ON THE
WSWS
Donate
to
the WSWS!
News Feed
Contact
the
WSWS
Editorial
Board
New
Today
News
& Analysis
Workers
Struggles
Arts
Review
History
Science
Polemics
Philosophy
Correspondence
Archive
About
WSWS
About
the ICFI
Help
Books
Online
OTHER
LANGUAGES
German
French
Italian
Russian
Polish
Czech
Serbo-Croatian
Spanish
Portuguese
Turkish
Sinhala-
Tamil
Indonesian
LEAFLETS
Download
in
PDF format
|
|
WSWS : Arts
Review : Film
Reviews
Impeachment not revisited
The Contender, written and directed by Rod Lurie
By Joanne Laurier
28 October 2000
Use
this version to print
The Contender is a political drama, obviously inspired
by the 1998 impeachment crisis surrounding US President Bill Clinton.
Writer and director Rod Lurie, a former film critic and entertainment
journalist, describes himself as a political junkie.
He says that Presidential election years are like football
seasons to me. I watch the events unfold with great excitement.
Remarkably, however, Lurie has made no reference to the impeachment
crisis in either his production notes or his comments to the press.
This refusal to address the Clinton scandal directly, mirroring
the silence of the major presidential candidates on the issue,
is telling. As an examination of the film will demonstrate, Lurie
is a Hollywood liberal, with all the opportunism and superficiality
that all too often implies.
The story centers on the intrigues that ensue when a US president
is obliged to name a new vice president following the death of
the previous second in command. President Jackson Evans (Jeff
Bridges), contrary to expectations, nominates Senator Laine Hanson
(Joan Allen) for the post, an act that has to be confirmed by
Congress. For reasons that are never entirely clear, a Midwestern
Congressman, Shelly Runyon (Gary Oldman), sets out to block Hanson's
appointment. He enlists a rookie Congressman to investigate her
past in hopes of finding something discrediting. Photographs are
dug up, apparently showing her engaged in promiscuous sexual activities
in college.
In the face of mounting political pressure, Hanson steadfastly
refuses to comment on her private life, thereby jeopardizing the
nomination. As further apparently incriminating details emerge,
the president is under pressure to withdraw her name. The original
frontrunner for the vacant position seems to be gaining support.
In the end, the president stands by Hanson, she is vindicated
and the right-wing congressman routed. In fact, Runyon is driven
from the House, as the president castigates him, eliciting a standing
ovation from the entire body.
The Contender misses the mark both artistically and
politically. The first few minutes of the filmduring which
an atmosphere of dirty tricks and conspiracy is built up through
a series of brief sequencessuggests the possibility of a
hard-hitting exposé. This rapidly dissipates, however,
as it dawns on the spectator that the film is less a critique
than a part of the problem. It is a thoroughly establishment and
essentially complacent piece, and any element of protest never
goes beyond vague criticism of the most obvious blemishes
of American democracy. Lurie is clearly mesmerized by the power
wielded by the Washington elite. The production notes hint at
the extent of the collaboration between the film's creators and
the Clinton administration: The filmmakers were extremely
grateful to the White House, which gave them access to the Oval
Office itself, as well as the mansion and grounds.
Any misgivings he may have about the nature and possible abuses
of this power take quite trivial forms, and, in any case, are
always colored by the general awe with which Lurie views the political
establishment. For example, the president is shown to be obsessed
with ordering the most exotic foods on each occasion and expects
them almost instantaneously. His need for immediate gratification
is perhaps a reference to Clinton's perceived out-of-control appetites.
There are two brief mentions of McCarthyism, which suggest that
Lurie knows more than he's saying, but they are hardly likely
to draw the spectator's attention to any dangers in the contemporary
situation.
Even when the film shows promise, in its opening sequences,
it hardly ever rises above the level of cliché. We see
familiar types: a slightly jaded president, a little wilted around
the edges; his Machiavellian operatives; ambitious, careerist
politicians, with their ambitious, careerist spouses; and the
relentless, dirty tricks right-winger. The viewer
who has read something about the film or seen its trailer at this
point expects a work sympathetic to Clinton, perhaps a straightforwardalbeit
in fictional formaccounting of the drive to remove a twice-elected
president engineered by the ultra-right. In fact, The Contender
is something quite different.
As the story unfolds, the superficial realism of
the initial scenes gives way to full-blown fantasy. President
Evans turns out to be the staunchest defender of democracy; the
operatives have all been working on the side of the angels; the
up and coming careerist sees the error of his ways, the opportunist
governor and his wife are sent packing, the right-winger is driven
from Capitol Hill. The system has worked, magnificently.
Then there is the matter of Senator Hanson. Here the fantasy
reaches its height. The film's heroine is physically impeccable,
has a meaningful marriage, a son with a can't-fail future, and
a sagacious father, whose position in the Republican Party insures
a pedigree, despite the liability of her gender, acceptable to
the president.
Hanson is a woman of unimpeachable (literally!) character,
the Clinton that should-have-been. The stakes are very highthe
possibility of a woman being vice-president for the first timebut
her principles are higher. She is the virgin queen of squeaky
clean politics. In fact, Lurie can't stop himself from making
the point that the fictional Senator Laine Hanson voted,
as a matter of principle, for the impeachment of the real
Clinton. (She argues that since he was the Commander-in-Chief
he should have been subject to the same standards of personal
conduct as the rest of the military brass.)
Hanson embodies the views prevailing in Hollywood liberal circles.
Or not-so-liberal circles. Defending herself against the attack
of the right wing during a hearing in the Houseor as she
puts it, the Chapel of DemocracyHanson describes
her political agenda as pro-choice, anti-death penalty and full
support for the use of American troops to police the world. Not
a word about poverty, about social inequality, or any significant
social problem. Indeed The Contender is peopled by individuals
with lots of money on their hands, and any hint of another American
realitythat of the working population and the pooris
entirely absent.
Lurie is essentially a Hollywood insider, who can't conceive
of life outside the privileged fast-lane. From his vantage point,
politics is an insular power game, played by people who are essentially
well-intentioned. The right and the left wing are always changing
places and, in any possible scenario, life would be pretty good
for all the players. In the film's production notes, Lurie expounds
on his banal vision: It is virtually impossible in politics
to paint anyone as a good guy or a bad guy. The notion of what
is good and what is bad changes with time. It's not just liberal
versus conservative; it's not just good versus bad ... human beings
tend to be enigmas, and social and political ideologies should
represent that.
For any thinking person, the film's final scene must be an
absurdity. The president, speaking before Congress, reaffirms
his nomination of Senator Hanson and lauds her as a shining example
for all, including himself. Incredibly, the entire body, showing
bipartisan unanimity, rises to its collective feet and cheers
for this underdog, who is being pummeled by the media and the
right wing. Is anything more unlikely, at a time when politicians
are beholden, as never before, precisely to these very same forces?
Evans is positively Jeffersonian. By comparison Frank Capra's
Mr. Smith Goes to Washington looks like a hard-core documentary
on US government operations.
An honest film, released in the middle of an election in which
no candidate or politician has uttered a word regarding the attempted
political coup two years ago, could have been an antidote to the
efforts to dull the thinking of the general public. Instead, we
get The Contender, which serves to reinforce the prejudices
and illusions that hold so many Americans politically hostage.
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |