THE FRONT RUNNER : Official Reviews (SPOILERS )

[jo]

Er… what kind of a review is this??

Assigns 0 of 4 stars to the movie. Who is this critic ( he sounds as freaky as the name of his site)

www.filmfreakcentral.net/ffc/2018/09/telluride-18-the-front-runner.html

[hughmanity]

I saw this yesterday, and what I thought of it and its author would get me kicked off this board!!

Sept 4, 2018 16:54:04 GMT -5 jo said:

Er… what kind of a review is this??

Assigns 0 of 4 stars to the movie. Who is this critic ( he sounds as freaky as the name of his site)

www.filmfreakcentral.net/ffc/2018/09/telluride-18-the-front-runner.html

[jo]

Speak up, hughmanity


No intellectual depth, no artistic appreciation, no filmmaking art intelligence, no sense of humor, such reckless command of the language, no-nothing freak!

He says he is from Colorado, the state that Senator Hart represented for 2 terms. Maybe there is a grudge somewhere!

It's nothing but a hate statement! What a poor excuse for a critic!


Rotten Tomatoes should be ashamed of itself for allowing such garbage on their pages!


Jo

[hughmanity]

Ugghhh.  I had seen this independently of RT. Disgusted to learn it is included--thought my eyes were deceiving me when I saw 0 stars. Talk about skewing the rating average.  The article below perhaps sheds some light on how/why this hack is unfortunately allowed.



Rotten Tomatoes Expands Its “Tomatometer-Approved” Critics to Include More Writers and Platforms
Your tweets still won’t count.
By RACHEL WITHERS

AUG 28, 20181:21 PM

Rotten Tomatoes, the internet’s most influential review aggregator, has updated its critics policy, broadening the scope of whose views can be counted toward its make-or-break Tomatometer score. The Tomatometer score is the percentage of the reviews that have been positive, supposedly reflecting the “collective opinion” of critics, but critics have so far been limited to those who write for established publications, a group that, according to numerous studies, is heavily slanted toward critics who are white and male.

Reviews from established publications will still be included automatically, regardless of who wrote them, but the new rules allow for the inclusion of individual critics, regardless of where they publish. The difference between reviews from respected publications and respected critics will be more or less tomato, tomahto. Individual critics will need to apply to be “Tomatometer-approved” and will have to meet set criteria: namely that they have written consistently for at least two years about film or TV at a non-self-published site. However exceptions can be made for self-published writers if they reflect Rotten Tomatoes’ “key values” of insight (not just a plot summary), audience (those who reach one), quality (those who can use grammar), and dedication (some kind of demonstration of commitment). Your tweets probably still won’t count.

Rotten Tomatoes is also expanding the criteria to include nonwritten reviews: those delivered on TV and radio or in podcasts and digital video series. These too must meet certain eligibility requirements. Approved podcasts/video series must have had consistent output for at least two years and demonstrated engagement, while critics who like to wax lyrical about film and TV must appear regularly and consistently on engaging platforms. Your Facebook live reviews nobody asked for probably won’t count either.

In a statement released Tuesday, Rotten Tomatoes said that the changes were about improving diversity and inclusion:

Rotten Tomatoes’ revamped criteria have an increased focus on the critic’s individual qualifications and body of work, rather than basing Tomatometer approval primarily on their publication or employer. This strategy will allow for a wider and more diverse pool of critics’ perspectives to be included in the Tomatometer.

While the new rules lay out strict boundaries for consideration—a minimum of 30,000 subscribers per video channel, for example—they also state that critics “reaching underrepresented groups” will be given case-by-case consideration even if they don’t meet all the criteria.

Rotten Tomatoes has also announced a $100,000 grant program, to assist independent critics with the high costs associated with attending film festivals. The first $25,000 will go to the American Friends of TIFF fund for the Toronto International Film Festival in September.


<abbr class="o-timestamp time" data-timestamp="1536111057000" title="Sept 4, 2018 21:30:57 GMT -4">Sept 4, 2018 21:30:57 GMT -4</abbr> jo said:

Sept 4, 2018 20:30:57 GMT -5 jo said:

Speak up, hughmanity


No intellectual depth, no artistic appreciation, no filmmaking art intelligence, no sense of humor, such reckless command of the language, no-nothing freak!

He says he is from Colorado, the state that Senator Hart represented for 2 terms. Maybe there is a grudge somewhere!

It's nothing but a hate statement! What a poor excuse for a critic!


Rotten Tomatoes should be ashamed of itself for allowing such garbage on their pages!


Jo

[jo]

The funny thing is -- even with the criticism from those early critics who gave the movie a thumbs-down ( Indiewire and EW), the points they bring out are arguable but can be valid from their perspective. There is also acknowledgment that Hugh's portrayal is noteworthy...whereas this freak simply disses everything. That loses the objectivity expected from a critic.

Maybe RT will review their standards after this glaring faux pas by a supposed critic?

I am reminded of what CarouselKathy observed about how some critics expect to see another movie compared to what the film auteur intended. Most specifically --

*Why is there a need for a closure...when the intention of Reitman is to bring the different perspectives in this retrospective. Many of the more experienced critics and movie press noted how well Reitman has channeled director Robert Altman's signature style of presenting the issues from different prisms. This invites the audience to think...to think which perspective they think works out or they favor or they wish would happen

*One of the negative critics talks about how the movie "side-eyes" the media and puts Hart in a more positive light. Ahem - do they feel defensive? The movie press is part of media -- and the same practices of tabloid journalism is probably more obvious with them ( look at all the click bait articles) to highlight something negative about a film star to invite attention to the work of the movie press! Where is the objectivity


Jo

[jo]

Some social media reactions -- from movie press reporters/critics...at TIFF

David Reddish

@thegaymagneto
Just saw THE FRONT RUNNER. The film features a wonderful performance by Hugh Jackman, and a fine supporting turn from Vera Farmiga. Jason Reitman goes into flamboyant director mode, but he tips his hand one too many times about his own sexual politics. ***of****

Jason LeRoy
@excessfaggage

Although the more I think about it, the more tone-deaf it is that Reitman seems ultimately more critical of the media than the man, and that he makes Hart the noble but flawed protagonist. At least he spares a few minutes to consider the consequences faced by Hart’s mistress.


Jason LeRoy
@excessfaggage

THE FRONT RUNNER: Jason Reitman continues his 2018 redemption tour with this engrossing political drama about Gary Hart’s 1988 primary scandal. Hugh Jackman is very effective as Hart. Gets a bit bogged down underlining its many points of current topicality. B+
#TIFF18

Lucas Salgado
‏@lucas_salgado

The Front Runner talvez seja o filme mais burocrático de Jason Reitman. Hugh Jackman se esforça, mas a trama nunca é envolvente de verdade. #TIFF2018

Translated from Portuguese by
Microsoft
The Front Runner may be Jason Reitman's most bureaucratic film. Hugh Jackman strives, but the plot is never really engaging. #TIFF2018

⁠

[jo]

A full review --

www.vanyaland.com/2018/09/07/tiff-review-jason-reitmans-the-front-runner-exhausting/

[jo]

Rebecca wrote the special feature on Hugh Jackman for VANITY FAIR.

[jo]

Jason LeRoy
@excessfaggage

Although the more I think about it, the more tone-deaf it is that Reitman seems ultimately more critical of the media than the man, and that he makes Hart the noble but flawed protagonist. At least he spares a few minutes to consider the consequences faced by Hart’s mistress.

It looks like there is a bit of resentment or at least some discomfort that media ( whom this tweeter represents) is profiled as less than noble in its pursuit of its profession.

Again, the issue of the reviewer reacting to a movie he wanted to see, not the movie focus that the film auteur wanted to project comes to mind. Can the media be objective in how they view the movie message?


Jo

[hughmanity]

Another full review and more positive


www.screendaily.com/reviews/the-front-runner-toronto-review/5132435.article

[jo]

Can't read the review -- says I have read my share of their free viewings

Any chance you can reprint the best parts of the review, hughmanity

[jo]

Kate Aurthur
‏Verified account
@kateaurthur

Belated: Hugh Jackman is fine as Hart, though he's not in full charisma mode, more like a dulled Logan with presidential aspirations.

Again, did she consider that this could be the true persona of Gary Hart himself? I think many critics and fans have a fairly set view of Hugh's personality and own charisma, his acting persona in past movies, his style of acting ( unfortunately, usually tied up with action hero roles or musical roles, either very strong or very showy personalities). I think since this is his first real biopic ( Showman was more fictionalized), many cannot separate the Hugh Jackman persona from the biopic role he is trying to portray. Also, in dramatic movies he has portrayed ( Prisoners/The Fountain/The Prestige/even Les Miserables), the roles had strong personas associated with the portrayed roles. Maybe this is really a more understated role ( which some critics did actually appreciate well)?

Jo

[hughmanity]

Sept 7, 2018 19:08:41 GMT -5 jo said:

Can't read the review -- says I have read my share of their free viewings

Any chance you can reprint the best parts of the review, hughmanity

REVIEWS
'The Front Runner': Toronto Review
BY ALLAN HUNTER7 SEPTEMBER 2018

Hugh Jackman stars as the 1987 Presidential candidate Gary Hart in Jason Reitman’s political drama

The Front Runner c bron studios

SOURCE: BRON STUDIOS

Dir Jason Reitman. US. 2018. 113 mins

The dramatic fall of 1987 US Presidential hopeful Gary Hart proved that the private indiscretions of public figures could destroy political careers - at least back then. The Front Runner captures the moral dilemmas and changing attitudes inspired by the Hart story with sprawling, Altmanesque brio. The combination of breezily entertaining political turmoil and personal tragedy may lack a sharp focus but it still has enough juice to attract audiences who also sought out The Ides Of March (2011) or The Post (2017).

A punchy, absorbing political drama


In 1987, Colorado Senator Hart (Hugh Jackman) seemed the ideal figure to carry the hopes of a Democratic Party deeply demoralised after Ronald Reagan’s two term Presidency. A handsome charmer with lofty principles and crowd-pleasing eloquence, he was significantly ahead in the polls for the party’s Presidential nomination.

Based on Matt Bai’s book ’All The Truth Is Out: The Week Politics Went Tabloid’, The Front Runner focuses on three key weeks in the Hart campaign. Director Jason Reitman uses overlapping conversations, multilayered sound and a fast, snappy pace to capture all the backroom hustle and bustle of a political campaign. Hart’s young, devoted team work tirelessly to promote his candidacy, the respectful press pack look for a fresh angle, trading banter and stories as if they had strayed from a production of The Front Page.

It becomes clear that Hart has no stomach for the showbusiness side of running for office. He is a serious politician, not a performer and refuses to make his private life into public property. When the Miami Herald break a story that exposes his infidelity, it is the start of a feeding frenzy that becomes a defining moment in the shifting relationship between the media and the powerful.

The initial bouncy, boisterous cut-and-thrust tone of The Front Runner is very engaging. When the events turn more serious, the film itself moves into a more measured, thoughtful groove. Hugh Jackman’s Hart is a righteous figure and the actor does nothing to soften the fact that Hart was arrogant enough to consider himself invincible and naive enough to believe that his private life was nobody’s business.

Hart is a victim of his own womanising but also of changing times. He fumes against a media reduced to gutter press tactics of doorstepping his wife Lee (Vera Farmiga) or hiding in bushes to capture intimate photos. His tragedy is in not realising that there can be no privacy for a man aspiring to the highest office in the land.

Jackman is a solid presence at the centre of The Front Runner but the ensemble nature of the storytelling means that he doesn’t dominate to the detriment of other figures. Reitman draws out the personal impact on several individuals, providing speeches and standout moments that define the characters and their dilemmas. Notable performances include a poignant Sara Paxton as the object of Hart’s affections Donna Rice, Farmiga as his steely, long-suffering wife and a terrific Mamoudou Athie as a young Washington Post journalist taught bitter lessons about journalistic responsibility.

The Front Runner trades lightly in hindsight humour (“ Do you think anyone will vote for Bush?) and reflections on the implications of Hart’s fate to the modern era. Hart does suggest that the intense media scrutiny on politicians may stop the brightest and the best from even entering the arena. He also remarks that America may simply winding up getting the Presidents it deserves.

The Front Runner may cover a lot of ground and raise more questions about morality and the media than it can ever answer, but it remains a punchy, absorbing political drama.

Production companies: Bron Studios, Right Of Way

Worldwide distribution: Sony Pictures

Producers: Jason Reitman, Helen Estabrook, Aaron L. Gilbert

Screenplay: Matt Bai, Jay Carson, Jason Reitman based on All The Truth Is Out by Bai

Production design: Steve Saklad

Editing: Stefan Grube

Cinematography: Eric Steelberg

Music: Rob Simonsen

Main cast: Hugh Jackman, Vera Farmiga, J.K. Simmons, Alfred Molina

[jo]

Many thanks -- that is a very well-thought out review! It did not insist on a different character portrayal or character emphasis that other critics and movie press people seem to have pre-conceivably etched in their minds. It appreciated how the different prisms are presented, with the audience leaving to make their own conclusions on how to deal with the contrasting perspectives. I am not an expert on dramaturgy both it sounds more like a very absorbing play in the theatre!


Jo

[jo]

A BTW moment that crossed my mind --

The Harts have been married for 60 years now -- how many folks go that distance? I wonder - did this personal tragedy ( Gary Hart lost his dreams for the presidency and Lee Hart having had to face the possible breakup of their marriage) actually strengthened their relationship eventually...and led to their long-lasting marriage at this point.


Jo

[jo]

Social media reactions --

[jo]

The Guardian of the UK has thought through the focus and ramifications of the Reitman political drama!

I wonder if the perspective of critics who are from outside the USA understandably provides a more thoughtful sense of objectivity?

www.theguardian.com/film/2018/sep/08/the-front-runner-review-hugh-jackman-makes-headlines-in-nuanced-drama

The Front Runner review – Hugh Jackman makes headlines in nuanced drama

4 out of 5 stars.

Starring as disgraced US senator Gary Hart, the Oscar nominee delivers a thoughtful performance in a film about morality in both politics and the newsroom

Benjamin Lee
@benfraserlee
Sat 8 Sep 2018 07.09 BST
Last modified on Sat 8 Sep 2018 07.27 BST



‘He plays Hart with either an understated dignity or an uneasy unknowability’ … Hugh Jackman in The Front Runner.



What is newsworthy? What should those working at a paper of record be devoting their time to while figuring out what can be filed away as frippery? It’s certainly a debate that’s plagued newsrooms more than ever since Donald Trump slithered his way into the White House with political journalists reduced to covering a daily whirlpool of sex, sleaze and stupidity.

In Jason Reitman’s new film The Front Runner, he takes us back to 1988 as US senator Gary Ryan, played by Hugh Jackman, seemed like a no brainer for the Democratic presidential nomination. He was handsome, charming, intelligent and his relative youth (he was 25 years younger than sitting president Ronald Reagan) made him popular with younger voters. But he was also a private man, uneasy when attention moved away from his potential policies and onto his personal life. He didn’t see how posing with his wife and daughter on the front of People magazine would benefit him as a politician.

The irony of being so guarded was that journalists were even more eager to find out about his life behind closed doors and not without reason. For a while, whispers of infidelity had followed Hart, nothing substantiated but a lingering suspicion that he was something of a womaniser. As rumours turned into a legitimate, albeit rushed and improperly handled, story, Hart was forced to finally open up to the public.



With a script co-written by Reitman, policy advisor Jay Carson and journalist Matt Bai, whose book serves as inspiration, as well as a deft infusion of real footage from the time, there’s an authenticity underpinning the portrayal of events in The Front Runner that lifts it above the less-than-groundbreaking set-up. We’ve seen dramatised stories of cheating politicians a great many times but there’s a refreshing lack of sensationalism, given the writing team, and events feel presented truthfully but also with style. The dialogue has a less smug Sorkinesque beat to it and Reitman choreographs scenes of chaos with finesse, from frenzied campaign headquarters to tense newsroom meetings.



Hart was an idealist whose initial naivety ultimately transformed into something closer to willful ignorance or perhaps even arrogance and the film offers a nuanced take on both him and the events that unfold around him. Can someone who is untrustworthy as a husband be trustworthy as a politician? Should your personal life dictate what opportunities you’re afforded in your professional life? There aren’t easy answers provided in the film and Hart is neither a villain or a victim. Despite Jackman’s undeniable movie star charm, he plays Hart with either an understated dignity or an uneasy unknowability depending on the scene. It’s one of his better performances and not many actors would be able to combine the believable presence of a much-loved politician with this lingering shadow following him everywhere he goes.


Reitman shows the effect that Hart’s indiscretions and attempts to deny them have on both the young campaigners and journalists who surrounded him. So many of them wanted him to represent the future and there’s a quiet tragedy to its dissolution, viewed most powerfully through his closest female employee, played with conflicted empathy by Molly Ephraim, who sees the callous way he abandons the woman he had an affair with. There’s a chilling cut to her reaction during a final press conference as she views a man she once admired fall from grace.

Aside from Jackman’s strong lead performance, there are also small, impactful turns from JK Simmons as Hart’s campaign manager and a slightly underused Vera Farmiga, as his betrayed wife, who delivers a poignant speech in the final act. The film’s avoidance of invented conflict and its steadfast refusal to instruct audiences how they should feel about Hart, how it was handled and the ensuing consequences might frustrate some and there are admitted shortcomings. There are a few sags after a dynamite first act and the script skimps on some of the details of Donna Rice, the woman Hart was linked to, and instead we see her as little more than a naive pretty face.

Sony has rather strangely moved The Front Runner to open on midterm election day, something that strikes one as a mere publicity stunt rather than an attempt to make a comment about the current state of US politics. Given the timing, some might also see it as an attack on the press but there’s no ambiguity about whether or not this was fake news, just how, when and where it should be reported.

The Front Runner is showing at the Toronto film festival and will be released in the US on 6 November and in the UK on 25 January 2019

[jo]

Another favorable review that focuses more on the media involvement and how that public instrument of communication has changed in its approach --

collider.com/the-front-runner-review/#tiff-2018

TIFF 2018

‘The Front Runner’ Review: How Journalism Became the Monster We Needed | TIFF 2018
by Matt Goldberg September 8, 2018

Do you remember when a major politician could cheat on his wife and no one would cover it because political journalists felt it wasn’t their business? I don’t, and that’s probably because the Gary Hart scandal happened when I was four. Jason Reitman’s The Front Runner plunges into the question about whether the private lives of public servants should be made public, and it does a solid job of making the case that while our media may have become more tawdry, it also finally held men accountable for sleazy behavior. Although the movie tries to offer up Hart as a counterbalance to raise the question of whether his private life is anyone’s business, his indignation comes off as whiny and self-serving rather than a principled belief.

After coming in second for the Democratic nomination in 1984, Colorado Senator Gary Hart (Hugh Jackman) was the obvious front runner for not only the Democratic nomination in 1988 when the film takes place, but to outright win the Presidency. However, as the movie notes, a lot can change in three weeks, and that’s exactly what happened with Hart when Miami Herald reporters discover an attractive woman coming and going from Hart’s Washington, D.C. townhouse. When confronted by the reporters about his relationship with the woman, Hart’s refusal to answer questions ignites a debate both in the campaign and among journalists about whether Hart’s private life should be up for discussion.


Reitman revels in the nitty-gritty of both the journalism world and the campaign world. Characters frequently talk over each other, there are false starts, screw-ups, and it all feels incredibly natural and lived-in. It almost feels like Reitman is doing a riff on the documentary The War Room but with more control over characters and conversations. It’s in these scenes where the film really comes alive, and you can see a different film where Hart is almost a background character to the machinations of reporters and staffers. But movies cost money, so there needs to be a big character, and Hugh Jackman is how you fund the story of a washed up politician from 1988. But Reitman never loses sight of what he’s really trying to explore, which is how the news media needed to change and adapt.

Although there’s a bit of a glaring oversight that the reason the media felt it needed to change was because it had whiffed so badly on Nixon and Watergate (Woodward and Bernstein chased down a story lots of other reporters missed), the film still keeps its focus on reporters wrestling with whether or not Hart’s personal life is in bounds. For Hart, he believes he only needs to talk about issues and ideas and that should be enough, and you can see reporters skittishly avoiding whether they should even raise the issue of Hart’s separation from his wife (Vera Farmiga) even though the couple had reconciled. Watching journalism change, grow, and develop into something more controversial but also more potent is exhilarating, and it’s the best aspect of The Front Runner.


Unfortunately, you also have to deal with the Hart scenes. Jackman plays the character well, showing off Hart’s quick wit and why he was the front-runner in the first place. The problem with Hart is that he’s ultimately not very special. You can walk out of The Front Runner thinking that if reporters hadn’t dug into Hart’s affairs, they would have found it with another politician eventually. It’s not like Hart was the first or the last politician to cheat on his wife, and just because he truly believes in “the process”, you get the sense he believes in it because reporters looking the other way serves him best, not because he believes that privacy is an essential value.

Eventually, you can see Reitman taking the side of the press because of how it intersects with how men treat women. Although it has a female character literally spell it out, the point is worth making that men like Hart, men in power, need to be held accountable because they treat women as disposable. I would go even further and point out that Hart’s behavior showed that he preferred doing what was easy (sleeping around) rather than doing what was right (being faithful or getting a divorce). The Front Runner doesn’t say so much that the media became inarguably better, but that it certainly shouldn’t bow to the whims of men like Gary Hart.


What I like best about The Front Runner is that it’s not only an enjoyable watch filled with terrific actors, but also that it’s a movie that will have you talking afterwards. It has ideas that are worth discussing and still incredibly relevant. You may disagree with Reitman or you may think he makes his points well. You may find Hart to be a tragic figure where we potentially lost a great leader because of juicy revelations about his private life. But no matter how you look at it, it’s definitely worth telling, and Reitman does the story justice.

Rating: B

The Front Runner hits theaters on November 6th

[jo]

This is also positive and gives a special nod to Hugh's performance --

weliveentertainment.com/welivefilm/tiff-2018-review-the-front-runner/

TIFF 2018 Review: The Front Runner

The Front Runner chronicles the story of Senator Gary Hart as he tries to win the Democratic nominee to run for President in 1988. Leading up to the Democratic Convention, he was the front-runner and looking like the next President of the United States until things took a turn for the worse. When a reporter from Miami uncovers the fact that he may have a mistress and not necessarily lead the family life that the American people expect, things go wrong.

Hugh Jackman plays Gary Hart and does fantastic work with the material. There are two distinct parts of Gary Hart we are privy to in the film: the Democratic Senator and the everyday man who believes in the privacy of his own life. When that privacy is invaded or questioned by the media or even his friends, Gary turns on the defensive and is adamant that his ability to lead and his private matters have nothing to do with each other.

These intense moments with Jackman are really where the film takes off. The scenes with him and reporter, AJ Parker (Mamadou Athie) are some of the best in the film. AJ struggles with his convictions and whether or not Gary is right that his private life should stay private. Their scenes are just ripe with tension and emotion and are easily the best moments in the film. Vera Farmiga who plays Gary’s wife is great but was given too little in my opinion. I think she could’ve been even better with a bit more material.

The dialogue in the film is sharply written and delivered expertly by the main and supporting cast. There are a few scenes with the campaigners who work for Gary and they are sitting in a room with just rapid-fire lines and humor shooting back and forth at each other. It feels a bit like the show Newsroom in these moments.


I love the questions that the film asks and brings to the forefront of the audience’s minds. They make us question if public and private life really matter when it comes to the ability to lead. This, in turn, rolls into the role of the media and their coverage of political candidates. In this film, we are faced with the question of how the media covers politics as well. They’ve turned politicians into more of celebrities than politicians. It begs us to question if that is how we’ve ended up where we are now in the United States.


Where I have issues with the film come from the pacing and the runtime of the film. At 113 minutes the film is far too long and starts to lose momentum in the middle of the film. It spends far too much time on the development of the scandal and that makes the film lose a bit of the edge it has. Toward the end, we get the film back on track and really to the core of the film, so it does pay off in the end.

The Front Runner has a lot of fascinating points that it manages to make, led by a stellar Hugh Jackman performance. Despite the slight pacing issues and bloated run-time, it is the best kind of film: the one that has you questioning the state of the world.

7 - GOOD

[jo]

Short review at VOGUE.COM --

www.vogue.com/article/five-things-to-know-toronto-international-film-festival-movies

5. Hugh Jackman in The Front Runner

Photo: Courtesy of TIFF

Is there anything this guy can’t do?

In the last 18 months, his Wolverine has slashed the bad guys to ribbons in that series’s final installment, Logan, and his singing P.T. Barnum, has headlined the wholly unexpected musical hit The Greatest Showman. Now, he gives a crackerjack turn as a real-life political figure in Jason Reitman’s jaunty The Front Runner, which chronicles the three-week fall of Colorado Senator Gary Hart, the leading Democratic contender in the 1988 presidential election. It was Hart’s deal to claim, not a little sanctimoniously, that he was the candidate of “ideas.” And he was. Trouble is, this married man was also the candidate of “zipper problems.” The movie follows the collapse of his campaign after the Miami Herald stakes out his house and breaks the story of his affair with Donna Rice (Sara Paxton), a young woman he met on a boat named, ironically enough, Monkey Business.


In telling this story, Reitman aspires to something of an Altmanesque sweep, putting Hart and his wife, Lee (Vera Farmiga, tremendously good), at the center of a circus that includes consultants, staffers, reporters, paparazzi—the whole mad political swirl at a pivotal point in the media’s coverage of candidates. Hart became the first major presidential candidate to have his campaign shipwrecked by journalists digging into, and reporting on, his personal shenanigans, a problem he only made worse by his arrogance, coldness, and insistence that his privacy was being invaded and that the media’s prying into his life set a terrible precedent for how politics would be covered in the future. Hart often seemed as cold-blooded as a lizard, but on this, he wasn’t wrong. And Jackman makes us see that.

There seems to be a growing perception in the latest reviews that this movie is not all about Gary Hart's charisma and cold arrogance...but that the events that affected his presidential run was the beginning of the era of a media that has become invasive of he private lives of public personas.


Jo

[carouselkathy]

Isn't that the point of the book as well? Until the Gary Hart scandal, political "Monkey Business" was mostly ignored by the press. Hamilton might be an exception, as his philandering may have caused a scandal that, had he lived, prevented his rise to a higher office. FDR saw us through the Great Depression & World War II. JFK used diplomacy to prevent nuclear war during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Their private lives were not exploited by tabloid press. Now the private lives of candidates and Presidents are covered by mainstream news. Scandals get more air time than regular news. I wonder what Gary Hart thinks about political coverage nowadays?

[jo]

theweeklyspoon.com/movies/the-front-runner-tiff-18-review/


Good to see that the movie is being taken now to the serious and relevant theme that it has espoused.

[jo]

freshfiction.tv/tiff-review-the-front-runner-is-hugh-jackman-like-youve-never-seen-him-before/

[jo]

www.thehollywoodnews.com/2018/09/09/the-front-runner-review-022130/

TIFF 2018: ‘The Front Runner’ Review: Dir. Jason Reitman (2018)
By Paul Heath - Sep 9, 2018


The Front Runner review: Political dramas don’t always translate that well internationally, but The Front Runner is a Jason Reitman film, the latest from a filmmaker who has managed to impress with his last few features, particularly his last offering Tully. His latest is a different affair, if you pardon the pun, and focusses upon the 1988 U.S. presidential campaign, and on one particular individual, the front-runner of the title, Gary Hart, here played by Hugh Jackman.


The Front Runner review [TIFF]

The feature is largely set over a period of three weeks, the campaign for presidential nominations in full swing. Our man who-would-be-president, Hart, is way ahead in the polls, an almost cert to be the Democratic nomination for the ’88 election, which would have ultimately put him up against Bush.

The Reagan-era drama actually kicks off four years earlier with Hart conceding defeat in the previous run, the dynamic opening featuring a very theatrical one-take effort, culminating with Jackman’s Hart revealing that, despite defeat, his long-term plan is already in motion, revealing to a colleague over a late night drink that now the American people in whole know who her is, standing him in good stead for the next effort.


We swiftly fast-forward to that next effort, but the key plotline for this film kicks in towards the end of the first reel, where the American press, particularly The Washington Post and The Miami Herald, get wind that the senator may be having extramarital affairs and, after an anonymous call comes in to the Florida newspaper, the plot starts to thicken.

A public outcry follows with Jackman’s Hart refusing to add fuel to the fire – claiming that his personal life has nothing to do with his politics, but in a world that has just started to wake up and pay attention to the tabloid press.
It’s obviously a narrative which is very parallel to today’s world – sex and sleaze in the White House, surely not – and Reitman’s feature is very aware of this. The film is reminiscent of a film like Steven Spielberg’s last movie The Post, very much moving focusing on the building of a story from the point of view of the press, and the decision to hold it for a period of time or push the button and print it. We also get a peek into Hart’s world, and the management of the event through his team, and the film manages to balance argument well from both sides of the story.


Jackman is on top form, shedding his superhero and musical persona for a more grounded performance, one where he is both reserved, selfless, and also full of character with oodles of panache. This is potentially one of his best performances in a film of this type for years, but let’s not forget the cast around him too. J.K. Simmons pops up in support in a very solid role as Hart’s battle-worn campaign manager, while Vera Farmiga (Up In The Air), also astounds as Hart’s scorned wife. Farmiga is massively under-used, but she does come into her own in the final reel as Hart’s journey to political superstardom finally starts to spiral.

The Front Runner is intriguing, fascinating and will raise many questions in your mind. One will certainly be answered as you walk away; in that, you’ve just witnessed some truly masterful filmmaking.

The Front Runner is undoubtedly one of the best in show so far this awards season and could land a golden statue nomination (at the very least) for Mr. Jackman. Has he ever been better? As I write this, he’s an undoubtedly a clear front-runner for Oscar glory in 2019.

The Front Runner review by Paul Heath, September 2018.



REVIEW OVERVIEW
The Front Runner

SUMMARY
The Front Runner is intriguing, fascinating and will raise many questions in your mind. One will certainly be answered as you walk away; in that, you’ve just witnessed some truly masterful filmmaking.

OVERALL SCORE : 4 of 5 stars

[jo]

www.showbuzzdaily.com/reviews/movies/film-festival-movies/toronto/showbuzzdaily-toronto-film-festival-reviews-widows-the-front-runner.html

THE FRONT RUNNER (Columbia/Sony – November 6): Jason Reitman’s worthwhile, intelligent recreation of a pivotal moment in the history of America’s politics and press is plagued by a curious lack of urgency. The title refers to Colorado Senator Gary Hart, who in 1988 was considered the man to beat for the Democratic Presidential nomination. It turned out that the person best equipped to beat him was himself, by way of a barely-hidden affair with Donna Rice, and his own taunt to the press that if they thought he was an adulterer, they should just follow him–which the Miami Herald did. When Hart left the race 3 weeks later, it changed the relationship between the media and politicians forever, and considering that the first George Bush ended up facing Michael Dukakis instead of the charismatic Hart, it also arguably changed American history. Reitman, writing with Matt Bai (whose book was the source material) and Jay Carson, tells the story lucidly and from a variety of angles, including the viewpoints of members of the Hart campaign and of the press.

The Front Runner is well-paced, and shot with an effectively restless camera (cinematography by Reitman veteran Eric Steelberg). Hugh Jackman, as Hart, presents a figure both believably electable and arrogantly heedless of his own self-destructiveness. The supporting cast includes the invaluable JK Simmons as Hart’s campaign manager, Alfred Molina as Ben Bradlee, Bill Burr and Kevin Pollak as other members of the press, and Vera Farmiga and Kaitlyn Dever as Hart’s wife and daughter. Somehow, though, the film feels placid rather than pulsing with the energy of crisis, as though everyone involved is all too aware that it’s telling a decades-old story. The Front Runner feels more like a thesis than a drama, depicting complexity rather than allowing itself, and its audience, to be coiled up.