Revival of the Political Thriller: The Contender, Part 2

In part two of our series, we begin with the men on the opposite side of the coin. The Contender has given Christian Slater a chance to display his acting in a whole new light. I am a great fan of his, but I do not ever remember his in a role quite like this. Christian Slater's character, Reginald Webster, takes on an interesting position. He maneuvers into a position on the committee. Interestingly enough, he does this because he believes in the system. Webster does not want to support a candidate purely on her gender. He then does everything he can to help Runyon in his quest to oust Hanson. At first, I was not quite sure what to make of him. You want to hate him, if only because he makes a point to help Runyon. However, it is the President and Senator Hanson that help point out that Webster does all this because he is young. Now the idea here is that his age allows him a high level of confidence in the system. He makes some mistakes without realizing it because he is full of ideals. In order to really understand this character, it is important not to forget that this character also has principles. In other words, he will go wherever those principles take him. In the end, I believe this allowed him to go in the right direction.

Jeff Bridges plays the man in the oval office, President Jackson Evans. In an interview, he said he based much of his character on his father, whom he described as a presidential sort of man. His character is very interesting, and much more complex than what you might expect. In this way, he is very similar to Shelly Runyon. His character is very interesting. He has cards up his sleeve just like Runyon, however you never see them. He brings them all out at once towards the end of the movie. If you pay close attention, you will also get to see the real reasons that he chose Senator Hanson for office. I honestly do not believe that he really chose her just because she is a woman. However, he never defends himself. In that respect, he is similar to Hanson. He never defends his choices probably for the same reason Hanson did not, because it is not appropriate to ask the question in the first place. In one scene toward the end, Evans advises Hanson on what to say in her closing statements. He tells her specifically to let them know why he chose her for office. I think this is a very subtle point to the movie. In much the same way that there are different standards for the personal life of men and woman in office, so are their abilities. Everyone assumes that Evans chose her just to give the office more diversity. That would be a double standard to make that assumption. Is it not at all possible that she was a candidate because she was capable of handling the position?

Go To Page: 1 2