Flick of The Day: Game Change

The American television network HBO, in addition to its output of cutting edge drama has recently developed a neat sideline in Zeitgeist capturing film feature's looking at various aspects of recent American history. Following on from 2008's Recount which examined the aftermath of the US state of Florida turning into Nicaragua after the 2000 Presidential Election and last year's star laden look at the financial crisis Too Big to Fail, comes Game Change. An adaptation of the book of the same name, it looks at the fateful decision to choose Sarah Palin as John McCain's running mate. 

Game Change 

HBO seems to have the style of these political drama's down to a tee and there is much here in style and scope that would be familiar from their previous efforts. Short takes and an emphasis on telling the facts as they are. The film opens with John McCain, played by Ed Harris in a word perfect turn and his campaign manager Steve Schmidt played by the always reliable Woody Harrelson debating how they can catch the seemingly unstoppable juggernaut that is Barack Obama. After a very brief search, they alight upon an obscure Governor of Alaska. With time tight before a nominee must be announced, Schmidt does not properly vet Palin. Julianne Moore inhabits the role of Sarah Palin in a performance that out-Tina Fey's Tina Fey showing her for perhaps what she really is. An intellectually limited but passionate individual who can make a connection with those of a similar type. The bulk of the movie is then made up of documenting how quickly the decision to choose Palin goes awry. Perhaps anecdotes of her legendary lack of general knowledge have been over done but there is till much to squirm at in the various coaching sessions and interviews that highlight her inadequacy. The realisation that they have made the wrong choice causes a rethink in the campaign. As this general malaise sets in, Palin herself becomes unable to deal with the pressure and we are led to belief comes close to mental collapse. However she regroups and realises that by sticking to her strengths and being difficult she is more than a match for the campaign staff. From then on, Palin is very much a rogue agent out for her own career post the election with its inevitable defeat for the centrist McCain.

Ultimately this is an entertaining portrayal of one of the iconic American election campaigns of our times. Moore and Ed Harris give startlingly life like portrayals of their characters without veering too much into imitation. Perhaps its main failing is to attempt to shoe horn too much detail into a two hour running time though there is a need to tell something new. Given this, they do make a bold decision to posit the idea that Palin is mentally unstable.

As regards its accuracy as a film, both candidates have accused it and the book upon which it is based of being a false narrative though against this, Steve Schmidt portrayed by Harrelson has said it is an accurate reflection of events. 

All in all, this is an entertaining romp through an interesting topic led by a perfectly cast group of American character actors combined with the high production values typical of a HBO production. While it carries the slur of being a TV movie, it is a decent political drama worthy of any cinema. Well worth a look.

Flick of The Day: The Ides of March

The political thriller is very much a phenomenon of the 1970's when films like All The Presidents Men, The Parallax View and The Candidate took advantage of the cinema going public's cynicism and lack of public trust in the wake of the Watergate scandal. For the first time, people began to question the character of their political figures with a degree of circumspection. This kind of introspective and downhearted view of America gradually disappeared during the Reagan era, when the enemy was no longer within but in the left wing ideology of films like Salvador and a former flick of the day, The Killing Fields. Today's flick of the day, The Ides of March, then is very much a throwback to a different era from its stark opening credits to its dark hearted ending, and all the better for it.

The Ides of March

George Clooney makes a welcome return to form as a director after 2008's misbegotten Leatherheads with this extremely well acted old school thriller. The cast is stellar, Clooney himself is the idealized Democratic Presidential candidate Mike Morris on the cusp of victory in the primaries. His campaign is guided by the hard bitten campaigner Paul, played by Philip Seymour Hoffman and the idealistic Stephen Myers, played by current Hollywood golden boy Ryan Gosling, most recently seen in Drive. Together they are engaged in a bitter war with the opposing strategist played by the ever reliable Paul Giamatti. A great ensemble cast but this is very much Gosling's movie. He holds the screen in a manner that at once confirms him as an actor of note, if his previous performances in Blue Valentine and Lars and The Real Girl were not enough.  Stephen is approached by Giamatti to switch sides in the final days of campaigning for the Ohio primary and neglects to tell his boss Paul about it. He soon finds himself on the outside looking in but not before discovering a dark secret involving a staffer played by Evan Rachel Wood with tragic consequences that could derail Mike Morris's campaign.

Adapted from a play called Farragut North by Beau Willimon, this film's theatrical origins are evident from early on with some long dialogue heavy scenes. This is no bad thing though for it allows the actors to really put some meat on the bones of their characters, something so often missing from modern thrillers. Gosling gives a very powerful performance as an idealistic young man, a true believer who sees his innocence completely dispelled. The best scenes are the one on ones between Gosling and each of the other leads. A tension filled scene in a Hotel room between Gosling and Hoffman, a look behind the curtain of idealism between Giamatti and Gosling and finally a dark late night game of verbal chicken between Clooney and Gosling. Each scene gives the sense that Clooney deliberately built the film around his actors, giving them the opportunity to show off their considerable talents. 

Ultimately though this is a drama, and a downbeat one at that. By the end, everyone including the audience is stripped of their innocence and the films ends quietly and ambiguously. Indeed, at the screening I attended nobody moved as the credits began to roll which I have always taken as a sign of a film hitting its dramatic targets. 

Tom Duffy: Get out, now. Or otherwise... 

Stephen Meyers: Otherwise, I'll end up like you? 

Tom Duffy: Yeah, you end up being a jaded, cynical asshole, just like me.

It could be argued the film is deeply cynical about the American election system though my personal view is that it is if anything more realistic than one would care to imagine. A fine drama, backed up by a superb male cast who make the best of their roles and Clooney deserves credit for having the gumption to cast himself as the slickly packaged candidate, a role so perfect for him that  you could easily see it ruined by casting somebody else. A fine film and well worth your time.