So Smart It’s...Duh, I Dunno... DUMB!

ON FIRST IMPRESSION, YOU MIGHT THINK: "WOW! A SUMMER COMEDY THAT DOESN'T APPEAL to WHAT STEPHEN KING USED to CALL THE LIZARD MIND!"

BUT THEN (WHEN YOUR BRAIN KICKS IN) YOU REALIZE: IT STARS OUR RUNNER UP for MALE AWL-TIME RAZZIE® CHAM-PEEN, SIXTEEN-TIME NOMINEE and SIX TIME "WINNER" KEVIN COSTNER (WHO's STILL DESPERATELY TRYING to PASS HIMSELF OFF AS the JIMMY STEWART/GARY COOPER of the NEW MILLENNIUM).

AND THE PREMISE of SWING VOTE -- THAT EVEN WITH the ELECTORAL COLLEGE, and a CONSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK in PLACE THAT SENDS UNDECIDED ELECTIONS to CONGRESS for RESOLIUTION, ONE MAN's INDIVIDUAL VOTE COULD DETERMINE WHO BECOMES PRESIDENT -- IS PATENTLY RETARDED.

THE "SUSPENSION of DISBELEIF" THIS FILM REQUIRES IS EQUIVALENT to PUTTING YOURSELF into a COMA. ANYONE WHO ACTUALLY FOLLOWS (OR UNDERSTANDS) AMERICAN POLITICS SHOULD DISMISSS THIS in an INSTANT. ANYONE WHO DOES BUY THIS FILM's PREMISE SHOULD NOT BE ALLOWED ANYWHERE NEAR a POLLING PLACE THIS NOVEMBER...

THE ONE UP-SIDE of THIS FILM: IF THINGS ACTUALLY DID WORK the WAY SWING VOTE SUGGESTS THEY DO, AL GORE WOULD'VE BEEN ELECTED PRESIDENT in 2000...and THAT WOULD'VE BEEN MILLIONS of PEOPLE's IDEA of a MUCH HAPPIER ENDING!

OKAY, WE'LL CLIMB DOWN OFF of OUR SOAP BOX NOW SO YOU ("MY FELLOW POST-ERS and POST-ETTES") CAN OPINE AWAY... 

COSTNER: "Yes, everyone involved in this film has two of 'em this size or larger -- For thinking intelligent audiences wouldn't notice how utterly idiotic this film's premise really is!"

To me, this looks funny and sweet. I might actually see this one.

When I saw this trailer, all I could think of is "after the elections of 2000 and 2004, I pretty damn sure America is well aware that the popular vote doesn't mean anything" and "the whole every vote counts slogan is nothing more than a myth." But now along comes Hollywood with this dumb excuse for a movie, hoping to keep that moronic myth alive...  

Every once in awhile, Hollywood can come up with a retarded idea for a movie so patently ridiculous that they can actually advance an intelligent argument for something as moronic and antiquated as the Electoral College (easily one of the two stupidest ideas borne by our Founding Fathers, the other being the Second Amendment -- the crappiest piece of writing in the history of legalese).

If a national election could ever be determined by a single individual of the caliber of the one portrayed by Costner in this film, I'd pack up and move to Canada.

Even if we accept, as the basic tenet of true democracy, that one moron is equal to one genius, is it necessary to go a further step and hold that two morons are better than one genius? --Leo Szliard, physicist

I actually like the premise. We all know it's ridiculous but it has never been done before and it's just fun to go along with it. I never have problems with premises I usually describe as great and unique because I'm a person who writes scripts with these types of premises. It's like Larry Cohen. He makes up great ideas and writes great scripts for these ideas.

Originally posted by thomsonmg2000 Not all of Costner's recent films were terrible. I heard "Open Range" was good. Originally posted by SchumacherH8ter Kevin Costner hasn't made a good movie since "Tin Cup"; I don't think the bad luck streak will end.

                                                                                        "Open Range" was boring as hell.

I hated Open Range.  I think the opening 10 minutes sums up the whole movie.  I just love wasting 10 minutes watching free rangers push a wagon wheel through the mud.  Yup, that's a great way to start the movie.  And, unfortunately, it was one of the better scenes. 

I have to give Costner and Annette Benning kudos, though, for taking some of the worst lines ever put into a western and actually showing some good acting despite what their characters had to say. 

Next worst scene was Robert Duvall and James Russo unloading their guns at each other about six feet away, both laying on the floor with no obstruction between them--and missing every shot.  My oh my oh my.  That was such a good scene. 

I will never understand why so many people rate Open Range so highly.  It was sheer torture to me.  Please give me True Grit, The Good, the Bad and the Ugly, The Unforgiven or, damn, I'll even take Shane over Open Range.

Of the movies I've seen with Costner, my favorites are The Untouchables, Dances with Wolves and Field of Dreams, which I've seen several times.  The most recent film I've seen him in was The Guardian, and he gave a fine performance in an okay film.  I actually take delight in Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves with its creakiness, corny lines, bad accents and Sean Connery as King Richard, but I'm fairly sure that isn't what Costner intended.  Waterworld sucks bilgewater. . . .

Cvcjr, your assessment of "Open Range" was spot on. And don't forget that dreadful Irish brogue James Russo attempted throughout the film. I couldn't understand a word he said. Between his marble-mouthed accent and Costner's perpetual mumbling, half the dialogue in the film was utterly unintelligible (probably utterly un-intelligent, too).

The thing that amused me most was the scene where Costner and Duvall walked outside the morning after it rained cats and dogs all night...and the ground was completely dry!