The irony of GAME CHANGE is that it reveals more about liberal hypocrisy and the flaws of the feminist elite than it does about the rise and fall of Sarah Palin. What comes across most clearly is not that Sarah Palin was unqualified but that the college-educated women on her own team resented her for class reasons that had nothing to do with political ability.
Late in the picture, when Sarah is being criticized, she says something to the effect of, "well, Hillary Clinton does the same thing and no one objects." And then her own female staffer says, "yes, and you're SO MUCH like Hillary." And we're meant to see that as a brilliant put down? Why? Because Sarah Palin's parents weren't rich enough to send her to Wellesley College? Or because she overcame economic and class-based obstacles Hillary never had to face?
The real message of the film is not that Republican policies are wrong but that working class people have no business aspiring to high political office -- or even taking an active interest in politics. If this is really what liberals think then they really are corrupt and dishonest beyond Sarah Palin's wildest dreams.
But I give GAME CHANGE seven stars because Julianne Moore, Edd Harris, and Woody Harrelson all give superb performances. The real tragedy is that the story didn't focus on John McCain. The writers plainly see him as a Shakespearean tragic hero, a noble man undone by the mob, like Brutus or Coriolanus. In this telling, McCain is a principled aristocrat who only discovers midway through the campaign that his own followers are nothing but racist subhuman scum -- and then he proves his tragic stature by deliberately losing the election on principle. Whether you believe that scenario or not, the fact is that McCain emerges as a much more compelling and sympathetic figure than Sarah Palin. Presumably an Annapolis graduate meets the liberal definition of a "well-born" American eligible for high office.
This movie was fascinating and disgusting at the same time. The people who made it are just as bigoted and ignorant as any of the people they attack. Only they don't know it.
Late in the picture, when Sarah is being criticized, she says something to the effect of, "well, Hillary Clinton does the same thing and no one objects." And then her own female staffer says, "yes, and you're SO MUCH like Hillary." And we're meant to see that as a brilliant put down? Why? Because Sarah Palin's parents weren't rich enough to send her to Wellesley College? Or because she overcame economic and class-based obstacles Hillary never had to face?
The real message of the film is not that Republican policies are wrong but that working class people have no business aspiring to high political office -- or even taking an active interest in politics. If this is really what liberals think then they really are corrupt and dishonest beyond Sarah Palin's wildest dreams.
But I give GAME CHANGE seven stars because Julianne Moore, Edd Harris, and Woody Harrelson all give superb performances. The real tragedy is that the story didn't focus on John McCain. The writers plainly see him as a Shakespearean tragic hero, a noble man undone by the mob, like Brutus or Coriolanus. In this telling, McCain is a principled aristocrat who only discovers midway through the campaign that his own followers are nothing but racist subhuman scum -- and then he proves his tragic stature by deliberately losing the election on principle. Whether you believe that scenario or not, the fact is that McCain emerges as a much more compelling and sympathetic figure than Sarah Palin. Presumably an Annapolis graduate meets the liberal definition of a "well-born" American eligible for high office.
This movie was fascinating and disgusting at the same time. The people who made it are just as bigoted and ignorant as any of the people they attack. Only they don't know it.