It’ll be interesting to see what people think of “Game Change,” assuming of course that they can get past their own political prejudices to watch it. We have long since made up our minds about the former Vice Presidential candidate and are either for or against her, but this HBO movie offers a more intimate look at her that you won’t find on any episode of “Saturday Night Live.” But even then, the movie is not all about her and deals more specifically with how people are selected to become national leaders. While you may think it’s the Presidential candidate who makes this final decision, that doesn’t always prove to be the case.

“Game Change” opens with a scene from a “60 Minutes” interview Cooper Anderson does with John McCain’s chief campaign strategist Steve Schmidt (Woody Harrelson) after the campaign has ended in which he asks Schmidt if he regretted choosing Palin as McCain’s running mate. The look on his face is perplexing as if he wants to say yes or is maybe instead looking for a better away to answer the question so it will seem more thoughtful. Either way we don’t find out his answer till the movie’s end, but we wonder about that question throughout.

Schmidt is seen as reluctant to join McCain’s campaign for President of the United States, but his respect for the Senator from Arizona eventually makes him a chief participant. But after McCain wins the Republican nomination, a bigger problem looms; the politicians he is thinking of selecting for his running mate won’t help him overcome the excitement Americans have for Barack Obama. This leads his political advisers Rick Davis (Peter MacNicol) and Mark Salter (Jamey Sheridan) to suggest Governor of Alaska Sarah Palin who they see as a “game changer.” Even though she has not been in office for very long, they believe that choosing Palin will enhance McCain’s image as a political maverick. Sure enough, Palin energizes his campaign in a way few others could with her strong presence and conviction of purpose. But when it comes to world and political affairs, that’s where everyone comes to develop a severe case of anxiety (including Palin herself).

Now I know Plain herself has made it clear that she has absolutely no interest in watching “Game Change,” but she is actually portrayed here with a lot of empathy. As played by Julianne Moore, Palin is sincere in her efforts in wanting to help McCain win the Presidency and is shown to be a loving mother and wife. Upon being introduced to the world as “the next Vice President of the United States,” Palin becomes overwhelmed with the negative press thrown in her direction to where she’s not sure how to deal with it. There are scenes where she watches helplessly as Tina Fey does her on “Saturday Night Live,” and you can’t help but feel for her even if it made for some great comedy on that show.

Speaking of Tina Fey, after watching her do a practically flawless and priceless imitation of Palin, it seemed insane for anyone else to try and play the former vice-presidential candidate either in a movie or a skit (did you see Andy Samberg try to do it?). But Moore never stoops to impersonating Palin but instead inhabits her does so brilliantly. The whole time we watch Moore in “Game Change,” we never get the sense that she is acting but instead searching for what drives Palin in this political race and in her life. I really felt like I was watching Palin in the movie and not Moore as she seems to just float away and has let the former Governor of Alaska take her over.

As the campaign rolls on, we see her rebelling against her advisers who keep telling her what to say, do, and wear. While part of us wants her to really listen to those in the campaign who’ve been through this kind of thing before, you can’t help but admire her for not wanting to put on an act for the American people. Deep down, we really don’t want to see our politicians put on an act for us as we always feel that we can see right through it. Would you be ever so willing to compromise the things you believe in just to win political office?

Harrelson is on a roll right now with his critically acclaimed performance in “Rampart,” and I love how he embodies Schmidt, a man who’s trying his best to handle a delicate situation that threatens to implode each and every day. Here’s a guy who thinks he can handle any problem thrown at him but ends up being confronted by one he cannot control. Seeing those eyes stare like daggers at Palin when she goes “rogue” is an unforgettable image as he eventually makes clear that this is McCain’s show more than hers.

Ed Harris doesn’t really look or sound much like John McCain, but that doesn’t matter here. What he does accomplish is making McCain seem like an honorable politician trying to run a campaign that is not full of nastiness like the one George W. Bush’s people ran against him in 2000. Seeing his grimace when his supporters start hating on Obama more intensely, calling him an “Arab” or a “communist,” is a painful sight as he realizes that this is not the kind of race he ever wanted to be a part of. Harris is an actor who always delivers the goods, and he certainly doesn’t fail us here.

One performance that stands out in particular here is Sarah Paulson’s as McCain adviser Nicole Wallace. Paulson gives her role a wonderful complexity as her sincere dedication to McCain’s campaign is severely tested by her utter resentment of Palin that we can constantly see is reaching its boiling point. As much as Wallace wants to help Palin do her best in debates and interviews, you can see in her eyes that she is thinking “is this the best we can come up with?” Also, Paulson looks a lot like Monica Potter, and I want to make sure we can tell the difference between the two in the future.

“Game Change” was directed by Jay Roach who also directed the superb HBO movie “Recount” which documented the voting debacle over the 2000 Presidential election between Bush and Gore. As with that one, he attempts to make “Game Change” a balanced look at a politician and campaign that we feel we know everything about already. Whether or not he has succeeded here is hard to tell because America is as politically divisive as it has ever been, and many people have been vocal with their criticisms even before they bothered watching this movie.

What Roach does great here is show us history as if it were unfolding right in front of us. We all know the outcome of this election, but we still cringe when Palin makes mistakes like on the Katie Couric interview. Even if she didn’t have our support during the general election, seeing her suffer through a process that really proves to be beyond anyone’s control is painful, and we want to see her overcome obstacles most people don’t get to experience. Regardless of what it is we’re watching we always find ourselves rooting for the underdog. As “Game Change” comes to an end, Roach keeps us on the edge of our seats as we wonder what Palin has up her sleeve next as she has long since proven that she is nobody’s puppet.

Is “Game Change” accurate to what actually happened? I guess it depends on who you ask; Palin and McCain have described it as inaccurate and based on a false narrative while Steve Schmidt and Nicole Wallace have said that it tells the truth and capturing the spirit of the campaign. When all is said and done though, I’m not sure I care if it is because most movies “based on a true story” are not and really can’t be for dramatic purposes. In the end all we can do is hope for a compelling motion picture that holds our attention throughout, and “Game Change” is certainly that.

Palin should at least be happy that, on top of being given a brilliant and respectful portrayal by Julianne Moore, she does not come off as the bad guy here. It’s really her political handlers who come off looking bad by throwing a barely tested Governor into a political minefield that is unforgiving and endlessly vicious. Long before the election ends, they see that their thirst for victory has overcome their better judgment as they picked a celebrity more than a true candidate. This brings me to scariest thing “Game Change” reveals though which is a truth that many of us don’t want to see: that these days the news is nothing more than “entertainment.”

* * * ½ out of * * * *

This movie came out on HBO several months ago, but I never got around to seeing it until now. How ironic, considering that we are now upon our country’s latest Presidential election and one of the most important ones at that. Still, the memories of hanging chads and confusing ballots permeate our consciousness 8 years after the heavily contested election between Al Gore and George W. Bush. We saw this played out on the networks with all their furious coverage, but now with “Recount,” we get a look at what went on in the campaign offices while this election fight went on to get what they each felt was fair and just.

How you view this movie might depend on what side of the political spectrum you see yourself on. I’m not sure how accurate this movie is to real events, but I imagine it is pretty close. Coming out of it, you may feel it values one candidate over the other. But in the end, “Recount” is not so much a movie about the fight to get candidates elected as it is about the fight for democracy. It is a fight for all the voters to be heard, and also a scary tale of how the fate of the Presidency can end up in the hands of a powerful few instead of America as a whole. Hopefully, this is something that we all collectively hope we never have to live through again.

“Recount” was directed by Jay Roach who is best known as the director of all the “Austin Powers” movies. Here, he directs a large cast of superlative actors who take the roles of many people we know well from the news, and gives us a strong case of why many still thank Al Gore was robbed of the Presidency (hence, it will probably alienate more conservative audiences). Both Gore and Bush are basically supporting players in this story, and we only see them from the backs of their heads (obviously portrayed by other actors) or in news footage of them during the campaign. The movie is more interested in what went on behind the scenes of the election, and of the different fights made to get to the truth of who won the Florida electoral votes.

Even though we all know how this ended up and who got elected, the movie is still riveting in the same way “Apollo 13” was. It is not so much interested in the general way things happened as it is the specifics of the issue. We see brilliantly shot examples of how chads in ballots could not be broken off as they were designed to be. The opening shot of the movie shows how easily confused some Florida residents are when they are trying to vote, and yet it is not altogether clear how to vote for Gore so that you don’t accidentally vote for Pat Buchannan. The moment where one of Gore’s campaign workers rushes up to him before he is about to make his concession speech on the night of that election is scary in that we all feel like we are running alongside him. This movie feels all the more stronger all these years later as we will finally be rid of Bush as President for once and for all. Even now, we have a strong emotional reaction to the thought of Gore conceding the election.

At the head of this star studded cast is Kevin Spacey who gives one of his best performances in quite some time as Ron Klain, Al Gore’s legal advisor on the campaign trail. The day before the election, it is presumed that Gore is going to win it, and Klain is offered a job in Gore’s new administration. Ron ends up turning it down, feeling that it is not the way he wants to spend the next 8 years of his life. But when it becomes clear that there are clear inconsistencies in the voting in certain Florida counties, Ron goes right into action to make sure that all the votes are recounted, as the margin of victory is only off by just over a thousand votes. Ron is aided by a large team of political strategists from Michael Whouley (Denis Leary) to Warren Christopher (John Hurt).

Spacey makes it clear from the start that Ron Klain is an idealist more than anything else about the way the political system works. What he does throughout the movie is not motivated by his desire to see Gore become President (he even admits in one scene that he is not even sure he likes Gore) as it is by the desire to see all the votes counted and to not have any of them thrown for different reasons like those rejected votes of people with similar names of convicted felons. Because the election was so close, we can see in Spacey’s eyes that this election is just much too important for certain votes to be cast aside.

We also get great performances from other actors like Ed Begley Jr. who plays David Boes who passionately fought for the recount to continue when testifying at the Supreme Court. Another great performance comes from the always reliable Tom Wilkinson (“Michael Clayton”) who plays James Baker who fights on behalf of George W. Bush to turn the election his way. Wilkinson plays Baker as being idealistic in his own way, and is almost as idealistic as Klain is for the democrats. Bruce McGill is also great here as Republican lobbyist Mac Stipanovich who is brought in to persuade Florida Secretary of State Katherine Harris to stop the recount.

Speaking of Katherine Harris (who by the way wanted nothing to do with this film), she is played here in a brilliant performance by Laura Dern. With makeup to bring up harsh memories of Faye Dunaway from “Mommie Dearest,” Laura gives us a Katherine Harris who is not dumb, but who is oblivious to what is going on around her. She says she is following the law, but never really questions those around her as to what their true motives really are. Laura is one of the best actresses working today, and this movie is a good reminder of that. Her performance is frightening in how it shows

The other thing I wanted to note about “Recount” is that the actors do a great job of inhabiting their roles as opposed to impersonating people we have known for a long time in the political world. That is always the trap of playing characters we know from really life; many end up playing these people from the outside in instead of inside out. It takes a group of well trained actors to play these roles, and who are not mere impressionists or mimics. Mimicry is a cool art, but it doesn’t work in movies like this.

Director Jay Roach does a great job of literally putting you back in the year 2000, and he makes you're a witness to all the goings on to where even though you know how this race ended, you still hope and pray for a different outcome. Jay also shows how each Presidential candidate has to be grateful for all the dozens of people and hundreds of supporters who helped their candidate to where he (or eventually, she) is in the political landscape (and landmines) of America. Aside from “The West Wing,” we haven’t had too many movies that have looked at these people who work so hard for the politician they support, and this movie is a reminder of how those people need to be thanked for all that they do. They can’t stay behind the scenes forever. They need to be seen for who they are.

In the end, “Recount” is not so much a movie about how Gore got screwed out of an election he won the popular vote on. It’s not about if Gore lost the election. It is about how democracy was lost in that election, and of how many voices were rendered irrelevant for reasons that were not altogether justified. The final scene of the warehouse where all those uncounted votes is haunting, and it almost feels like an outtake of the scene from “Raiders Of The Lost Ark” where the Ark of the Covenant is being stored in a factory holding hundreds of boxes that all look alike. The real victim of that election was that all the voters were not heard, and that ended up leaving a shadow over George W. Bush’s Presidency that will never fully be erased.

It also serves as an important document of a moment of history that we can never forget. We need to remember what happened so that it never happens again. We have already seen history repeat itself, and now it’s time to learn from it so that it never happens again.

“Recount” shows how HBO continues to make some of the best and most important movies today. It’s one of the best movies I have seen in 2008.

**** out of ****

Starring: Paul Giamatti, Laura Linney, Tom Wilkinson, David Morse, Stephen Dillane
Director: Tom Hooper
DVD Release Date: June 10, 2008
Running Time: 501 min
Distributor: HBO Films

“It is no small thing to build a new world, gentlemen.” – Ben Franklin

“I am determined to control events, not be controlled by them.” – John Adams


John Adams, the HBO miniseries based on David McCullough’s bestselling biography, accomplishes something that John Adams, the man, attempted to do for the better part of his political life, speak of his accomplishments, a feat which is achieved here in grand fashion. Most of our knowledge of John Adams is only that he was the 2nd President of the United States, but this miniseries tells a much broader story spanning more than 50 years, showing events before, during, and after his presidency. And what a fascinating story it is.

John Adams is the story of a man more complex than history would allow him to be viewed. John Adams (Paul Giamatti) was a stubborn little man whose moral foundation was built on strong principles far greater than most of those he surrounded himself with. His honesty and outspoken nature were among his best and worst characteristics. Beginning with his unpopular decision to defend the British soldiers involved in the Boston Massacre in the name of the law, a foundation he held very close, most of his decision making prowess came in the form of counsel by his wife, Abigail Adams (Laura Linney). Some of his decisions made in her absence have been widely and rightly condemned as being poor. She was his voice of reason any time he was to let his emotion blindly drive him into doing or saying something out of turn. The movie plays very well as a love story between the two. Separated for the better part of the first 14 years of their marriage, she stood by her man through every adversity encountered in the name of chasing his dream.

The sacrifices made by Adams were greater than those involving his wife and his family. The friendships of the men we came to know as the Founding Fathers were also strained as the country declared its independence and moved forward with the revolution. It was interesting to watch men and their alliances transform as the differing views of how to run a country’s government began to take hold. There was no blueprint for success, there were no definition of boundaries and title; they were making it up as they went along. We now look to our country to guide us but there was no history telling them how things should be run. They simply did what they thought was best as determined by the collective majority of those put into power.

Watching John Adams is like discovering our own history for the first time. I found myself feeling very patriotic. More times than not when we get a movie that involves a part of our American history, it is told in a self aggrandizing manner. John Adams told the story from a much different perspective. It was not afraid to show the trouble these men had in making the decisions that eventually shaped our country into what it is today. It showed each man less God-like than history has made them out to be. It wasn’t easy and mistakes were made. For that I think we should all be more thankful knowing they were ordinary men with extraordinary dreams and the fortitude and drive to realize them regardless of what obstacle stood in their way.

You cannot watch this film without being in awe of the multitude of great performances. Giamatti and Linney were the backbone to be sure, but the supporting members of the story provided a depth that would not have been able to be achieved if it weren’t for the great acting. Tom Wilkinson plays Benjamin Franklin as a man wise beyond his years and just as crazy. Stephen Dillane as Thomas Jefferson is a sophisticated southerner as headstrong in his ideals as the next, and David Morse as General and President George Washington not only bears an uncanny resemblance to our nation’s first president, he commands attention every time he is on screen.

Toward the end of the series, after another bout of frustration with how his legacy is to be upheld, Adams tells his wife that he should have followed his father’s course and been a farming, shoemaking, deacon so as to have avoided what he deemed to be only headaches left in the wake of his political career. The fact of the matter is that when a man makes sacrifices as John Adams did during his life to realize a dream that he may not even live to fully realize, that shows a selflessness of immeasurable proportion that we cannot fully grasp in our present state of affairs. History may not have allowed him to be as iconic a figure as the rest of the Founding Fathers, but for all his shortcomings he had something most of the rest of them lacked. He was honest and driven, yet fallible. That he made no apology for being any of these things made something far more important than any character trait he may have possessed: human.

And there’s the rub.

**** out of ****