Maidgethma Wonderfully offbeat film!

Sexyloutak Absolutely the worst movie.

Neive Bellamy Excellent and certainly provocative... If nothing else, the film is a real conversation starter.

Jerrie It's a good bad... and worth a popcorn matinée. While it's easy to lament what could have been...

gavin6942 A documentary of the Bill Clinton 1992 presidential campaign and the organization who ran it.Wile this film was great in its own time, it has only gained in importance since. First of all, the choice to follow Clinton is an interesting one. While he ultimately won, at the beginning of the campaign, Clinton was losing to Paul Tsongas. It would be a very strange film if it followed a candidate who never even won the primary. Would such a film be completed or would they just scrap the whole project? But those involved have risen. George Stephanopoulos has become an important political commentator. James Carville is a legend. The Clinton family has had political influence far beyond 1992 (though it took quite a hit in 2016). And then there is Rahm Emanuel, who could someday make a run of his own.

matthewjherbert As a government teacher, this is one of the few movies I make sure I play EVERY year. The Ragin' Cajun is unstoppable in this film! Anyone who wishes to know EXACTLY what a campaign is like inside and out needs to check out this film. There is a scene in this film featuring George Stephanopoulous where he straight up threatens to end a guys political career, should he come out with allegations against Clinton. I am simply amazed that this scene wasn't edited out of the film. However, the simple fact that it wasn't helps me realize how "real" this film is.The only reason that I gave this a 9 out of 10 instead of a 10 out of 10 is simply that as time passes, the Bush v. Clinton election becomes slightly less and less relevant to viewers. Anyone younger than about 25 probably won't relate to the details (Jennifer Flowers, etc...) of this film.

Lee Eisenberg I watched "The War Room" a few days after the 2004 election. Seeing Bill Clinton's strategies, I really got the feeling that John Kerry didn't do as much as he could have. But also, I could see why the far right went after Clinton: here was a young man who came of age in the '60s and was certainly a far cry from the old men who usually dominate Washington. But even aside from that, it was very interesting - even sort of funny - just getting a glimpse inside DC. I would recommend this documentary just so that people can understand politics better. With the midterm elections less than two weeks away, we just might have a chance to change the disastrous course that George W. Bush has led us on. A very good documentary.

Joe Benik This is one of the great political films since All the President's Men, and one of the best documentaries I've ever seen. The story is fascinating, the characters are very interesting, and its all real. Even the music adds to the frenetic pace of the film.The documentary follows the 1992 Clinton Campaign from the doldrums in New Hampshire, through the Democratic convention in New York to its summit on election night in Little Rock. But Clinton spends very little time on the screen. The film captures the behind-the-scenes action of James Carville, George Stephanopolis, and the rest of the cast and crew of Clinton campaign headquarters. The film shows how TV spots are written, how interviews are managed, how the candidates' message is distributed, and how the "spin doctors" do their stuff.The pace is quick. Staffers come into and out of scenes constantly, and there is a great deal of off-camera dialogue, much like an emergency-room scene from E.R. The mix of standard documentary footage with news reports and interviews is terrific. Some of the best scenes are of the pols watching the news reports and reacting to what they see. The central character is James Carville, who is more interesting than anyone else in the campaign, much moreso than the candidates themselves. He reveals that his "Ragin' Cajun" image is genuine, for he is truly passionate about his work. But it also reveals a mind working on overdrive, and a sensitive nature that you wouldn't expect to see. His "people will say you are lucky" speech to staffers at the end of the film is as moving as anything written for the studio, and moreso because it is genuine. Stephanopolis came off less well. Behind his youthful looks and seeming intelligence comes a certain shallowness. Much of his contribution was more of a "me too" nature than anything truly creative or deep. He also had a moment at the end of the film when, in a room with a starry-eyed female staffer, he's describing how he feels. And the conclusion is, not much. It is not hard to understand why years later George was a washout in the Clinton White House, never managed another campaign, and is now earning his living in front of the camera.After all is said and done, it is clear that the candidate is secondary in a modern presidential election. He's like the hand your dealt in a game of poker. It's important, but what you do with it once it is dealt to you is much more important. And these guys are pros.So are the filmmakers. There were several times when I had to remind myself that this was a documentary, and not a work of fiction. In fact, if you see it immediately after seeing "Primary Colors" you'll see that truth is not only stranger than fiction, but it can be more interesting as well.