Politics of director show up in film

Now that DreamWorks has released "The Contender" on video, America can see close-up the fuming intolerance of Big Hollywood. Yet in the weeks that have followed the last-minute Clinton pardons, tanned California liberals must be wondering if defending their ex-savior has been worthy of their time.\nThis film makes a clear statement about a particular Democrat in the Oval Office, and its release date, less than a month before the 2000 elections, shows strategic political positioning.\nLet's face it: post-term, Liberals and Democrats have abandoned the USS Bubba en masse. Never has the world seen so many rats wearing life preservers, dog-paddling toward the shore. The Rich pardon and a few of the other pardons might still yet tar the Democrats. \n"The Contender" was a great piece of propaganda at the time it was strategically released, but now it can easily be seen as a pitiable period piece, a case-study in denial.\nLike many stupid Hollywood attempts at commentary, I found much of its premise silly, but overall "The Contender" is recommended viewing. Generally well-reviewed, the film is a smoothly executed sermon against moderate-conservative American values. Its heroine is a Democratic senator from Ohio, its villain is a Republican congressman from Ohio, and its author is a former film critic from Los Angeles, Rod Lurie. Chances are Lurie doesn't know Middle America very well -- except what he hears from Norman Lear, Rob Reiner and other left-wing Hollywood ministers of culture.\nThe movie's biggest flaw is pretending that Joan Allen's character, Laine Hanson, is so left-wing that voting against confirming her as the new vice president wouldn't be a cakewalk for any member. Yet a vote against her is seen as an increasingly treacherous path for any Congressperson who dares to think freely.\nIn the movie, Hanson, set to replace a dead vice president, has to testify before the more unfavorably viewed U.S. House of Representatives -- which is unlikely in itself. She boldly declares she wants to remove guns -- all guns -- from every home in America. She states she is absolutely pro-choice -- but gets into a screaming match over the issue. Worst of all, she seems to mock other's religious beliefs as "fairy tales." This is Hollywood's idea of a good vice president? \nLurie's heroes, all Democrats, imply that voting against her -- even if ignoring contemptible sexual charges aimed at smearing her -- would still be "misogyny." But give me Dan Quayle over Hanson any day. \n"The Contender" left me befuddled. Everyone has heard the old line that Clinton, having almost been lynched by evil Republicans, was the first "black" president. Is he also the first "female" president as well?\n"The Contender" couldn't even be consistent in its point. While testifying, Hanson admits that as a Republican House member (she switched parties -- what a total Hollywood fantasy), she voted to impeach Clinton -- and doesn't regret it. So Clinton's sex scandal was worse than her alleged one? \nOf course, that's not the movie's point. The moral is you shouldn't ask about sexual history in the first place. Yet Lurie's bias is clear. This is a movie about Clinton and his unfortunate humiliation. But Clarence Thomas probably deserved his. DreamWorks meant very much for this to be a pro-Clinton morality play. But even in the post-Monica/ pre-Rich-pardon scandal era, they felt the need to take Clinton off the table and put him under the desk (so to speak).\nThe movie even bashes The Drudge Report, which "broke" the Monica scandal on the Internet, but not because of leaks from Republicans. You can feel the hatred in the actors' voices as they speak of the thinly veiled fictional "Nichols Report." Misguided anger, I say. (Drudge scooped Newsweek, not Republicans, which was investigating rumors.) \nActor and producer Gary Oldman, the "evil" Republican, was outraged after the film's release. His family has ties to the British Conservative Party, and he and the film's other producer charged that Spielberg (and others) put the script and editing through a pro-Gore grinder. \n"If your names are Spielberg, Katzenberg and Geffen," co-producer Urbanski told Premiere magazine in October, "you can't have a film with a Republican character who is at all sympathetic being released on Oct. 13."\n"The Contender" delighted the Hollywood elite. It elicited early Oscar talk (sans Oldman), and Allen and Jeff Bridges have since been nominated for Academy Awards. Bridges is a long-shot but Allen is a dark horse, all because of Hollywood politics. \nGiving the movie four stars, top film critic (and Gore supporter) Roger Ebert wrote in The Chicago Sun-Times, "When I asked its star, Jeff Bridges, if the plot was a veiled reference to Monicagate, he smiled. 'Veiled?' (Bridges) said. 'I don't think it's so veiled.'"\nPerhaps they wish they could veil it now. Their hero is probably wondering how to deny the next wrongdoing. And it won't be as original as "The Contender." In fact, it will probably be something like "I did not have sexual relations with that donor"