Game Change

Game Change, the Jay Roach film based on the much ballyhooed book by John Heilemann and Mark Halperin, is basically a love song for hacks.  The film, as one might surmise, is politics in its very soul – but politics in a very DC sort of sense.  This is after all, the Washington DC that saw Bill Clinton’s adultery as a far greater sin than Ronald Reagan funding the rape and murder of Catholic missionaries in El Salvador, that continued to pass of Hermain Cain as a conservative wunderkind not until he proved his lack of basic knowledge on Libya, but when it turned out he like to boink.  There is a claim that DC cares more about politics than other towns – which is partially true, but it is more knee deep in the tactics on the Hill than any sort of curiosity about what they are fighting for.  I know living here, I have seen motorcades passing by – but who knew the world the tinted windows covered was no more sophisticated than 8th grade?  Judging by the information contained in Game Change, a film which benefits greatly from competent direction and acting that is better than the material, Halperin and Heilemann had the best seat in the house for the 2008 campaign but could only deliver with spreading nasty rumors about the girls they saw.  This is not to say that the film is not well made.  It absolutely lives up to HBO’s standards for production and acting and whatnot – and this has to be vastly superior to the book considering how much Moore and Harrelson bring to their characters, and how little curiosity the writers seem to show for anything that would actually be interesting or insightful.

Woody Harrelson plays Steve Schmidt – who has remade himself as MSNBC’s Republican Primary version of Hubie Brown – a campaign strategist left over from the Bush days who gets called by John McCain (Ed Harris) to try to help the campaign.  In this moment, we hear Schmidt talk about how Obama lacked experience while McCain was an American hero and he wants to help the team and so-forth.  And that basically is the extent of the politics in the film – and things shift into the very interior world of running a campaign.  Apparently, McCain is struggling along with Obama getting the large convention bump and so on and so on – and so there has to be something to counterract it.  Steve Schmidt of course has the brilliant idea – bring in the governor of Alaska.  Here, the movie is skillful in displaying the calculation.  The team is looking at numbers and the news cycle, and trying to win the everyday campaign.  There is an absence of a larger context – perhaps since for these people there IS no larger context.  Indeed, the authors of the book bring no such insight to the table.  In some ways, the movie would have benefited from eliminating the McCain character entirely.  Ed Harris brings little to the role here, and the filmmakers and the book’s authors have no interest in portraying him as anything other than the heroic news clippings that make Chris Matthews drool.

Of course, with this choice comes the entrance into the arena of Ms. Palin (Julianne Moore) herself.  Palin I believe, is none too pleased about her portrayal here.  Actually I think Roach is far more sympathetic to Palin than Halperin and Heilemann are.  As a matter of fact, considering their gleeful disparaging of Elizabeth Edwards, one can surmise that there is a bit of a misogynistic streak in how they regard women working in the arena in general.  The Palin story of course needs no rehashing here, and Juliane Moore – seasoned pro that she is – does not attempt to strike a perfect impersonation.  Tina Fey has that covered.  Instead Moore suggests the Palin personality, and in the limited things the screenplay allows her to show, you get a sense of a woman who got the call from the big leagues, and slowly started to recognize and exploit what a big deal she was.  She did not ask for this, but the McCain campaign was trying to have it both ways – have her be the running mate for their base, PR flunky reasons, but limit her power to actually act like somebody important.  Needless to say, Palin – like anybody in that position – resisted.  Moore’s performance is heroic here, in fewer quiet moments, suggesting some depth and feeling without the screenplay offering her much help.  Halperin and Heilemann want us to think that she is the cartoon character depicted in the media – but Moore resists.

Indeed, Palin becomes more difficult to handle, and by the end, we are asked to sympathize with Schmidt’s regret for his decision.  However, I just got the sense he was upset that they lost – and for those who lived in that time, it’s not like Palin was causal – preventing a perfectly heroic angel from winning what was entitled to him.  That, like much of DC politics is also invented claptrap.  But of course, this is a Beltway insider book, so what did we expect?  I was glad I saw the movie, if nothing else to sate my curiosity.  However, the screenplay David Mamet wrote for the fictional Wag the Dog contains far more insight about politics, and the PR folks who shine their shoes and the court stenographers.  It is amazing yet totally unsurprising that the book Heilemann and Halperin wrote made such a splash – full of sound and fury and rumor signifying nothing.

Dinner for Schmucks

Jay Roach’s Dinner for Schmucks is probably as close to a truly edgy comedy as Hollywood in 2010 is probably capable of doing.  In a way that is a compliment – in particular Steve Carrell brings a sort of nerve to a comic performance not seen since Jim Carrey in The Cable Guy.  However, the movie does not make the leap into true black comedy and is content to go for a sweeter vibe.  This is no The War of the Roses.  That said, we are left with an effective comedy taking advantage of Paul Rudd’s enormous resources of Paul Rudd-ness and a wicked gallery of ummm … extraordinary people, but something a little maddeningly short of what could have been a real classic.

Tim Conrad is an investment banker in the Los Angeles wealth management game – who, like most of these types, is looking to get ahead.  He suggests a brilliant idea to rope in a very important client to the president of his firm, and suddenly he is on the promotion fast track.  However, first he has to attend a dinner with his future co-workers where they bring idiots to make fun of them. (idiots?  more on that later)  Now Rudd, who is one of the most effective actors in this sort of realm, projects goodness easily.  He is pretty clearly not the Type A uberdouche that you expect with this personality type.  He has  a girlfriend he is in love with, and a life that he wants to move forward  for most of the good, American Dream sort of reasons.  As such, you gotta pay to play, right?  Suffice to say, if the Tim (Rudd) wants to advance in his new job and secure a new client, the man has to find an idiot right quick.  Suddenly deus ex machina comes to the scene as his Porsche hits a very oblivious Barry (Steve Carrell) and away we go.

Barry is … something.  I am not sure if idiot or anything is a fair characterization of him, or if it is a mean spirited one.  I mean, he has considerable talent at his hobby (indeed a montage of his works is shown in the opening credit) which I would not dream of spoiling.  But he certainly is not book or street smart.  He gets Switzerland and Sweden confused for one – and then the language the Swedish actually speak with the language Swedish muppets speak.  He also has a bad habit of going through Tim’s stuff, and responding on Tim’s IM to a woman who has been stalking him.  Where some of these misunderstandings take Tim’s life (his girl, his car) does not require Nostradamus to predict.

In the trailers for this movie, I thought that Carrell might over ham this sort of character up, but to his credit his performance falls just short of that.  Carrell and Roach are able to manage Barry’s absolute, total cluelessness with absolute logic.  Barry is never acting maliciously – and that’s what makes the comic consequences of what he does so painful.  There is a lot cringeworthy here (in a good way) during these passages – the sorts of vivisection of manners that the Brits do especially well.  Tim, being a good guy is in a conundrum – because while he clearly recognizes Barry’s goodness, the sheer magnitude of Barry’s missteps can sure add up.  As the complications pile up (the stalker, the important client, Tim’s girlfriend walking out on him) Roach here consciously chooses to go a more genial, screwball route.  The supporting players are a menagerie of weirdos, whether it be the curiously Russell Brand-like artist whom Tim’s girlfriend is curating, or Barry’s archrival (Zach Galifanakis) who has developed a skill in hypnosis.

Ultimately all of this is a setup for the dinner itself.  Of course at this point, Tim does have regard for Barry, but still wants the promotion.  The dinner is a terrific comic set piece, and the variety of guests is pretty darn imaginative.  However, in the ending, the movie shows where it falls short of greatness.  While we have this gallery of true absurdity around, the movie has cast its lot with Barry being kind of sweet, and so of course here it is required that Tim make a Capra-esque speech about who the REAL idiots are and whatnot.  That Roach stopped just short of the finish line and went for a more conventional sort of tone for the finish makes the film more genial, but probably denies it greatness.  That is a bit of a shame.  Of course, for a summer Hollywood film with a couple of pretty high profile stars – taking this material in the darker direction might have just not flown with the test audiences or marketing types.  I guess it’s like the British version of The Office versus the American one – the marketing premise is that Americans want something sweeter and more cuddly, even in its satire.  I’m not sure that is the case.