lasttimeisaw Mike Nichols presents a political satire PRIMARY COLORS, which came timely during Bill Clinton's infamous Lewinsky scandal and impeachment in 1998. So it might boost the publicity then, but 15 years later, when our memories fade, the film actually has weathered pretty good, narrating from a Black young novice Henry (Lester)'s eyes, who assists Governor Jack Stanton (Travolta)'s presidential campaign for the democrats, initially Henry thinks Jack is different from other politicians because he viscerally cares about adult literacy and dyslexia, but when he gets closer to him, the stain of Jack's personal life is far more reprehensible and the conniving political game is far too scurvy for an idealist like him. With a light touch, the film sets its campaign process in a vibrant tempo, benignly portrays Jack as a zestful candidate who canvasses and panders to his voters with great facility (through the different connotations from his body gestures and a memorable slapstick cameo from Allison Janney) in spite of the relatively youthful and uninitiated team. Then when Jack's wife Susan (Thompson) comes into the scene, the placid surface cannot dissemble the cracks beneath as soon as we detect Jack's philandering nature. A sex scandal is well-expected, which invites the troubleshooter Libby (an open lesbian and a close friend of Jack and Susan since college), plays by a fiery Kathy Bates, a devil-may-care warrior can track down any sources and break them, Bates is well-deserved for this hard-earned Oscar nominated performance, her wrangle with Jack and Susan about the integrity she cannot forsake is purely magnificent. Emma Thompson is perpetually excellent, especially under Nichol's guidance, a perfect wife behind a successful man mode is such a cinch for her and she nails it with much more nuances to accentuate her vulnerability and snobbishness. As for Travolta, it has hitherto been his last decent offer (if one can count out his droll transvestite transformation in HAIRSPRAY 2007, 8/10), underneath his cordial impression, his true color does not betray easily even in the hardest times, maybe that's why makes him a successful politician. And Adrian Lester is the audience's proxy, a wide-eyed enthusiast undergoes the tidal wave throughout, and an adamant observer which cogently influences his sea change in altitude through the screen to the viewers, bookends with the ending's artificial vagueness which also corresponds with the beginning, the same handshakes, different undertones. Forget about its reality allusions if you can, PRIMARY COLORS qualifies itself as a better-than- expected dissection of what politicians are made of, we are all characters with flaws, sometimes moralities and political expertise should be discriminated in order to see through the murky smoke screen and select the credential-ed ones instead of stalking horses. As for most of us, the most substantial message is that there is no win-win situation or whatsoever in the political composition.

svaldez-4 The movie is well made and the acting is very good, but I still don't understand why getting Governor Stanton elected is so important? He seems to be a lovable philanderer with absolutely no personal morals. He seems to really care about people in the macro sense but not in the micro sense. If he did he would not act so callous to his friends and wife and lovers.Why was getting Governor Stanton elected so important? It seems like this film was made for people who believed that getting a Democrat elected, even one who had grave personal failings was more important than getting a Republican elected. That is where I feel the movie was weak. In 50 years moviegoers are going to be asking themselves this question who were not alive in the 20th century to understand how hated Republicans where in the 90s. Great political movies like Mr. Smith Goes to Washington establish the need to get Jimmy Stewart elected. This movie does not establish the need to get John Travolta elected.

coreymoquin Primary Colors, which came out in 1998, is a political film unlike any other. It appears to be self aware of the political situation in modern United States politics. It both pokes fun at American politics and sheds light on real unnerving problems. It also poses a battle between political power and human morals. The film, like other films we've viewed this semester, places the viewer in a dilemma where they must decide what is more important.The film came out in 1998. During this time Bill Clinton was president and the Monica Lewinski scandal is just starting to surface in the media. Up until this point Bill Clinton, having been recently re-elected, was for the most part a celebrated president. The United States was enjoying a time of peace. The only real problem the country was facing was a slight recession. However, the sex scandal in the white house shook the American citizens to the core. Suddenly a politician that appeared to be trustworthy was dishonest. The American citizens didn't know whom they could trust in politics. Clinton was impeached but was acquitted. Primary Colors' character Jack Stanton, played by John Travolta, is an obvious interpretation of Bill Clinton.Primary Colors decides to show both sides of the political process during the primary races. It shows that campaigning is just about the people as it is about destroying your competitor. This is done by either hiding your own implicating material or uncovering material that may be implicating to the competitor. This film shows the political primary races as a ruthless and morally absent competition to eliminate contenders. Fairness does not seem to enter in to this competition because the politicians in this film seem to be more preoccupied by sabotaging their competitors campaign rather than create credible political strategies. Jack Stanton's character has quite a bit going against him during his race. He is faced with a false accusation of having an affair with a hairdresser. Also, implications arise in the media that he was a draft dodger and had arrests covered up. Even a protagonist is not 100% honest in this political world that the movie has created. The film decides to make itself "real" by presenting real life political problems. Perhaps this was done to show the audience that the message the film is conveying is in fact a truthful one. The scene where Jack is addressing the factory workers is a good example of this. Stanton states that he cannot fix the factory workers situation because companies will always export jobs to cheaper countries. He takes an honest approach so he can focus on his primary political stance of education. This technique is rarely seen by politicians in real life as some would rather lie to get votes.Primary Colors main battle is between political power and morals. Jack Stanton prides himself on being fair and honest, and this creates a good protagonist. The character conflict arises when he is pulled into a dirty political fight where his character's morality is tested. He decides to fight dirty by digging up implicating material. The moral representative in the film then shifts to the Libby Holden character. She believes, as Jack used to, that campaigning should just be about political stances rather than hurting competitors. Jack decides to use reason by saying if he doesn't use the implicating material then someone else will. This places the viewer in a dilemma where they must decide what is right to themselves. In a way the Henry character is an outlet that the audience can side with.In the end Jack Stanton decides to take the middle route by alerting the competitor of the material and not going to the media. The film shows that politicians are not perfect people; in fact they are from it. Most of them have made mistakes; some are just more honest than others. Perhaps it is just better to focus on their political stances and agendas rather than focus on their past mistakes.

evanston_dad What on paper sounds like the ingredients of a smart, snappy political satire instead makes for an over-long and lifeless dud of a movie.Mike Nichols directs John Travolta and Emma Thompson as a political couple clearly modeled on Bill and Hillary Clinton as they make their bid for President and First Lady of the U.S. But the movie has no spark at all, and it drifts aimlessly and lethargically to its conclusion.The only person who is able to breathe some life into the proceedings is Kathy Bates as a firecracker of a political consultant. Once she departs the film, her presence is sorely missed.Grade: C-