'The Manchurian Candidate' 2004: Meryl Streep Steals All Her Scenes

The Manchurian Candidate 2004 Denzel WashingtonThe Manchurian Candidate 2004 Denzel Washington movie. (Image: Denzel Washington.) While keeping the framework of the 1962 original, Jonathan Demme's remake of John Frankenheimer's political thriller The Manchurian Candidate has revamped the plot so as to create parallels between what takes place on screen and current events. The results are mixed at best.

In the new version, adapted by Daniel Pyne and Dean Georgaris from George Axelrod's 1962 screenplay and Richard Condon's 1959 Cold War novel, U.S. Army Major Bennett Marco (Denzel Washington) spends his days giving speeches about the heroic deeds of Sergeant Raymond Shaw (Liev Schreiber), winner of the prestigious Medal of Honor for having saved Marco's Gulf War platoon during an ambush.

Marco's nights, however, are considerably less placid. He suffers from a recurring nightmare, in which he finds himself back with his platoon on the night of the ambush. But in this dream, the ambush is not perpetrated by Iraqi fighters, but by much more sinister forces.

In the meantime, through the wily manipulations of his mother, Senator Eleanor Prentiss Shaw (Meryl Streep), the idealistic Raymond becomes the most-likely next vice president of the United States.

Upon learning of Raymond Shaw's nomination, Marco, his sanity about to go over the edge, stalks the candidate so as to uncover the whole truth about the ambush and its aftermath.

The Manchurian Candidate 2004: Top talent can't save it

Although The Manchurian Candidate 2004 boasts top-line talent both behind and in front of the cameras, with the exception of Meryl Streep's enjoyable turn as the power-hungry U.S. Senator Shaw (a more humorous version of Angela Lansbury's mother-from-hell in the original film), most of those involved in the production are either misused or underused.

Denzel Washington, the film's emotional centerpiece, is a case in point. Despite – or perhaps because of – his obvious efforts, Washington is never fully convincing as a psychologically battered man on the brink of insanity. Liev Schreiber, in an equally difficult if radically different role, is just as inadequate.

Jonathan Demme's self-conscious touch only adds to the film's woes. The director shows an enormous fondness for awkward close-ups and is incapable of making the most outlandish plot elements seem nothing short of laughable.

A Manchurian Candidate for the Bush years

In fact, the film's biggest handicap is its screenplay. If the similarities to the George W. Bush White House and its corporate cronies are both intriguing and disturbing, an overabundance of plot holes and a dishonest, overly tidy ending – problems also found in the original – severely cripple the picture's sense of immediacy.

Additionally, The Manchurian Candidate's 130-minute running time feels like 130 minutes. Such ponderousness is something that a suspenseful thriller, whether or not it offers a pressing political message, cannot afford.

The Manchurian Candidate (2004). Dir.: Jonathan Demme. Cast: Denzel Washington, Meryl Streep, Liev Schreiber, Jon Voight, Jeffrey Wright, Kimberly Elise, Bruno Ganz, Ted Levine, Vera Farmiga, Miguel Ferrer, Dean Stockwell, Simon McBurney. Scr.: Daniel Pyne and Dean Georgaris; from George Axelrod's 1962 screenplay and Richard Condon's 1959 novel.

Note: The Manchurian Candidate review initially posted in Sept. 2004. The Manchurian Candidate 1962 starred Frank Sinatra, Laurence Harvey, Janet Leigh, and Angela Lansbury.

The Manchurian Candidate 2004 movie Denzel Washington picture: Paramount Pictures.

'The Manchurian Candidate' 2004: Meryl Streep Steals All Her Scenes © 2004–2018 Alt Film Guide and/or author(s).
Text NOT to be reproduced without prior written consent.

Leave a comment about ''The Manchurian Candidate' 2004: Meryl Streep Steals All Her Scenes'


Don't waste time and energy disagreeing with and/or being deeply offended by the presentation of factual information.

On the other hand, it's perfectly okay to disagree with and/or, if you're so inclined, to be deeply offended by the views & opinions (and/or likes & dislikes) found on this site. And to let us know about any omissions or, heaven forbid, errors.

Just bear in mind that *thoughtfulness* and *at least a modicum of sanity* are imperative.

In other words: Feel free to add something reasonable & coherent – AND fact-based – to the discussion.

Abusive/bigoted, trollish/inflammatory, baseless (spreading misinformation, whether intentionally or not), spammy, and/or just plain deranged comments will be zapped and offenders may be banned.

And finally, links found in comments will generally be deleted.

Most recent comments listed on top.