Putting words like “Nobody wants to shoot the vice president” as a wisecrack in a POTUS-obsessed 6-year-old’s mouth, Rod Lurie’s political drama THE CONTENDER conspicuously tries to salt the story’s central witch-hunt with some levity, but also betrays its manipulative, beggar-belief improbability.
Starting off as a choice treatment on USA’s bipartisan political landscape, THE CONTENDER concentrates on Senator Laine Hanson (Allen), who becomes the current POTUS Jackson Evans (Bridges)’s vice president nominee, a glass-ceiling smashing attempt, mainly to secure his own legacy, as Evans is in the dog-end of his second term. But the catch is, the nomination needs approval from both house of Congress, and Republican Congressman Sheldon Runyon (Oldman), who presides the confirmation hearing, doesn’t see eye to eye with Hanson, mostly because she is a Republican proselytizer, tinged with the usual misogynous undertone that is part of the furniture in every boys’ club.
After unscrupulously burrowing into Hanson’s past, Runyon trades on a salacious scandal Hanson may or may not be involved to discredit her qualifications, which Hanson roundly refuses to comment, because in her belief, it belongs to her own private life, whether to admit or deny it can only substantiate that such insidious behavior can be condoned, rightfully so. But Runyon’s insinuating ploy incites media circus and by clamming up on the issue, Hanson is on the back foot, aggravated by the fact that, when she was romantically involved with his husband William (Thomas), her campaign manager, the latter was still in a wedlock.
Just when the plot suggests that Hanson is out and Evans reluctantly concedes to nominate Governor Jack Hathaway (Petersen, a MANHUNTER reunion with Allen!), the white-bread emblem of a star-spangling hero (or is he?), Lurie’s script has an ace in its sleeve, a game-changer that is fairly unexpected, but also totally illogical (let me put it that way, there is simply too risky a subterfuge for a man of such prominence, it is also extremely implausible the said subterfuge could go misfire like that, why not leave the car door open?). From that moment on, the hitherto nip and tuck bipartisan political intrigue swerves to a patriotic and Democratic party-boasting fanfare, with Bridges assertively holding forth in one of his most spectacular turn, it rings hollower 20 years later, but Bridges is a force to be reckoned, that is for sure, his gourmand president has an unconventional front is both disarming and cunning.
A bellowing, head-corked Sam Elliott as Kermit Newman, White House Chief of Staff proves his bark is worse than his bite, while Petersen’s vile blandness leaving a tangy taste in one’s mouth , but Christian Slater’s up-and-coming democratic Representative is not entirely resonant with the rest of the gamey cast, most extraordinary is Oldman and Allen.
Taking a raw deal, Oldman’s Runyon is a hardened bigot and a sly fox, holding a grudge and vindictive, his blatant antipathy towards Hanson is unearned, the film dodges the issue to show us whether or not Hanson is a worthy candidate (she is pro-choice, politics-savvy, but there is not enough meat here), therefore, Runyon might be right when he reprimands her bluntly that she is not made for the job, Oldman miraculously impersonates him with an obnoxiousness that doesn’t repulse but engages us, Runyon’s complexity is never examined under the spotlight, but through Oldman’s masterful mannerism and effusion, we can glimpse his concealed interiority, a character much more mysterious to pin down than anyone else.
Allen, reaping her third Oscar nomination, is granted a bespoke leading role to shine, and she shines spectacularly, dignified, principled, unflappable in her crusade, putting on a strong face in the face of mounting adversary, only letting on her agony under fine-tuned restraint. Her Hanson is a full-bore perfection, the only quibble is that Lurie’s script festoons her with the projected perfection from a male angle. Were her alleged role in that sexual imbroglio not altered, she would end up being a worthier and more humane heroine (a tack might also solve the problem of her qualifications). But Lurie regrettably panders to a more wholesome image of his democratic presentation with a self-congratulatory finish, eventually THE CONTENDER’s punchy momentum peters out down the homestretch.
referential entries: Mike Nichols’ PRIMARY COLORS (1998. 7.0/10); Jonathan Demme’s THE MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE (2004, 6.1/10).
鯊魚漢堡...- -
本來想給3星的,因為感覺選副總統(tǒng)難道是只能在矬子里拔大個嗎……直到看到結(jié)尾才知道女議員的真實想法。只不過依然不太能理解,就為了堅持自己的政治信念,可以一直不去澄清事實的真相?個中邏輯有點搞不清……
收的表演 詳見Joan Allen
瓊艾倫絕對是奧斯卡上的怨婦,三次奧提都奉獻了極其經(jīng)典而又精彩的表演,這個角色難就難在她不能輕易地將自己的喜怒表現(xiàn)出來,就連片中僅有的發(fā)怒也是一瞬即逝,很快就壓制過去。確實演得很贊。
瓊艾倫啊瓊艾倫,你是這個世界上最被低估的女演員之一
A-
"It's an ideological rape of all women." While examining the double standards imposed by the society through a microscope of politics, the film inevitably glorifies female forgiveness and persistence as well as the American spirit.
這豈止是理想主義了,簡直把政治浪漫主義化了。漢森議員在最終hearing上的一連串I stand for很動人,程度可以跟當年newsroom第一集Will的演講媲美
美帝總喜歡玩這種,不評價
精彩
本片獲第73屆奧斯卡最佳女主角和男配角提名。前頭鋪陳了那么多,突然來個180度劇情大反轉(zhuǎn),最后高歌頌揚了美國政治。特別是總統(tǒng),就像是古代帝王那樣高、大、全的形象。這樣的編劇怎么那么眼熟?恐怕評分這么低也是在這種背景之下反轉(zhuǎn)的吧?
馬克吐溫 《競選州長》
本片以a級片的包裝這樣一個捧民主黨而踩共和黨的政治題材,顯然力有不逮。該片以副總統(tǒng)競選之間的唇槍舌戰(zhàn)為戲劇張力,但太多地方皆是一廂情願,比如瓊艾倫飾演的民主黨參議員太過理想化,她堅持原則不作任何妥協(xié)以及受到委屈不發(fā)一言辯護的環(huán)境,像是暗喻聖女貞德的處境一般,但即使瓊艾倫的演技再好,也無法改變角色是民主黨左翼代言人理想化的化身。與之相比,加里奧特曼所飾演的共和黨極右保守派便是邪惡的化身,而加里奧特曼也演繹得入木三分,但最後還是敗給正義的一方的,因此在這種好萊塢正邪分明的公式化下,瓊艾倫的角色也成了戲外收買人心的一招(愛國為主,個人的私德並不重要)。雖說,本片的不少場面和對白都相當精彩,儘管導演手法一般,但演員之間的火花四濺的戲劇火花確實厲害,尤其以杰夫布里吉斯飾演老謀深算的總統(tǒng)最為出彩。
其實一開始觀眾會很同情跳水中救人卻沒救活的男候選人,而對女候選人有猜忌(我們第一次見到她就是她的sexscene,所以我們也覺得她是個slut),但是突然曝出男候選人偽造撞車,從此之后女候選人像金子一樣超級正直,堅信私人生活與政治無關(guān),所以不為自己辯護??偨y(tǒng)點各種吃的,招人煩,但是好人
4/6 in class essay. choi總是給我們看R rated片子嘖嘖。
彩!
瓊艾倫年輕時候太美了
好無語的片子,最后總統(tǒng)在那一陣演講,議員們神經(jīng)病一樣瘋狂鼓掌,我都不懂他們干嘛。
價值觀不喜歡 婚外戀還光榮了
Gary Oldman總是壞人!穿著西裝打著領(lǐng)帶依然是壞人!唉