When it comes to politicians nowadays, it seems that what goes in the bedroom or the person's long ago past are just as important as their political experience and other qualifications to hold their office. Whereas past indiscretions such as JFK's alleged affairs with various women were always rumored but rarely explored, today's candidates and office holders had better have a squeaky clean past and a skeleton free closet lest their political career face the prospects of suddenly coming to a crashing halt.
Such skeleton hunting and unearthing is part of the entertaining, well-conceived, and executed premise of "The Contender," a crackerjack political drama that was easily one of the best films of 2000. Former film critic turned writer/director Rod Lurie has certainly blossomed since his debut with "Deterrence." While that film had its moments, it was essentially a one-set variation of "Failsafe" that had its share of both decent and somewhat ridiculous material. Barely released in theaters, the film nonetheless polarized critics into those who hated it and those who liked it or saw it as a guilty pleasure.
With this work, however, Lurie has graduated into the word of big-time filmmaking, easily showing that he's capable of playing with the big dogs by delivering an engaging and often riveting work that unfortunately was more of a hit among critics than with the average moviegoer, although it may just earn a new life now that it's available on video.
On the surface, the premise is simple, yet effective. A liberal female Senator is up for the V.P. spot, a conservative House committee chairman doesn't like her, and sets out to ruin both her and her nomination. The contrasting political, ideological and gender-based attributes of the two obviously create palatable levels of conflict and drama.
Deeper down, however, Lurie's script adds layers of subtext and grayness that makes the proceedings even that much more interesting and complex. Although the film is rather clear-cut in who it wants us to root for as its hero and hate as the villain, neither they nor many of the other characters are pure black and white, or right or wrong.
Laine Hanson, wonderfully and deftly played by Joan Allen ("The Crucible," "Nixon") in a performance that earned her a third Oscar nomination, is a dignified woman who steadfastly sticks by her beliefs, sort of like an idealistic version of Jimmy Stewart's character in "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" had he been a woman in the present day Senate.
Yet, she's also human and an early scene of her fooling around with her husband purposefully plants a seed of doubt in our mind that later blossoms when we begin to wonder whether the later allegations of her sexual improprieties from the past might be true. Since she refuses to comment on them, we're never quite sure if she's simply sticking to her guns (that it's nobody's business) or is calmly trying to douse the rumors (that are true) before they burn down her career.
Hers is one of those characters that constantly frustrates but ultimately satisfies viewers since she won't defend herself or fight back with equally damaging and damning allegations, even if they are true. While it seems unlikely that many such people exist in today's world, it's refreshing to see such a character, even if you're not always completely sure about her.
A true epic battle obviously needs a resourceful and strong-willed antagonist to confront and attack the hero, and Lurie gets that and more from Gary Oldman ("Lost in Space," "Air Force One") who surprisingly didn't walk away with an Oscar for his uncanny performance as the conservative and self-righteous House committee chairman.
Barely recognizable in his makeup, attire and overall characterizations, Oldman creates a credible and worthy adversary (much like he's made a career of doing) out of what easily could have been a one-dimensional villain, inherently earmarked for our immediate and nonstop disdain. Yet, the mild vague qualities that both Lurie and Oldman inject into the character results in one of the most interesting and complex antagonists to hit the screen in some time.
Not to be left out, Jeff Bridges ("Arlington Road," "The Fisher King") completes the winning performance triad with his terrific take on the President who's looking to fulfill his legacy. It seems that writers and performers love writing for and playing this character - as evidenced by Aaron Sorkin and Michael Douglas and Martin Sheen's work in "The American President" and "West Wing" respectively.
Lurie and Bridges continue in that tradition, creating a complex and funny character who has no problem subtly but effectively playing his political hand or demonstrating his power and prowess (often through ordering exotic dishes through the White House kitchen in a terrific running gag). The role and performance earned Bridges an Oscar nomination.
Supporting performances are nearly as good with Christian Slater ("Very Bad Things," "Heathers") embodying the ambitious but hopeful and optimistic Mr. Smith type character and Sam Eliot ("Tombstone," "Mask") perfectly playing the gravely voiced, get anything done Chief of Staff. Other performances by the likes of William Petersen ("Fear," "Manhunter") and Saul Rubinek ("Dick," "Unforgiven") are also solid.
As was evident in "Deterrence," Lurie excels at creating high-stakes, political pressure cookers where strategy, smarts and intestinal fortitude go hand in hand, and all of that is entertainingly on display here. Despite a significant plot twist that some will see coming (due to a few details that are briefly discussed) and a lack of the type of suspenseful momentum that often builds in films like this and gets viewers' adrenaline pumping, this is an intelligent, thought-provoking and constantly engaging film that's easily one of the best from 2000.
![[Logo]](/images/screenit_logo2.jpg){kind=logo}
