Despite the percentage of eligible voters who participate in the U.S. electoral system being disappointedly low, the sheer number of votes cast -- 120+ million in the 2004 Presidential election -- is certainly impressive and even daunting to the average citizen. It certainly gives them reason to doubt that their single vote really makes that much of a difference, which is likely one reason why (along with distrust of the government, dissatisfaction with those currently serving, etc.) not everyone participates.
Of course, every vote is important, less so in the overall popular tally, but certainly in our flawed electoral college system where smaller precincts can have an impact on how things ultimately turn out. And while it's highly unlikely that a single vote could decide the outcome of an election, it is statistically possible, however improbable that might be.
Except in the movies where it makes a fun if unlikely premise in the logically titled "Swing Vote." Something of a modern day, Capraesque comedy about the importance of a nobody becoming a somebody, the film will likely split viewers along lines comparable to the two-party split currently bedeviling America.
There will be those who fall for the broadly played satire where politics, politicians and the media are in the crosshairs and one downtrodden man ends up making a difference. Others, however, will find much, if not all of it as contrived, filled with one-note characters, comedy that takes the easy way out rather than cutting deep, too many songs and montages, and an Americana score and big speech at the end that might just induce the gag reflex in some.
I fall somewhere in the middle, albeit leaning more toward the latter than the former. With public opinion of both politicians and the media at all-time lows, picking on them is like shooting fish in a barrel, and writer/director Joshua Michael Stern and co-writer Jason Richman unfortunately don't really deliver anything we haven't seen or heard before.
The basic gist is that politicians will do or say anything to get elected (remember Dukakis in the tank?), and the joke here is that the two Presidential candidates (Kelsey Grammer representing the red team, and Dennis Hopper, of all people, being the chosen leader of the blue one) end up flip-flopping like an out of water fish on hot pavement. While the stance switching does provide for some funny campaign commercials (the best and most entertaining parts of the movie), the overall satire isn't as smart as it easily could and should have been.
That's particularly true regarding the opportunistic media that descends upon the town once the swing voter is identified as the seemingly somewhat dimwitted and beaten down by life character played by Kevin Costner. Yes, we get that they're like pack dogs that lunge into whatever meaty story they come across, dig up, or invent, but this comedy angle ends up even weaker than the political jabs. Having Paula Patton as the local TV reporter with an inner battle between conscience and ambition feels rote and predictable, and George Lopez as the station manager/boss isn't evil or manipulative enough to be the best possible indictment of his kind.
Even if his character is one-note (drunk, ambition-less, bad/absent-minded dad) and makes the predictable persona change at the end, Costner is actually decent in the role. He's always comfortable in the "aw-shucks" persona and he plays it well here, although I would have preferred more depth to his character. The big revelation, however, is Madeline Carroll as his precocious daughter who's really the adult figure in the family. While that's also a contrived setup, Carroll nails the part, bringing some credible emotion to the role and thus the film.
It's just too bad that Stern doesn't have a tighter grip over the script. There are too many classic songs and montages as filler (not to mention a momentum-killing scene where Costner gets to play a song with his real-life band -- talk about an unnecessary indulgence), and the press' overwhelming coverage of the man and his daughter too conveniently ebbs and flows whenever necessary, thus making that part of the film feel lazy.
Had the pic cut more deeply or at least in new directions with its comedic look at them, politicians and voter apathy, and if the characters (including Stanley Tucci and Nathan Lane) would have developed in unexpected ways, this might have been a terrific satire. It is entertaining at moments, but it relies on too many conventions to be anything near a landslide winner in its genre. "Swing Vote" rates as a 4 out of 10.
![[Logo]](/images/screenit_logo2.jpg){kind=logo}
