1998 release of all things Clinton.

Anyway, Nichols' movie deserves another chance. It's a great piece of work.

Rating:
Summary: Savage satire is one of my favorites of 1998
Review: Somebody's not telling the truth about this movie. The studio emphasized that "Primary Colors" was not intentionally based on Bill and Hillary Clinton. The writer of the book it's based on was written by "Anonymous". The real author turned out to be Joe Klien, who works for The New Yorker Magazine. He says the book was, in fact, based on Clinton's first Presidential campaign.

John Travolta and Emma Thompson play Jack and Susan Stanton. Jack is Governor of an unnamed Southern State. The couple looks a whole like Bill and Hillary, both in body language and in appearance.

When the film came out last Spring, it did fairly good business. It was viewed as a political satire, which it is. In fact, it's one of the best films of its kind in a long time. Some would mention "Wag the Dog" in the same breath as "Primary Colors". The former was certainly a fine movie, but "Colors" is witty, rambunctious, smart and, well, a whole lot like the Clintons!

I suppose it has a slightly darker feel to it now, with all the bad press and publicity Mr. Clinton has lately gotten. Before all the disclosures about Clinton's private life, the movie seemed almost innocent. Now it seems prophetic. It's as though "Primary Colors" mutated into a different form. Or could it be that, after the revelations were made about The President, the nation suffered from a case of Mass Denial?

The irony is that the character of Jack Stanton is seen as an intelligent, well intentioned man, who has a bit of a problem with his fly.

Whatever its parallels with real life, it stands on its own as a good picture. The focus is on John Travolta's character, but Thompson's Susan doesn't get off lightly either. That is because, no matter how much Stanton fools around, the couple is always united in its pursuit of power. This is made clearly evident in two scenes. In the first one, Susan is sobbing and being held by Henry [Adrian Lester], a young and affable political aide. Susan has just found out about another one of Jack's affairs, and she is furious at him and at all who kept it secret from her. The film cuts straight to the second scene, where Susan is shown as all business again, throwing herself into the campaign. This sudden shift in her moods is done on purpose to underline how nothing in this world will alter her mission.

Mike Nichols is in top directing form. He really hasn't done as many movies as people might think. He's just done some of the most famous, such as "The Birdcage", "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?" and "The Graduate".

Travolta and Thompson are so good that they are almost spooky. Emma Thompson is one of the great actresses of our times. While nobody paid much attention to him for many years, I think many are coming to realize that Travolta is one of our great actors.

As Richard, a brilliant but insane political ally, Billy Bob Thornton shines again. It never ceases to amaze me how much Thornton's physical appearance can change from role to role. For the record, he was born in Hot Springs, Arkansas.

Kathy Bates threatens to steal the show at times in her dynamic turn as a political aide Stanton hires. She been in an asylum for the last fifteen years!

The script by Elaine May has some of the best dialog of any film released in this decade.
For example, Stanton checks into his motel at some campaign stop. He looks around and say, "What? No cable TV? What the [blank] were you thinking. of? You can't run for President of the Untied States without [blank] CNN!".

Mike Nichols and Elaine May were, many years ago, the top standup comedy team of their time. It's wonderful to see them reunited in this way - he directing, she writing. Still a team!

Rating:
Summary: How to Use the Presidency to Influence People
Review: Politics has, for a long time, need taming, but using this parody on the Presidency to reflect the Peck's Bad Boy and its sidekick, Taming of the Shrew version of how to kick off (literally) a Presidential campaign and term of office is an excellent example of how to bring the wrath of Kahn (pronounced Hahn?) into the fragile arena of elections by persons who care little for the office, or the patriotism it represents. Whether or not it accurately depicts the candidate, Bill Clinton and his wife, Hillary, is not nearly as important as the decision to portray their life together as it was, setting in motion an onslaught upon them, as well as upon the Presidency as an office worthy of holding, and what ordinary people will do to get there, or to influence who gets there. The fact that Americans have any respect for the office at all is the result of having had numerous persons who brought credit to it, in their decisionmaking abilities, and the knowledge they'd gained presumably through years of experience that they then decided to use to try and become elected, presumably, or as people hope, to better the lives of American people, and not for their own ego satisfaction, power and financial reward. The fact that the office is seen of late as evolving into the latter is reason enough to see the film, and to give serious consideration of how much puppetry goes into the making of the Presidency, and whether the persons who end up residing there, a.k.a., the Clintons, might reject the idea of being used as puppets, for their own purposes, or whether indeed they reduced themselves to the diplomatically impoverished pair they appeared to be, beginning with the film that supposedly characterized their marriage as well as their maneuvers to reach the White House post. While many recognize the difficulty of their marriage, few expected it to impact the post of the Presidency as much as it did. However, as an aftermath of the dilemma it posed for them, and for the American people, most do recognize that "Some things are just meant to go together," and this film did more to prove that point in combination with Clinton's years as President more than anything else during his terms, but supported by everything during them. This film in Presidential political history may well show how not to be so revealing of the true nature and character of Presidents rather than to display them, a detrimental effect for world citizens, but perhaps one needed to be heeded. To the extent that it trivialized Clinton, his wife, and their 1992 run for the White House is something people are not likely to forget soon, made all the more important for what transpired there. If anything, it should make Americans look more closely at Presidential candidates and their wives to inquire as to what or who they are voting for, and what to expect when they "arrive," however glamorous they appear to be at inaugural balls. Since it is not likely that the Presidency was meant to portray simply a good contest won and the beautiful pageantry of the office, nicknamed Camelot from the JFK years, that are meant to be replicated, never duplicated, it would be difficult to assume that Clinton and his wife did not try their very best to do just that. We can assume from the appearance, perhaps, that had JFK lived, he might have been subject to just such an impeachment hearing given the circumstances and lack of support that Clinton came into the White House with. We also learn how easily, if not comfortably, it is to cripple the office with public opinion, and disrespect for the office regardless of who might win the election and "appear" there on that world stage. While the office has much to offer the American people, most of what it has to offer is bound into the personality and effectiveness of the person who resides there for that term or terms of enchantment and hostility that it can be viewed to represent. That Clinton survived somewhat in tact is an achievement in itself; that he was able to accomplish anything during it is nothing short of a miracle, one we are not likely to see again soon. In that, he may be more of a JFK admirer than ever thought possible, and ultimately, had 8 years to prove it. Given his weaknesses and those of his wife, as seen by most Americans and portrayed in this film, if accurate, and accurately portrayed, his terms were either an extraordinary success or a dismal failure depending upon one's perspective - and just possibly, party affiliation, regardless of one's morality index.

Rating:
Summary: Political Idealism Shattered.
Review: I throughly enjoyed the novel by "Anonymous" when it came out in (I think) 1995. When the film premiered I braced myself for the worst. The film is never as good as the book, as anyone will tell you. But I was wrong. If anything, "Primary Colors" was *better* than the book, a thinly-veiled take-off on Bill Clinton's turbulent campaign for the Presidency in 1992.

Why is this such a fine movie? Two words- John Travolta. As Jack Stanton he captures the role perfectly- Clinton's demeanor, his passion for people, his weaknesses. I scoffed at hearing that Travolta was to play the part, and am I ever glad I was wrong. Travolta is terrific. Whoever won the Oscar for Best Actor that year must have done a great job to out-shine Travolta.

The rest of the cast is dead-on in their roles- Emma Thompson as Stanton's Hillary-esque wife, Adrian Lester as the Stephanapoulos-esque moral center to the film, Kathy Bates as Stanton's idealistic alter ego, and Larry Hagman as Stanton's opponant, Governor Freddy Picker.

I particularly liked Billy Bob Thornton as Richard Jemmons, a stand-in for Clinton's advisor James Carville. A lesser actor would have aped Carville's Cajin accent and played the part as a parody. Thornton though is smart enough to play Jemmons as a smart, cocky but utterly loyal subbordinate whose good 'ol boy demeanor masks a cunning political mind.

Director Mike Nichols has produced some wonderful performances from a really wonderful cast. The film's exploration of political idealism and how quickly it is shattered is well-done and quite timely now given the current Presidential election.

Outstanding film for political junkies and people who enjoy good drama.

Rating:
Summary: BITTERSWEET ENTERTAINMENT
Review: The machinations of a presidential campaign in "Primary Colors" is presented through the eyes of Henry Burton (British actor Adrian Lester). Henry is a privileged young African American feldgling politician whose grandfather was a civil rights legend. While trying to find out who the candidate is, Henry is virtually kidnapped by the presidential campaign of an obscure Southern governor, Jack Stanton (played flawlessly by John Travolta). Stanton's politically savy, smart lawyer wife Susan (amazingly played by Emma Thompson) is often the brains of the campaign. The parody on Bill and Hillary Clinton is obvious.

Of course, the idealistic Henry and aging Stanton loyalist, Libby Holden (Kathy Bates who possibly hands in the film's best supporting performance) keep hoping that Jack and Susan are as good as they seem. Inevitably, the Stantons compromise everything to win the campaign and power, leaving without much integrity as the campaign progresses.

The movie is very funny and works as a Clinton parody without being offensive. Indeed, the magical collaboration between director Mike Nichols and screenwriter Elaine May produces a very clever and entertaining political melodrama. After three viewings, I'm not tired of this movie. At the end, I gained even more respect for the talents of Travolta, Thompson, Bates, Billy Bob Thornton et al.

This is a must see film.

Rating:
Summary: Really makes you wonder....
Review: Was Bill Clinton so out of control with his libido?

This movie (fiction, apparently based on fact) shows the man in all his glory and with all his flaws.

We see Gov. Stanton as an inspirational, courageous, and charismatic leader, but also as an out of control sex addict.

It is a great film, with great performances from many characters, including Larry Hagman, Emma Thompson, Travolta, of course, and Kathy Bates.

Rating:
Summary: Why did this movie get overlooked?
Review: Mike Nichols' 1998 take on Joe Klein's (oh, I mean, Anonymous') 'Primary Colors' was a pitch-perfect political roman à clef about the Clinton 1992 presidential campaign. You could draw direct lines from the book's protagonists to Bill, Hillary, George Stephanopolous, James Carville, Mandy Greenwald, Betsy Wright, Paul Tsongas and many, many more.

The casting was superb - Travolta channeled Bill to a 'T', right down to the clumsy dancing (a notable feat, given this is, after all, Tony Manero, the man in the white suit who became a cultural icon with 'Saturday Night Fever'). Cambridge grad Emma Thompson wrestles an American accent to death. We'll call it a tie. Her performance pales next to Adrian Lester's narrator, Henry Burton. You'd never know Lester was an Englishman. He's perfect here as the master of the War Room.

Nichols' scene of Travolta's Jack Stanton connecting one-on-one with 'Danny Scanlon' a Krispy Kreme clerk is, in my mind, one of the most evocative scenes you'll see in any movie. It's the film's signature moment - it gets to the heart of Stanton/Clinton...there's absolutely no one else around, but he's still campaigning, still connecting. And it's real. Nichols shows that Stanton isn't just talking. It's clear he enjoys the man and the encounter. It's great moviemaking.

Which is all a long way of saying: why did this movie flop at the box office? The egregious marketing campaign surely didn't help (tagline: "What went down on the way to the top." Ugh. Please.) But there's something greater afoot here: maybe just a rejection of political movies by the American public, or an oversaturation at the point of the 1998 release of all things Clinton.

Anyway, Nichols' movie deserves another chance. It's a great piece of work.

Rating:
Summary: Political Idealism Shattered.
Review: I throughly enjoyed the novel by "Anonymous" when it came out in (I think) 1995. When the film premiered I braced myself for the worst. The film is never as good as the book, as anyone will tell you. But I was wrong. If anything, "Primary Colors" was *better* than the book, a thinly-veiled take-off on Bill Clinton's turbulent campaign for the Presidency in 1992.

Why is this such a fine movie? Two words- John Travolta. As Jack Stanton he captures the role perfectly- Clinton's demeanor, his passion for people, his weaknesses. I scoffed at hearing that Travolta was to play the part, and am I ever glad I was wrong. Travolta is terrific. Whoever won the Oscar for Best Actor that year must have done a great job to out-shine Travolta.

The rest of the cast is dead-on in their roles- Emma Thompson as Stanton's Hillary-esque wife, Adrian Lester as the Stephanapoulos-esque moral center to the film, Kathy Bates as Stanton's idealistic alter ego, and Larry Hagman as Stanton's opponant, Governor Freddy Picker.

I particularly liked Billy Bob Thornton as Richard Jemmons, a stand-in for Clinton's advisor James Carville. A lesser actor would have aped Carville's Cajin accent and played the part as a parody. Thornton though is smart enough to play Jemmons as a smart, cocky but utterly loyal subbordinate whose good 'ol boy demeanor masks a cunning political mind.

Director Mike Nichols has produced some wonderful performances from a really wonderful cast. The film's exploration of political idealism and how quickly it is shattered is well-done and quite timely now given the current Presidential election.

Outstanding film for political junkies and people who enjoy good drama.

Rating:
Summary: You are my sunshine, my only sunshine...you make happy...
Review: What an ensemble cast! Probably Travolta's last great performance in a movie, but he's not even the best one in this. Billy Bob Thorton is at his comic best and noone can play a better redneck in a movie (not even the great Robert Duvall, whom he idolizes). The best acting though is Kathy Bates. In her best performance since Misery (which was kind of over the top) and in just a small supporting role, she gives dimension and soul to a character other actresses may never have been able to channel. Even though the movie is longer than most comedies, every scene is well crafted in both the writing and directing that no scene is wasted. Lastly, I think that with all of the cylanders clicking at once with the acting, directing, and screen-writing, I highly recommend this movie to anyone.

Rating:
Summary: A Window Into The Mind of Clinton's Supporters
Review: Clinton comitted felonies. Not just infedelity, or inappropriate relations with Monica. That was only part of it, contrary to what his fan club would have you believe.

He also brought spin to a whole different universe with his famous phrase "it depends on what the meaning of "is" is." But there are those who still elevate him to demigod status. They seem to admire Clinton because he was able to lie, cheat, and steal and still be admired.

This is because he's the kind of politician who hangs out in doughnut shops talking to minimum-wage workers. This actually happens in film Primary Colors. And he's so good at talking to guys in doughnut shops, that he deserves to be president, and he deserves our love and respect.

That's the logic of Clinton's adoring supporters, and the "moral" of this film. The audience sees Jim Stanton's malicious side again and again; then comes another "dougnot shop" style scene to remind us what a great guy he really is.

This is the logic of those who love the legacy of Bill Clinton, the logic that governs this film's story. This film is therefore useful in understanding the Clinton lover's mind. Having said that, it's still pure, shameless Clinton propaganda. It doesn't "expose" Clinton per se; by portraying him as a "man of the people," it seeks to justify every shady thing he ever did.