Rating: 
Summary: Smart dialogue, excellent actors. But not for everyone.
Review: Rod Lurie's most recent films, Deterrence and The Contender, are struggling to find the right target audience. Conservatives openly hate Lurie's liberal philosophies; but liberals may be turned off by his unapologetic way of exposing power, deceit, and deal-making behind closed doors. This director clearly has talent. His scripts are whip-smart, he's a keen observer of the mechanics of power, and he has a knack for pushing well known actors to higher levels. But Lurie seems to hold little appeal among the masses. His films are better suited to viewers who like strategy and have a strong tolerance for ambiguity. In this regard, Lurie's works break with American tradition, revealing instead a stronger affinity with British dramas like The Lion in Winter, A Man for All Seasons, or Becket.
Rating: 
Summary: I glad these people are not running the country
Review: In this movie a President chooses a persons who is a husband stealing admited atheist to be Vice President but he likes her because of her strong pricnicples. I could see why people are upset with this movie and the messages it sends. Well thank goodness I rented and I only have to see this picture once. The acting is good but that is beside the point. To stand and conclude the picture on principle when the person in question is at best a mix bag of principles just does not ring true. To applaud is against my principles.
Rating: 
Summary: You do not need to buy this DVD
Review: The only reason this gets two stars instead of one is that it isn't *Battlefield Earth*. That said, this old-hollywood melodrama is as cheerless as it is dumb. What's so frustrating is that it might have been a much better movie, had it been written and directed by someone else. Joan Allen, Jeff Bridges and Gary Oldman have all been in first rate pictures (JA: *Pleasantville*, *Nixon*, *Face Off*; JB: *The Big Lebowski*, *Fearless*, GO: *Prick Up Your Ears*). Ditto the supporting cast, including Phillip Baker Hall, Christian Slater, Sam Elliot and, yup, Mariel Hemmingway. So what happened? Here's what happened: Once again we have paid the price for encouraging people who live in Hollywood in the belief that they have anything interesting to say. As people. As citizens. We obviously have not learned any lessons from the Reagans, the Hestons, the Baldwins, the Spielbergs, and the Robert Downeys (Sr. and Jr.). Well, actually *I* have learned. But the studio system, being as it is *choked* with actors who play actual people on TV and in the movies, is also *choked* with writers and directors who believe that being rich and/or beautiful (preferably both) imbues one with political insight. Alas. This is more than just tragic because making movies requires the untoward expenditure of lots and lots of cash (think of what it costs to crash one car) -- cash that could have been used to buy books and newspapers, for example. It's not that those of us who live in New York City or L.A. are genetically dumb. The problem is, we are under the illusion that we live in America. Or rather, that America is where *we* live. But this is purely an accident of geography. I know this because I am a typical New York City liberal myself, and I totally didn't get this last "election." But I digress. *The Contender* is at its worst when it is most solemn and self-contratulatory, as in the tortured moment when the candidate sums up to the committee why she ought to be Vice President -- (cue swelling patriotic music): "I stand for a woman's right to choose. I stand for a strong military. I stand for taking every gun out of every home. Period. I stand for the separation of church and state, which I believe the founders instituted not to protect religion from the grasp of government, but to protect the government from the grasp of religious fanaticism." (Yes, these are actual lines!) Or when Christian Slater's youthful congressman Webster moves lugubriously around a room in the White House looking at oil paintings, respectively, of Wilson, Lincoln, JFK, and Truman. First, the camera lingers on the painting (swelling patriotic music). Next, we see Slater's big kool-aid grin as he, presumably, looks at the painting. After Slater has dutifully taken note of, and sighed over each of the dead presidents, a black servant in a white coat enters and asks Slater if he wants something to drink. Slater says no. Black servant leaves. Slater sighs and grins again. BLYUUUUK. This takes up about 5 minutes of film in a 93 minute movie. Enter Jeff Bridges's blowhard President Evans offering Slater sage advice on political savvy and a shark-steak sandwich. "Webster, do you have a dictionary?" (this too is an actual line). I could go on, but I'll spare you. Bridges and Slater are terrible. Sam Elliot too. Not because they have no talent, but because they do and it is sooooo wasted on this crummy script. Phillip Baker Hall's character appears in one scene that appears to be an important plot moment, but that is dropped without explanation, so I'm sure he hopes no one will remember. The best bit is Mariel Hemmingway's walk-on scene as one of Joan Allen's victims. (Well, not Joan's victims, but her character's.) But the rest of the performances are pure drek, including Allen's. This is not the actors' faults, mind you. It's that the movie is so enfuriatingly stupid. If you absolutely *must* see this movie, watch for a wink in the direction of *The Big Lebowski* in Bridges's bowling scene -- it must be homage because there can be no other possible reason to have set a scene in the White House bowling alley. But that's as clever as this movie gets. More often it is pious, silly, and just plain dull.
Rating:
Summary: Hillary Clinton's evil twin
Review: After watching this movie I am left cheering anxiously...for the expected Screen Actor's and Writer's Guild to strike and to end the political assault upon my senses. Inappropriately coined a "thriller," the movie was a high budget infomercial for the Democratic party, no doubt conceived over drinks in the White House and funded by campaign resources and presidential pardons. While I am often critized by others for my ability to separate my opinions and emotions for the critical enjoyment of an artistic endeavor, "The Contender's" complete lack of subtlety left me expecting an acknowledgement to the ACLU and perhaps a clip of Richard Gere ranting at the Academy Awards of the daily injustices of a world so keenly observed within his impoverished lifestyle. To his credit, Jeff Bridges does a better job acting than he does selecting movie scripts, and Oldman is convincingly jaded. Joan Allen, on the other hand,...well, at least she has the blessing of knowing that she can't be in a film worse that this, her latest.
Rating:
Summary: Pathetic, Repulsive
Review: If I could have chosen 0 stars, i would have! This was a pathetic, repulsive movie. Joan Allen and Jeff Bridges gave two very disgusting performances. The foul language, the overt anti-God, anti-Christian sentiment, and the immoral nature of the main characters made this movie an absolute dog!
Rating:
Summary: ...
Review: This picture started as a reasonably competent thriller. By the time Joan Allen delivered her closing speech at the confirmation hearing with the music rising,the absurd surprise plot twist, and Jeff Bridges' ridiculous call for a roll call, I had to apologize to my DVD player for being violated for the previous two hours. My only enjoyment out of this picture was an excellent performance by Jeff Bridges and a wildly over the top one by Sam Elliot. A film about the President (Bridges) probably would have been a better movie. What a load of hooey!
Rating:
Summary: Why does everyone hate this movie?
Review: I bought this dvd a few day's ago and it is a very good thriller about the whitehouse and scandel, If you listen to the commentery track rod lurie will tell the movie is about standing up for what you belive in and never giving in no matter what happen's, something that is very timely right now. After reading all the bad reveiw's I almost did not buy this, because I made a mistake and bought the awful dr t and the womwn againest advice, but I thought about it this movie is up for two acdeamy award's joan allen and jeff bridge's and has apeared on numerous end of year best list's. I think it's a great film and like the great spike lee movie do the right thing is easiy one of the most misundersood movie's to be released in a long time. Don't pay attention to the bad review's buy this dvd if you can and if not atleast rent it.
Rating:
Summary: Well made political film
Review: I am dumbfounded by all the one star reviews that I have read here. But then it hit me - the ones leaving these reviews are probably just like the Gary Oldman character in the film! I found this film intelligent, riveting and for a film over 2 hours, the time went by fast. Sure, parts of the plot are a stretch but it is by no means a bad film. It is well constructed and the acting is superb. Joan Allen is great, as usual, and the supporting players are all very strong. I'm surprised though that Jeff Bridges got the Oscar nomination for this and Gary Oldman didn't. Oldman is super creepy here and good. Highly recommended for open minded viewers.
Rating: 
Summary: Good Idea, Poor Execution
Review: The Contender is a movie with a good message that suffers from poor execution. It is a strong statement for integrity in political office and against sensationalist, mud-racking journalism. In a way this movie is a fairytale, a glimpse at what the oval office would be like if the president really operated on principles rather than polls. The "good" president (Jeff Bridges) and his "good" candidate for vice president (Joan Allen) are thwarted at every turn by the evil congressmen (Gary Oldman). As you might be able to guess from my tone, I thought these characters were portrayed in too black and white a fashion. Especially Joan Allen's character, who has no flaws. She just stands above at the political fray on her higher moral ground. This is a great image, but leaves the viewer feeling that they are seeing the embodiment of an ideal rather than a real character. This movie is certainly worth watching, but it falls well short of greatness.
Rating:
Summary: It Coulda Been Great!
Review: This movie could have been great. The first half was dramatic, compelling, believeable, and character-driven. The 2nd half degenerated into the tawdriest and most unbelieveable sort of political propagandizing imagineable. It's hard to believe, in fact, that the person who wrote the first half of this movie also wrote the 2nd half. The first half of this movie is very human...a story about people in politics, being tested by morally ambiguous circumstances. Their actual politics, while clearly laid out, are secondary. Moviemakers used to wisely recognize the folly of imposing their own political views on their audience, and made sure that political expressions were limited to those that were fairly universally accepted--truth, honesty, and so forth. Remember "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington"? "The Contender," however, goes out of its way to do the exact opposite. Near the beginning of the movie,Laine Hanson (an ubelieveably saintly Republican-turned-Democrat) is speaking to her father, a retired Republican Governor, whom the filmmakers gratuitously have chide his grandchild for his kindergarten teacher's having mentioned Jesus in the classroom. Teachers are there to "teach, not preach," and he denounces her remark about Jesus as "superstition"--quite beside anything remotely pertinent to the story. His remark, though, is pointed, his attitude is bizarrely sneering for what the writers clearly hope to pass off as an aside. The movie gets much worse, though. Later, during what is supposed to be a rousing and morally superior closing statement before the Senate Confirmation Committee that has been questioning her moral suitability, she proudly declares herself to be an atheist who worships in the "chapel of democracy." During the same speech, she declares that she wants to remove "every gun from every household," that she supports a woman's sacred right to choose, and so on and so forth. Standard political boilerplate. (Curiously, she states at one point that she left the Republican party when they moved away from the values she espouses. I wonder...when has the Republican party EVER espoused gun banning, abortion, abolition of the death penalty, or any of the causes for which Laine now so zealously crusades? Are the filmmakers trying to make her seem thoughtful and fairminded in her zeal? Come on!) Okay, so what's wrong with this? She's a politician expressing political ideals? First of all, the speech is hoaky as can be, with music clearly meant to raise us to a pitch of (left-wing) patriotism...the effect, though is embarrassing. I was uncomfortable for Joan Allen having to recite such awful lines. Second, she's is supposed to be a moderate Democrat...yet all the views she expresses extremely left-wing. Even Republicans in this movie espouse leftist ideology (like her father). The one person who expresses a conservative viewpoint is Gary Oldman's character, a political hardball player who during the confirmation hearings is given to snarling at this poor woman for supporting a "holocause" of "unborn babies." The cliches are fast and furious. To show, however, that Runyon (Oldman's character) is--or WAS-- a good man, the writers trot out his haggard wife and have her remind him of the time he stood for something good...the time he stood up for hate crime legislation! Amazing. Third, the filmmakers take all this silly rhetoric as seriously as Laine Hanson does! In fact, if this movie's failure can be summed up, it is probably that the moviemakers are as gravely serious about the protagonist's trenchant ideology as she is. The term for this is: Authorial Intrusion. The moviemakers committ is, big time. The problem with this movie is not that it favors liberal ideology, of course. It's that it favors ANY ideology. You cannot promote any agenda as brazenly and aggressively as this movie does, and not have it throw the whole movie off kilter...like a shopping cart with a bad wheel. The ending of this movie--which I will not divulge--is improbably beyond belief. This movie has been billed as a political thriller. It isn't. It's a hybrid between a cheesy soap opera, and a propaganda film. Gary Oldman and Joan Allen deliver great performances, though, and if this movie is worth seeing at all, it is just to see two great actors practicing their craft.
|
