Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueGovernor James Reynolds Pryce is campaigning to win the presidential nomination.Governor James Reynolds Pryce is campaigning to win the presidential nomination.Governor James Reynolds Pryce is campaigning to win the presidential nomination.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Récompenses
- 1 victoire et 2 nominations au total
Gia Franzia
- Delegate
- (as Gia Natale)
Avis à la une
As a political junkie, I am more likely to enjoy political-themed movies like this one. While 'Running Mates' has some good ingredients (mainly Bob Gunton's populist U.S. Senator), it has some bad ingredients too. The approach is heavy-handed, to say the least. For example, how do we know the U.S. Senator backed by big business is supposed to be a bad guy? He refers to Laura Linney's character (Selleck's campaign manager) as 'bitch' instead of using her real name while they discuss business in a professional setting. And Dunaway is awful, looking wretchedly made-up and overacting outrageously as a onetime flame of Selleck's. And for this she got a Golden Globe nomination? At least Robert Culp (as Dunaway's Senator husband) underplays his part (what little there is of it anyway). Tom Selleck is kind of low key and pretty bland in the lead. However, if he was trying to go for the bland politician look, he nailed it. How much safer of a candidate could Selleck be? Even his climatic convention speech is pretty tame, and that's the CLIMAX! Overall, a decent time, if you get past all of those clichés. The cast is pretty good (especially Gunton and Nancy Travis), aside from Dunaway's occasional outbursts and Bruce McGill's slime-ball Senator (though there's not much else he could have done with such a one-note character). And what's with that misleading movie poster? It shows Linney holding hands with Travis (who plays Selleck's wife), insinuating a possible same-sex twist to the story. However, as the movie unfolds, it is obvious that no such link exists. The two aren't even close! Did the filmmakers need to lure viewers that bad? This, nominally a 6, gets bumped down to a 5 because of that poster debacle. Talk about a cheap shot. If you want to see a good political movie check our Bob Roberts (with Tim Robbins). It is a more polished candidate, while Running Mates is more a political hack.
TNT had been promoing this one since the winter primary season, so I expected something like a blockbuster. Fool me once . . . Actually, "Running Mates" has its likeable moments and it did close with an uplifting plot turn, though it was one you could see coming. The scenes came fast, which I thought worked, and the editing kept the story moving.
The disappointments were in the utter phony silliness of certain aspects of what was a crackling good presentation much of the time. For example, the character of the Texas VP hopeful; that style wouldn't have worked in a good movie or TV show 40 years ago. The four women all having something in common with Tom Selleck's Gov. Pryce was a forced issue and hard to believe -- and also unnecessary. The vice-presidential decision coming on the night of Selleck's acceptance speech was likewise fiction and likewise not necessary; just a cheap hook to keep viewers tuned in all the way to the final credits.
There were a lot of good vignettes, the real TV personalities gave the movie a newscast feel, and Selleck and Bob Gunton as the reluctant VP candidate were the best of a good cast. Overall, a slick production that was certainly watchable. But it seems to me if you're doing this kind of thing during a political convention and tying in so many real events, you'd want to make the entire movie as real as possible. The production/directorial decisions that deviated from that are hard to fathom.
The disappointments were in the utter phony silliness of certain aspects of what was a crackling good presentation much of the time. For example, the character of the Texas VP hopeful; that style wouldn't have worked in a good movie or TV show 40 years ago. The four women all having something in common with Tom Selleck's Gov. Pryce was a forced issue and hard to believe -- and also unnecessary. The vice-presidential decision coming on the night of Selleck's acceptance speech was likewise fiction and likewise not necessary; just a cheap hook to keep viewers tuned in all the way to the final credits.
There were a lot of good vignettes, the real TV personalities gave the movie a newscast feel, and Selleck and Bob Gunton as the reluctant VP candidate were the best of a good cast. Overall, a slick production that was certainly watchable. But it seems to me if you're doing this kind of thing during a political convention and tying in so many real events, you'd want to make the entire movie as real as possible. The production/directorial decisions that deviated from that are hard to fathom.
Good overall, but I thought the bathroom scene with 3 ex-lovers discussing their flings in the presence of the candidate's wife was gratuitously tacky and tasteless. Cut that scene, and this would get several more stars. The scene where the candidate waits to the end of his Acceptance Speech to reveal his choice of running mate is unrealistic, but dramatically effective. Tom Selleck is a commanding presence. Robert Culp is cast to type as the somewhat sleazy,untrustworthy chap. Faye Dunaway plays the role of the drunken,neglected wife convincingly. Laura Linney was well cast - as was the film as a whole. Selleck has been good in everything he has been in.
I just watched this film tonight, quite coincidentally at the same time as the votes are being counted for the 2004 US presidential election.
The film concerns the political skullduggery involved in the nominating of a running mate for a Democratic presidential candidate played by an almost unrecognizable Tom Selleck. He is a bit of ladies' man inspiring unwavering devotion from his faithful followers and his legion of loved and discarded women who still work for him and believe in him even after the affair is done (could part of his character be modeled on that last charismatic Democrat president we ask ourselves?).
Laura Linney has a strong part as his clever campaign manager, Teri Hatcher a less showy part as a press secretary, and Faye Dunaway a very showy supporting part (the type of role she excels in these days) as the wife of a senator hoping to get a place on the ticket.
This is not a bad film and quite interesting for anyone interested in politics. It does not withstand comparison to the similar but superior "Primary Colors", but it is still not bad. The cast is good but the heartwarming ending is a little hokey for this hardened cynic.
The film concerns the political skullduggery involved in the nominating of a running mate for a Democratic presidential candidate played by an almost unrecognizable Tom Selleck. He is a bit of ladies' man inspiring unwavering devotion from his faithful followers and his legion of loved and discarded women who still work for him and believe in him even after the affair is done (could part of his character be modeled on that last charismatic Democrat president we ask ourselves?).
Laura Linney has a strong part as his clever campaign manager, Teri Hatcher a less showy part as a press secretary, and Faye Dunaway a very showy supporting part (the type of role she excels in these days) as the wife of a senator hoping to get a place on the ticket.
This is not a bad film and quite interesting for anyone interested in politics. It does not withstand comparison to the similar but superior "Primary Colors", but it is still not bad. The cast is good but the heartwarming ending is a little hokey for this hardened cynic.
The indiscriminate use of the "P" word turned me off to this made-for-TV movie. It had enough stars in it to make it a success, but I never used language like that and can't understand why TNT aired it as is. They edit other films for broadcasting with unacceptable language, so why is this one any different?
I grew up learning from my parents and peers what was acceptable language in mixed company and what was not. Maybe that's what is wrong with the world today.
Sincerely,
RN
I grew up learning from my parents and peers what was acceptable language in mixed company and what was not. Maybe that's what is wrong with the world today.
Sincerely,
RN
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesArianna Huffington: As herself.
- Citations
Gov. James Reynolds Pryce: Whose congress is it anyway? The highest bidder, that's whose.
- ConnexionsFeatured in The 58th Annual Golden Globe Awards 2001 (2001)
- Bandes originalesTutti Frutti
Written by Dorothy La Bostrie, Little Richard (as Richard Penniman) and Joe Lubin
Performed by Little Richard
Courtesy of Dominion Entertainment, Inc.
By Arrangement with Celebrity Licensing, Inc.
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
Détails
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant