Man of the Year (2006) User Reviews

"Man of the Year" is a very good political thriller/comedy that will suffer at the box office because of its misleading marketing campaign.

[ScottDMenzel · 7/10 · 13 October 2006]

"Man of the Year" tells the story of Tom Dobbs (Robin Williams) a political comedian (like Jon Stewart or Stephen Colbert) who has his own television show. On his show he talks about all sorts of things but his main focus are political issues which he is very opinionated about. One day on his show, a fan from the audience raises the idea that Dobbs should run for President of the United States. After that episode aired, millions flocked to the web to create various petitions and voice their opinions on why Dobbs would make a great candidate for the President for the United States. A few weeks later, Dobbs decides to run for President and low and behold wins the election. Everything seems to be going as planned until a woman by the name of Eleanor Green (Laura Linney) shows up and starts some controversy regarding his position. A funny yet serious political thriller ensues…

Man anyone walking into this film expecting to see a brainless comedy will surely be disappointed. I always wonder how some people are film marketers when I see how misleading their marketing campaigns. "Man of the Year" is a great example of bad and misleading marketing, because everything from the poster, to the trailer, to the online advertisements makes this movie look and feel like a comedy. I would honestly have to say about 1/3 of the film is funny while the rest of it plays off as a political thriller that makes good arguments and allows its audience to think. I kind of wonder in this case if the marketing was done on purpose since this film addresses pretty serious issues in-between its comedy routine.

But enough about marketing, lets get down to the film itself.

I really liked "Man of the Year" even though I was expecting to see a comedy instead of a serious film. One of the many things I will give this film credit for is that the film does a decent job switching between comedy and drama even though at first it seems a little awkward. I really think that after you figure this out that the movie is going to be more of a political thriller than a comedy you get comfortable with it. Some may not because they are lead to believe that they are seeing a comedy and don't understand what this film is trying to say in the end but for those people they can blame the marketers for not advertising this film right.

"Man of the Year" talks about a lot of things and seems to have a very strong opinion. As Tom Dobbs speaks he is saying things that need to be said and isn't about candy coating them. I also think the whole political subplot, while most critics say hurt the film probably again because of the misleading marketing, was very good. The idea of computerize voting has been tossed around the last few years and with all the problems computers have the issue being addressed in this film could surely be realistic. Also the control big businesses have over voting also gets addressed.

As far as acting goes, I think everyone involved did a good job. Robin Williams had a chance to be funny yet serious at the same time by playing Tom Dobbs. Some say that Williams has overstayed his welcome as a comedian but I personally still think he is funny and he's a good serious actor as well. This is probably one of the few occasions though that we get to see him go back and forth from serious to funny and I think it works well. Also it's nice to see Lewis Black co-star in a decent film. Again I like Black when he appears on "The Daily Show" and does stand up however most of the films he has been in were awful. This was a good movie for him because I think his political views fit in with the story that director Barry Levinson was trying to convey. Laura Linney is a fine addition to the cast and proves once again that she is a very good actress and lastly Christopher Walken and Jeff Goldblum both do a very good job as always with this roles handed to them.

"Man of the Year" was written and directed by Barry Levinson, the man who has brought us such films as "Rain Man," "Good Morning Vietnam," and "Wag the Dog." Levinson does a fine job writing the film and directing it. Like I said I know a lot of critics didn't like the whole political thriller aspect of the film but I thought it fit in nicely. It was actually nice to watch a mainstream movie that allowed me to both think and laugh at the same time. Barry Levinson did a fine job with this film.

In the end, don't go into this film expecting to see the movie that the commercials are selling you. It does have laughs but at the same time it plays off more as a political drama. It's not as stupid or silly as the marketing campaign leads you to believe. I really liked the fact that this film that this film wasn't a typical Hollywood film. It tried to be a comedy and a serious drama at the same time and worked at least for me. I like the fact that the film didn't really tone down any of the issues it addressed nor did it have a typical Hollywood ending. I was trying to call the ending from the get go but surprisingly it didn't end the way I thought which made me happy. It's a movie that will make you laugh but then a few minutes later allow you to think and wonder what's going to happen next. I think its a good movie that will be hurt by its bad marketing.

a comedian is elected President - or was he?

[blanche-2 · 7/10 · 10 January 2013]

Robin Williams is "Man of the Year" in this 2006 film also starring Christopher Walken, Laura Linney, and Jeff Goldblum. Williams plays comedian Tom Dobbs, a Jon Stewart type who decides to run for President. He gives great speeches, filled with humor, and ruins a televised debate against the incumbent, but wins a standing ovation. He wins.

Laura Linney plays Eleanor Green, who works for the company that developed the new, state of the art voting system, and she realizes that there was a problem with it, and that Dobbs did not win the election. Her superiors absolutely don't want it to come out. Posing as someone from the FBI, she is able to approach the President-elect but gets caught up in his humor and his friendly entourage and doesn't tell him. Meanwhile, the company has gotten rid of her and is taking any steps it can to discredit her.

I knew nothing of this film going in, so I didn't know that it was incorrectly marketed. I found the film an easy mix of hilarious comedy, mostly Williams' routines, and some true drama. This is never easy to do, and often, a film like this doesn't know what it wants to be. That's not the case with "Man of the Year," and I think Levinson's approach is successful. Mostly this is because Robin Williams can do anything - he's a riot, he's warm, he can do real drama, and here he does a wonderful job. Laura Linney gives a terrific performance as a woman who finds herself in terrible trouble as she tries to right a wrong.

Very good movie with a good cast.

It's all just very frustrating

[samseescinema · 5/10 · 15 October 2006]

Man of the Year reviewed by Sam Osborn

Frustrating is a good word to describe Man of the Year; frustrating because one half of this film shines. This half moves with ease and works off the unshakable glow of Robin Williams. The other half—the evil half, if you will—works more like an infection: relatively harmless at first, but fatal and sort of repulsive when left untreated. What could have been a sweetly charming comedy is left suspending all means of reality to turn this wickedly funny political affair into a silly farce of a thriller.

Robin Williams plays Tom Dobbs, a kind of fictional counterpart to Jon Stewart. Like Mr. Stewart, Dobbs hosts a nightly comedy talk show that discusses the absurd nature of current political news. In Dobbs' world—and more than likely, in ours—more people obtain their knowledge of current events through Dobbs' nightly sketch than from valid news sources. He's so popular in fact, that when one member of the audience suggests that he run for president in the upcoming election Dobbs takes it seriously. His campaign is fostered through a grassroots internet movement that manages to put him on thirteen of the fifty states' ballots and into the last of three national debates between the two party-aligned candidates.

This segment requires that, yes, we suspend some belief in Director/Writer Barry Levinson's vision of reality. Could a talk show host with no political background really rise to such presidential heights? Probably not. But it's plausible enough. The true deception comes with the ornery sub-plot that Levinson plunks down like an anchor into this prim and simple tale. A new voting system has been implemented into the upcoming election, created by the corporation Delacroy. Eleanor Green (Laura Linney), an employee for Delacroy happens to find a glitch in the voting system only weeks before the national election. Her alarm is muffled by the legal head of the corporation, Alan Stewart (Jeff Goldblum), and her reputation put to tatters by a cocktail injection of illegal drugs a shadowy man sent from Delacroy gives her. And so when Dobbs wins the presidency by way of the glitch in the Delacroy voting system, Eleanor must evade assassination from corporate hit men and alert Dobbs to his undeserving position.

I think it must first be said that I'm rarely one to penalize a film for lack of realism. In my opinion, a suspension of reality must align with the function of the film. Spiderman, for instance, doesn't require many laws of physics, while a film like Apollo 13 does. With Man of the Year, I have no issue overlooking Tom Dobbs rising to Presidential Elect, if it's a concession needed for the film to exist. At the same time, however, I find it difficult to believe that Ms. Green discovered the glitch in the Delacroy voting system by inadvertently testing the program at population volumes similar to those used during actual elections. The glitch is an alphabetical problem: candidates with pairs of letters that appear earlier in that alphabet will inevitably win the election (Dobbs beat Mills, for instance). Don't you think that the American Government might have tested this little gem of computer programming before relying on it to monitor the nation's votes? I think so.

Should I be easier on this small puddle of disbelief? Well, I would if the subplot seemed at all necessary; which it doesn't. The Delacroy plot begins as an annoying thread but weaves itself into the delicate fabric of the entire tale. Soon, instead of following Mr. Dobbs' witty rise to power, we follow Ms. Green as she partakes in car chases, whispered phone calls, and FBI posturing. It's not exciting, it isn't thrilling, and it's certainly not tragic. Don't even ask if these segments are funny. When Dobbs could be grappling with the American political system and driving the film into a quiet and smarmily hilarious character comedy, Director Levinson chickens out and plays it dumb with this Delacroy farce.

It's all just very frustrating, I suppose. Christopher Walken, Lewis Black, and Robin Williams are a comedic force. And allowing Williams to drift off into his own stand-up material was an ingenious creative decision. Mr. Levinson even has a convincing grasp on current politics and manages dozens of jokes surrounding them. And so why fall back on this Delacroy nonsense? Bah! i say. What a shame. Rating: 2 out of 4

Sam Osborn

Is to comedy what The Village was to horror

[matz1036 · 6/10 · 13 October 2006]

Okay, I wasn't sure about this movie prior to going. I read the four or five reviews and they said it wasn't a comedy. Therefore, I expected it to be a thriller like they said.

Well, they weren't exactly correct. It is funny, and no, not all the humor is in the trailer. I agree, this is not just a comedy, it's a dramady (drama/comedy) But if you know that going in, you won't be as disappointed. It is similar to Barry Levinsons other comedies, funny but also has some deep drama.

This movie was advertised wrong, much like The Village. But it is still a good movie

Not what I expected

[bbw_vanessa · 7/10 · 24 October 2006]

This movie was advertised as a comedy but was far more serious than the trailers made it out to be. Don't get me wrong, I enjoyed the movie, but was expecting more laughs. Great performances from Robin Williams and Laura Linney. Worth seeing, but don't go expecting to be rolling on the floor. The movie left me wondering what it would be like if Robin Williams character was a real person that was running for president. Would we elect a comedian? I doubt it, unfortunately. That kind of stark honesty is something greatly lacking today. This is a movie that I will be adding to my DVD library as soon as it comes out on DVD. The movie has heart.

A fairly decent movie

[chzzyg · 7/10 · 10 October 2022]

I thought Man of the Year was an okay film. Its heart was in the right place but had nagging issues that kept losing my attention. First and foremost, the cast is awesome. Just about everyone cast is a well known star and each play their roles well. In specific, Laura Linney shines playing the full gamut of emotional positions in believable realism. The story is clever enough to maintain attention, and the camera work is pretty good. So what's the problem? I'm not sure but I think it's the pacing. The beginning of the film moves pretty fast getting Robin Williams into Presidency, and then it slows down to a grueling crawl of slow plot points and me nearly screaming at Laura Linney's character to reveal her key information to get things moving again, which doesn't happen for quite awhile. During these moments Robin Williams picks up the ball with jokes and gags but it gets old after so many scenes of nothing substantial happening. More time could've been spent on digging into the voting machines plotline which is only peppered into a few scenes to break up the monotony. I did go into this movie at a rough time in 2022 but the politics were kept to more of a background fluff than as a key part of the storyline which was a relief. I feel like this movie could've used a few more plot points than it ultimately had and that would've helped with the pacing issue, but other than that it's not a bad popcorn flick. There are fun moments to be had in it and in the end it's just a straightforward story with moments of romance, suspense, humor, and drama sprinkled in.

An enjoyable comedy that finds itself with too much to say to be taken seriously

[sytrohs87 · 6/10 · 13 October 2006]

I think the above summary says it all. The movie was good for a laugh, and the debate scene was spectacular. Other than a few other nuggets of comedic genius, this movie ends up spiraling out of control and lands somewhere between a dark comedy and a suspense drama. Levinson can't seem to figure out if he wants to make a comedy or a drama, and as a result, the movie ends up getting to big for itself.

I was left incredulous at the convoluted chain of events that was, at times, completely unbelievable. The film is good for those of us who want a good laugh, but don't expect any kind of great, intelligent satire or you'll be slightly disappointed.

Good political satire.

[filipemanuelneto · 5/10 · 27 July 2018]

There are some movies that almost look like prophecies. In this film, a highly popular comedian leverages his fame and notoriety to create an independent, largely Internet-based support platform, through which he launches an election run to the White House.

The film debuted in 2006, isn't one of the best known in Robbin William's filmography but remains very pertinent and current if we take into account the latest developments in US politics, and the election of the current president, Donald Trump. Like the protagonist, Mr. Trump had no prior political experience and used all of his fame and notoriety to reach the presidency. Both are outsiders, who apply to please those who are tired of conventional politicians. Curious, is not it?

Williams is good in the lead role, which is basically the typical comic character that he knew how to do very well. So, without surprises, he stands out and does a very good job. Behind him, we can see a competent cast of supporting actors. Laura Linney is, perhaps, the actress whose character is more within a dramatic profile. Its around her that a conspiracy revolves around, preventing an electoral error from becoming public and ruining all future prospects of a large technology company. Christopher Walken, for his part, plays a clever political aide with an eye for the show.

Time, unfortunately, has vindicated this film

[neilheims · 4 January 2020]

I am not a great fan of Robin Williams, although I recognize the immensity and diversity of his talent. And I do not think much of Barry Levinson. But this film is prescient, except that Tom Dobbs, unlike Trump, is a decent man.

A Nutshell Review: Man of the Year

[DICK STEEL · 7/10 · 13 March 2007]

Imagine the likes of popular talk show hosts becoming the most powerful man on Earth. What do you think of the Lettermans and the Renos taking over the Oval Office? Will their humour and mass appeal pull in the votes, and give them enough to win? Or will they be in the mix solely for entertainment value, unable to put on the table serious issues that the fate of the country depends on?

There was a line used in the movie, which I thought was so true. The "perception of legitimacy is more important than legitimacy itself". Like giving hope when you know things are rigged (which in my opinion, every lottery is), that statement forms the crux in the story, and brings to mind whistle blowing events in recent history, and the effort taken to silence critics and detractors. Nothing reeks more than dirty politics, where it seems like the only way to play the game, and having no place for an honest man.

Written and directed by Barry Levinson, the story is layered somewhat with some exploration into dirty corporations and ethics, or the lack thereof, and looks at the current political system in the US (though the thoughts shared could be modified for almost every democratic election campaign), that candidates chalk up huge campaign funds, and where does the money come from? The supporters of course, those who can contribute, and the unsaid word being some expected favours should be returned when the horse they back crosses the finishing line in first place.

I'm a fan of Robin Williams, so Man of the Year was a no-brainer must watch for me. However, Williams did seem to be quite restrained in the introduction, where as political talk show host Tom Dobbs, he entertains the masses through his television show, produced by a very capable team behind him, led by manager Jack Menken (Christopher Walken, in a role that fit him to a T). He jumps into the campaign trial by announcing his candidacy during one of his shows, and unlike his screen persona, he led the charge with a stoic nature, bringing up (boring) bread and butter issues as his agenda, repeating his mantra that he doesn't serve special interest groups like the others, but serves the common folk.

But of course, don't expect Williams to be gagged for too long. As the strategy isn't working, he had to adopt his persona to engage audiences, and that's when the fun starts, with his poking fun at himself, the political system, and the process. There were genuinely funny bits, spread throughout the movie, though most seemed to have been centered within his awakened election strategy, and sadly too, only in a montage of sorts. And yes, do expect some parts to be censored as he crosses lines deemed to sensitive by the censors here.

Accompanied by a great soundtrack (you have to pay attention!), it was the attempt to actually layer the story that seemed to dragged much of the pace. Without going into details, it had to do with the concerns for electronic voting, as well as a romance bit with Laura Linney's Eleanor Green, the system developer, that wasn't convincing enough, and sagged, as it can't decide if it wanted to be a romance, or a conspiracy action thriller, well you get the drift. Jeff Goldblum plays a supporting role here as a corrupt legal adviser, again in a stereotypical role that condemns company lawyers as conniving, sneaky and dishonourable.

All in all, it's still an enjoyable movie not without its flaws, but for a rainy evening, something good enough to sit through while you wait out the rain.

It started so good...

[hyperbart · 3/10 · 15 June 2009]

The premise of this movie, of a comedian talk show host running for president as an independent just to shake things up, is funny, entertaining, brilliant and even a bit inspiring. (thought about the west wing debate when Tom Dobbs leaves his podium, thought about Steven Colbert announcing his candidacy, good times) The first 15 - 20 minutes of this movie are therefore very very entertaining, the debate especially. When he eventually get's elected, it's a pity that is because of a computer glitch, you'd want him to win fair (although that is unrealistic).

But after that this movie goes completely downhill. I thought we'd get a great movie like 'Dave' (1993) in which we see how it would out if a comedian actually ran the country. Instead, the movie turns from comedy into a thriller, a romantic comedy and a drama and does none good. The computer glitch becomes the main storyline, which really sucks. Boy is this disappointing. I give it 3 stars just for the premise and because I actually managed to watch this movie from start to end without stopping it, which is usually a good thing with me.

timely and funny, a worth see!

[chrissyafrica · 8/10 · 10 October 2006]

I completely disagree with the other comments! I too saw this film at an early screening and found it quite enjoyable. Robin Williams is in top form. True, the tone is familiar, but it is Williams of Good Morning Vietnam: smart, funny, on point. After too many dark turns, Williams is finally back to what he does best. The supporting actors give great performances, especially Laura Linney and Chris Walken. Chris plays himself, as usual, but as the "agent" to the next president he was a delight each time on screen. Lewis Black plays only himself basically, but he is wonderfully well used here. There is also a fun turn by Jeff Goldblum. The movie is more than what the trailer suggests, as well. The movie is funny, but it is not a pure comedy as suggested. It has a bit of a thriller line, which everyone should seriously consider, especially if you pay attention to the newspaper.

Man of the Year- A Joke to the Chief! **1/2

[edwagreen · 7/10 · 4 March 2007]

While watching this film, I was saying to myself that it would become better when it would become more serious. That is exactly what happened.

The problem with the film is that we were stuck with Robin Williams' corny jokes. He plays a comedian who seeks the presidency and by some fluke wins. As far as the fluke goes, does this sound familiar?

Yes, he runs on a platform of integrity and ignoring the needs of special interest groups. As with too many candidates of today, he is quite vague on complex issues.

The film vastly improves when it is discovered that a computer error has pushed him into the presidency. When Laura Linney, as Eleanor Green, an employer with the computer company brings this out, she is discredited in the usual discredited sort of way.

Of course, Williams admits on a comedy news show that he shouldn't be president-elect after all. He now becomes even more famous on the comedy circuit because he has shown true integrity. Did the writers of this film ably do so?

The usually sinister Christopher Walken sheds that image and portrays an adviser to Williams or Dobbs as the candidate's name is in this film.

Funny in parts, but flawed

[crako1 · 5/10 · 16 October 2006]

(contains spoilers) Tom Dobbs (Robin Williams) is a television talk show host gone political candidate; a Jon Stewart type that takes the plunge into contributing rather than heckling. This part of the movie works. Dobbs is credible, serious, and uses humor not for substance but to mock the ridiculous nature of the current lobby-ridden two party system. The political solutions offered by Dobbs are the standard third party 'common sense, but not too deep' solutions. Tom Dobbs wins and becomes the President Elect.

But the movie is flawed with the 'other half'. Laura Linney portrays a computer programmer who discovers an error in the new, nationwide electronic voting system - one that caused Dobbs to win. She reports the error to her CEO ...who torpedoes her email, and then sets her up as a drug abusing burnout who may have caused the problem herself. Linney flies to Washington to inform Dobbs that the election was a sham - but them doesn't tell him.

That's right, a sharp left turn away from suspension of disbelief and straight on to 'beg pardon? Why?' It's clear that Linney's character understands that she MUST tell the truth, but for reasons we can only speculate, the writer chose to waste thirty minutes of screen time as she develops an emotional bond with Dobbs before telling him.

The movie would have been much better had Linney's character revealed the problem right away, and then collectively the 'good people' spent their time solving the problem. Instead, the 'good people' spend their time doubting each other (while we are left to doubt the script writer).

It's still enjoyable in parts, but maybe wait until DVD so you can skip the second act.

Really well done.

[MrOvletine · 27 December 2015]

I saw this movie on DVD after buying with absolutely no knowledge of the film at all. I only bought it because Robin Williams was the star. I wasn't disappointed at all. This is a great satire on modern politics. Robin Williams character seems to say what everyone thinks - that modern politicians are in the back pocket of special interest groups. There are a couple of plot holes here - like how a computer system is fooled by such a very simple loophole - but that just serves as a way to move the story along. Williams is excellent here as both a comedian and a serious actor. I have always thought he is equally good at both and such a great talent. His character is very believable. I would recommend this film to anyone who likes a movie with some thought put into it.

Must see!

[BigCRod · 7/10 · 13 October 2006]

I saw this movie at a private screening at the movie theater that I work at about 30 minutes ago and I'd have to say that I thought it was comedy at its best. I was about to see the Marine but something messed up with the film since we are switching to digital so I watched this one instead. Robin Williams shows his best side in this extremely humorous film with an all star cast. Trying as hard as I can to now spoil this movie for anyone, I'm going to just tell you that although the majority of the movie deals around comedy, any political buff(especially those of you out there that are moderates) so to say on the political spectrum, will find the message appealing. Walken, Williams, Black, and even Goldbloom(though he was portrayed as the "bad guy" in the film), brought a different element to comedy on movies. While most people are used to situational comedy, irony, and other forms on the same lines, Robin Williams brings back that "Dangerfield" type comedy that keeps hitting you over and over again. I really appreciated that about this film. So get your jaws ready for a workout for the jokes and your ears clear for the message because Robin Williams is back!

not just a comedy

[roedyg · 6/10 · 22 October 2006]

This movie is not just a comedy. It is a thriller and also a philosophical commentary on American politics.

The main problem I had with the movie was I was always aware I was watching a movie. This almost never happens for me. I usually have no problem at all suspending disbelief. Except in the scenes with Laura Linney/Eleanor Green, I was asking myself questions like, "Wow look at all the extras. How did they afford an scene after scene with more extras than Ben Hur?", or "I wonder how they got James Carville to poke fun at the Democratic party". "Hey, that's Chris Matthews. I wonder if CNN had to vet the script." "I wonder if the oval office is the real thing or just a set?" Part of the problem is awkward dialog where people make professorly political commentary, quoting Mark Twain. It just does not ring true to character.

It pulls punches by skewering no actual politicians. Even the arch villain Delacroy Voting Machines, commits a crime quite different from the crime that Diebold Voting Machines of reality Delacroy is based on.

I was infuriated that nobody noticed the obvious voting machine fraud when the Robin Williams/Dobbs character won the election after polling only 10% in polls and exit polls. They did not even point out that nobody noticed. That is perhaps too subtle a joke for the American viewer who overlooked similar Diebold fraud in the 2004 election.

The movie's message is dishonest. It suggests there is no difference between Republicans and Democrats, and that there is no hope voting independent. It thus counsels despair and letting the bad guys run things, while pretending to have a "give 'em hell" message.

"Politicians are like diapers. You have to change them often, and for the same reason."

Disappointment

[ewq2 · 6/10 · 14 October 2006]

Before seeing this movie, I had heard and read comments about how the movie is "not a comedy" but I saw the movie anyway. Robin Williams has proved himself as a talented comedic and romantic actor so I figured either way I'd give the movie a chance.

To get to the point, Christopher Walken and Robin Williams could not save this movie. The plot had tremendous potential, but what wasn't advertised in previews was the ridiculous premise on which the movie was actually based. In addition, the movie is not simply a comedy, but more of a drama/thriller (but without the thrills). By midway into the movie, I was hating Robin Williams' character. He had few funny moments reminiscent of his Live of Broadway and other stand-up work. However, those moments were quickly drowned out. His image as a bold, witty political commentator is replaced in most of the movie by that of a weak, insecure man unfit for the presidency. That was not the Robin Williams I went to watch.

Over-the-top, obviously fictional, and fun

[ray-280 · 6/10 · 1 September 2007]

How do you know your president is fictional? He passes a law guaranteeing everyone a job (Dave); he's popular among both parties (The American President); he kicks terrorists off a plane (Air Force One); he teams up with his Republican/Democratic archrival on a third-party ticket after someone spends all movie trying to kill them (My Fellow Americans); he ignores Global Warming despite liberal nagging (The Day After Tomorrow); he almost causes an asteroid to hit earth due to lack of faith in an oil-driller astronaut (Armageddon); he gives a life-affirming speech after millions die due to a smaller Asteroid (Deep Impact); or he's just busy fighting off the aliens (Independence Day; Scary Movie 3-4).

In this fictional turn, we get Robin Williams as A Jon Stewart type who launches a populist campaign....and wins. The story begins there. The script is over-the-top, as is the acting, and the characters are stereotypical. Voters want change, and when the voter wants it, the change appears in the form of talk-show host "Comedian Tom Dobbs." Not expecting to win, Dobbs lampoons the usual suspects, reveals his sordid past (some of which is sordid), and asks us, the audience, perpetually, as in every six or eight seconds, if we should be more tolerant of politicians who are like us. He wants change! We get change, but only as a plot device to showcase the evils of electronic voting, and how even when no one intends to steal an election, self-interest causes the same coverups due to stock price rather than a black-ops team like Nixon had. Dobbs is the solution, and if you don't laugh along and agree along like Bill Maher wants you to, well you're just out of the loop. Look at all those people laughing! The best part of the movie was the end, when Dobbs truly comes of age, a changed and improved man from his Washington experience. Christopher Walken as the dying campaign manager was brilliant, and the rest of the cast wasn't bad. Laura Linney gave a creepiness to her role that would have been difficult to duplicate.

This is not the movie that was advertised

[batson-robert · 4/10 · 15 October 2006]

Saw this movie at a Saturday matinée with a friend. Theater was about 70% full.

Although there are quite a few funny lines, it is more of a drama/suspense with humor sprinkled on top. Robin Williams gives a decent performance as does Laura Linney. Being a Daily Show fan, Lewis Black is pretty good in this. Christopher Walken gives a good performance also.

The movie starts out slow and remains that way for about the first thirty minutes, then the suspense part kicks in and starts keeping you a little on edge throughout the rest of the movie. Suspense in a supposed comedy movie? I know that I, as well as everybody else in the place, was struggling a bit with this. A character would crack a joke during suspense sequence and you would hear just one or two laughs in the theater.

In all fairness, after the movie was over there was smattering of applause. So, definitely, some people enjoyed this movie.

I gave this movie a four out of ten, because I believe the comedy aspect doesn't work very well in a suspense/drama movie and the actors performances, while not bad, were just decent.

Again, this movie isn't what was advertised.

Movie Flow

[arya_p_bhattacharya · 6/10 · 17 February 2007]

The movie gets off with a real bang and a speedy start... raising expectations, and of course with Robbie Williams we expect more! Unfortunately however, the movie slows down with some not so well planned out plot thrown in, and then there is the unreasonable public access to prominent members of the government adding to the lack of realistic touch.

If you've got nothing better to do on a Saturday afternoon go for it, it won't put you to sleep and u'd get a dose of the healthy pointed humor we have come to expect of Robbie Williams, but it still leaves you waiting on a half empty stomach.

What could have been...

[kevin_barnett · 2/10 · 11 August 2007]

This is a bad movie that contains a lot of elements for two good movies.

Movie #1: A political comedy about a a talk show host becoming president. "Dave" would be the model for this kind of movie done extremely well.

Movie #2: A thriller about fraud in a new voting system, about corruption and greed. There are dozens of examples - think "All the President's Men".

"Man of the Year" tries to do both of those things, and it ends up being very bad at both. I imagine the scriptwriters of this movie being rather like Chewbacca in "The Empire Strikes Back". They have all of C3PO's pieces, but cannot quite figure out how to assemble them all properly.

Better than people will say

[dead-canaanite · 10/10 · 29 October 2006]

When taken as a whole for its ideas and dissection of the current 2-party system and political process, I think this is a great film. Granted the movie was not the comedy I expected, but once I got over that this film really made me think. So much of what we see and hear in regards to any election is such a joke. There is in particular a debate scene in this movie that I felt was a masterful critique of our political debates and how policies are "discussed" at them. I encourage anyone who thinks our process is fine to go see this film. If you want something to laugh at however, Robin Williams and Christopher Walken are not their usual selves. In this movie they show us that the truth hurts, not that the truth is funny.

How did they let this one get away?

[BigMac331 · 6/10 · 28 October 2006]

I really wanted to like it, I really did. How can you have so many likable actors, with a great plot line, and hate the movie. A bad subplot line, thats what. It goes from *put in any political comedy movie* to *put in any conspiracy movie*, leaving the viewer wondering if they put on a different film. It goes from happy-go-lucky ha-ha, Robin Williams is Jon Stewart becoming president to Oh No! The voting was false and one person is doing the right thing, running away from the suits to right a wrong. I could have done without all that garbage. Barry Levinson needed a bad rewrite. We went to go to the movie to laugh and go into fantasy land. Robin, Christopher Walken (who in the 10 minutes he had an impact was classic), and Lewis Black (Oh, no! What happened. He really tried) all had great tries. Laura Linney and her storyline killed the movie. I got bored easily with her, and I didn't want her to show up. I thought it would have been Robin Williams concreting his position as a comedy god, but sadly it may have put him in the demi-god section. I gave it a 6 out of 10 for 3 reasons:

1) Robin Williams already qualifies it for 3 points. 2) The first half hour was hilarious. I loved it. 2 points. 3) The trio really tried to make it work, and it would have if it wasn't for Levinson's twist. 2 points.

Bottom line, you can get all the funny parts from the trailer or YouTube, and the political drama sucked anyway, so skip the movie and go see Running with Scissors for some comedy or The Departed for drama/action.

Two Very Different Stories In One Movie Seemed Awkward To Me

[sddavis63 · 5/10 · 8 June 2012]

I found this movie to be ... awkward. It wasn't bad. There are parts of it that are actually quite good. But it struck me as what you might call overly ambitious. There are basically two movies here. They're certainly connected; in fact in the context of this movie they're inseparable. But they're very different stories, and the combination of the two was - again - awkward.

After what I thought was a pretty slow start with what was a rather lengthy narration style opening from Christopher Walken, playing Jack Menken, who was the manager for Tom Dobbs (Robin Williams), the movie started out really well. Dobbs is a political satirist, a la Jon Stewart. On his TV talk show he skewers politicians and rants against the system, and then suddenly and unexpectedly declares his candidacy for President of the United States. Starting out as a serious campaigner, he cuts loose as the political satirist he really is during a televised debate, his campaign catches fire and he gets elected, to everyone's surprise. This was working for me - and it was working really well. It wasn't outrageously funny, but it was a wonderful poke at the system, and I was seriously looking forward to seeing Dobbs poking the system from inside as he takes over the Oval Office.

Then comes the awkwardness, as a completely unnecessary storyline gets introduced. The United States was trying out a new computer-based voting system. Now, I may not be an American but I'm familiar with the American electoral system. That's almost impossible. Each state runs its own version of the presidential election in its own way according to its own rules. To expect that every single state would sign on to this system is ridiculous. But that's the story. It then moves on to the fact that a computer glitch is what got Dobbs elected. You know what? I really wanted him as the legitimately elected President - a poke in the eye to the system from the voters. But he's not. The company that developed the computer voting system wants to cover the glitch up of course. So what if the glitch screwed democracy - it will hurt us in the pocketbook if people find out. But Eleanor (Laura Linney) - who works for the company - doesn't agree, wants to go public, and so the company sets out first to discredit her and then to eliminate her. So what started out as an enjoyable and light-hearted political satire becomes a political thriller about an electoral conspiracy. That could make for a good movie on its own, but to tie it in with the first part of the movie, where Dobbs gets elected in a huge upset was - I'll say it again - awkward. Both stories had a lot of potential. Because of the hybrid nature of the movie, neither story reached its full potential.

To give credit where credit is due, though, Robin Williams was, I thought, superb in the role. He seemed credible, sincere and completely believable. I'm not always a big fan of Robin Williams; this movie was one of the best performances I've seen from him. Linney was good; Walken was probably underused.

The movie's not bad. I just think it tried to do too much, and it would have been more fun and more interesting and maybe more thought-provoking if the whole political thriller angle had been dumped and we could have seen Dobbs actually and legitimately behind the desk in the Oval Office. (5/10)