Dope for a better tomorrow

As the presidential campaigns kick into high gear, the nation's attention is firmly entrenched in politics, so what better time than now to poke fun at the election process? The Campaign sets out to do just that as funnymen Will Ferrell and Zach Galifianakis square off as opponents vying for a North Carolina Congressional seat. With a comedic pairing like that, you would expect big laughs, but like most politicians, these two are unable to make good on their promises.

Ferrell plays Cam Brady, a four-time Congressman who doesn't think twice about his actions since he believes he'll be running unopposed. Enter Marty Huggins, a Southern simpleton who gets coaxed into running by the nefarious Hotch brothers, who want a man they can control in office so that they can get away with running sweatshops in the U.S. The brothers are played with mustache-twirling evilness by Dan Ackroyd and John Lithgow. They are a thinly veiled parody of the real-life Koch brothers, but I found myself comparing them more to the evil rich old men from Trading Places

Both men begin to go all out in order to make sure they win. This should have made for some comedic gold, but in this Olympic year, its a bronze, at best. Part of the problem is one that plagues so many comedies - advertising fatigue. Several of the film's best jokes have been played to death in trailers and television ads. Half the fun in a good joke is the surprise it provides and that gets taken away when you've seen 40 times before. Something like Will Ferrell punching a baby felt fresh seeing it in the trailer, but comes off flat by the time you see the movie.

The bigger issue though is the film's attempts at mocking the political process. If you pay any attention to the nation around you, you not only know how politics work, but you also know the humor that can come from people trying to run for office. Hardly anything offered in The Campaign feels fresh or original. Shows like The Colbert Report offer more biting satire and witty insight into election coverage on a nightly basis than this film can muster up throughout its entire runtime.

Perhaps the film's biggest misfire is focusing on how political candidates are mere puppets for people with real power and wealth. That's not necessarily the wrong approach but when you've got Ferrell and Galifianakis as your leads, the focus should be on them and the characters they create. We really don't get much insight into who these men are or why they behave the way they do. I think this could have been a much sharper film if they had made these two campaigning against each other for a smaller, local office. This past season of Parks and Recreation proves that small-town elections can produce big laughs. Taking that approach not only yields good laughs, but it also allows you to focus more on the characters and the community, whereas the approach they took here just makes you depressed as you realize that too much of what they're doing here is actually happening in real campaigns.

Perhaps I'm being too hard on the movie. After all, despite my criticisms about the choices they made, Ferrell and Galifianakis are still very funny here. Even when a script isn't as sharp as it could be, these two talented guys find a way to milk laughs out of everything. Those who are less concerned with political commentary and just looking to laugh should have no reservations about checking this out. You'll likely also enjoy the efforts of a lot of the supporting cast, including Galifianakis wife, kids, and pets who have some hilarious skeletons in the closet.

Like most candidates that we support, The Campaign is flawed and far from perfect. But you also realize that it's a better choice than most other options. That said, we also cannot be complacent and just blindly accept everything that's offered to us. We know these guys can do better and we should always demand the best from them. I think that's a platform we can all support. Grade: B-

March on Washington

Finishing up the second part of the double feature I saw last weekend, we now come to The Ides of March, a political drama that has Oscar aspirations about a man with presidential aspirations. In this case that man is George Clooney, who also directed and co-wrote this film. The film, based on the play Farragut North, examines the dilemmas faced by everyone involved in trying to be, or help someone to be the next leader of the free world.

While Clooney is the candidate running for president, the film spends more time with his staff as they run his campaign. At the forefront of that is Stephen Meyers (played by Ryan Gosling), he's a hotshot assistant who claims to have already worked on more campaigns than anyone ten years his senior. That experience doesn't seem to help him much as he quickly gets caught up in the game of dirty politics. He takes a meeting with the chief of staff of the guy Clooney is running against (played by Paul Giamatti). When Clooney's chief of staff (played by Phillip Seymour Hoffman) finds out about the meeting, he's none too pleased.

When you have a cast that features four talented individuals like this film does, you expect to have scene after scene of scenary chewing taking place and yet most of the dialogue between these characters falls a bit flat. I was expecting these scenes to be more explosive where you really felt the emotion behind their words. Perhaps I've gotten too spoiled by Aaron Sorkin dialogue and expected too much here, but I just didn't find these talky scenes to be as gripping as I expected them too. This is not to say they are bad by any means. I was just suprised I didn't love them more.

A lot of their discussions and strategizing are a result of the actions of a young staffer on Clooney's campaign played by Evan Rachel Wood. She takes an interest in Gosling's character, which causes a number of problems. Without spoiling too much about what she does, I will say that I didn't buy into this subplot. Her actions and motivations don't seem realistic and they drag the film down. When it's focused on her, it strays from being a political potboiled into an area of tawdry melodrama.

What this film does do right though is give us a fair, albeit frustrating depiction of the nature of politics. You see as you watch these characters operate that anyone who enters the political game is unable to come out of it unscathed. Everyone has to get a little dirty, it's just a matter of whether or not you embrace it or not. Those who think their ideals can rise above the mudslinging are only fooling themselves. Some moviegoes may be frustrated with that theme since it prevents them from having anybody that they can root for or rally behind in this film.

Though I've pointed out some flaws in this film, it is by no means a bad film. These flaws only get pointed out because the expectations for this film were so high in the first place. In that way, The Ides of March may be very similar to real life presidential candidates. While they make a good first impression, the more you peel back the layers the more disappointment you find. That should in no way suggest that you should ignore this movie like so many people ignore potential candidates. Though this may not win the equivalent of the Oval Office come Academy Award season, it still has a lot to say that should be heard. Grade: B