CigaretJim

Let's get this out of the way: this is a terrible movie. The performances are campy. The conclusion is inevitable and foretold by the title. The story could've been told in less than half the time. However, the... let's call it "relaxed" pace of this film works in its favor. I am a big fan of carnival imagery, so the numerous long (and I do mean long) montages of the fairgrounds, day and night, sometimes featuring the film's characters (but usually not), are quite compelling. The dark jazzy score is very much of its time and is A LOT, full of intrusive sleazy horns and dramatic percussion (again, this is a plus for me). The lead performer, Claire Brennan, is very watchable and has a striking look reminiscent of Mary Woronov.

It's... well... I... OK I don't know what to tell you. This is not a great movie. But it is very well made, in its way. If you turn off your brain and just go along for the (absolutely insane) ride, you may enjoy the experience.

It's more frustrating to see a good film fall short than to witness an utter failure. With "The Contender," writer/director Rod Lurie made the mistake of either not trusting his mostly excellent writing, or underestimating the intelligence of his audience. Several key speeches are cheapened by the crescendo of "stirring" and intrusive music. In these scenes, Mr. Lurie penned some admittedly very partisan, but nevertheless convincing political rhetoric for his characters to speak, then inexplicably second-guessed the effect that his words, beautifully delivered, could have had on their own. It's disheartening to think one has to rely on Pavlovian response to a swelling, triumphant (and largely generic) score to get a point across, especially when the point has been more than adequately made. (insert inspiring music here)

I wouldn't be so upset if the movie had not otherwise gotten 'this close' to getting it right. And here are some of the elements that were very, very right:

The plot (which has been summarized in more detail in other reviews posted here) -- it is an interesting study of a political candidate being confronted by a sordid event in her past. In these times of increasingly negative American political campaigns, this story is unfortunately all too relevant.

Gary Oldman -- as the opposing Senator. The character was well-written as a savvy politician, staunchly conservative but not some kind of two-dimensional right-wing nut case. It was so refreshing to see Mr. Oldman portray a nemesis who was not frothing at the mouth, but rather subtly underplayed with all the skill that we haven't gotten to see from him in some time. This is the type of performance that we have all known he was capable of delivering AGAIN, despite the scenery-chewing of some of his more, shall we say, "blockbuster" roles (you know, like that One. With the President. On the airplane.) Give him good writing and he is one of the best there is.

Joan Allen -- I have never seen Joan Allen be anything less than excellent and this was another shining example. A well-deserved Oscar nomination. Enough said.

Jeff Bridges -- Another fine performance, as the President in a relatively small role. As for the rest of the cast, there wasn't a bad one in the bunch, to a man (and woman) delivering solid, subtle performances that could make me forget I was watching a movie. At least until that music started up again...

Finally, let me admit that I wouldn't even know how to BEGIN making a movie, and Mr. Lurie has done a fine job here. Maybe a bad experience at a test screening prompted the decision to "strengthen" these scenes, I don't know. I look forward to his next film, and hope that he trusts his instincts and considerable talent when that time comes.