C
Kevin Costner the producer severely underestimates the ability of Kevin Costner the actor to win over the audience in this tepid satire of electoral politics. Through a technical and mechanical glitch, Costner's character, an affable loser named Bud, finds himself...
| Audience: | High School |
| MPAA Rating: | Rated PG-13 for language |
| Movie Release Date: | August 1, 2008 |
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
This film is predicated on the illusive lie that the popular vote actually counts, when really it's the electoral college. In the real world someone like Bud could never exist.
Thanks for the comment, Greling. It's a satire, so I suppose we have to give it some leeway. And it does try to address the electoral college issue. But its other deficiencies are even greater than the one you have identified.
Actually, there isn't any discussion of the national popular vote in the movie. No one really talks about the Electoral College either, but at one point, there is a television screen that shows how many electoral votes each candidate has. One candidate (I can't remember which) has more than the other, but neither has a majority. Although this is never said explicitly from what I can remember, it is implied that the popular vote in New Mexico is tied, and that is why Bud's vote is needed to allow a candidate to win New Mexico's electoral votes, therby giving him a majority of the Electoral College.
That's right, Matt -- Thanks for setting the record straight.
"Like the rest of this movie, that choice is a bubble or two off prime, a disconnect between the reaction the movie expects and the reaction the audience will have. "
This is an aside. I'm familiar with "a bubble off plumb," but not "a bubble off prime." Is this new? What's the origin?
Thanks
I took my son to see this (he's pretty savvy for his age), and we both enjoyed it immensely. Even he could see that the language and drinking were inappropriate (sometimes kids can learn from bad examples if their parents frame things right). As a satire, it was brilliant. Too many Americans are frighteningly like Bud, apathetic or so cloistered in their own little set of issues that they don't look beyond the media hype to learn what the candidates are really about. (Isn't that how we ended up with the last 16 years of dubious national leadership...shame on us!) We're not a family of hard-core political activists, but with the upcoming election, we do talk about politics at home, and we don't exclude our kids from the conversation.
Even my 9-year-old son "got" this one, and I say "Bravo!" to the producers for encouraging us to pay attention!
I appreciate the comment, especially in the context of your other comment on "Bridge to Terabithia." It shows we agree that if you know what to expect and put it in the proper context, a movie can be a good way to initiate some important discussions. And I agree with you entirely that the message of engagement and attention to the issues is one all Americans should take to heart. Thanks for writing!
I agree with LLP. What a shame this movie was marginalized, especially in this election season. We enjoyed this movie with our 11-year-old son. (The non-stereotypical depiction of the drug addict and/or mentally ill mother was very stark and realistic, not some air-brushed desperate housewife.) More kids in this country will have seen The Dark Knight, a totally inappropriate movie for kids, reinforcing violence and nihilism, when they could have seen a movie that would open their eyes to the hypocrisy, and the hopes, of democracy. What a shame.
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.