John Kelly I found this film totally enthralling from start to finish, and it's actors performances - in particular Tom Selleck and Teri Hatcher - if you had rasberried them with their respective performances on the small screen as Magnum PI and dumb Lois Lane, this is a film to watch..it will pleasantly surprise you and turn you around as it has me.Faye Dunaway is absolutely brilliant, and Laura Linney and Nancy Travis' characters bounce so well off each other.The cover of the DVD has "Tom Selleck is Stellar!" - So are the four ladies mentioned above..absolutely Stellar - this is a great ensemble cast.It could be compared to a lot of modern films, "Dave", "True Colours" etc, bit it has a uniqueness all its own. Totally recommended..

formula44xxx Sure some of the characters in this film, about a Governor (Tom Selleck) running for president, seem hollow and fake...but isn't that the way politics is? As it goes this is a decent entry, though you would be better suited watching 'Bob Roberts' from 1992. The cast here is good, with Laura Linney and Nancy Travis giving the film's best performances, while Faye Dunaway is embarrassingly bad at first, then delivers a poignant middle before settling down at the bottom again near the end. Why does this woman keep getting Golden Globe nominations for such overripe performances? I Recommend this mostly for political junkies or for viewing during election season.

spteos TNT had been promoing this one since the winter primary season, so I expected something like a blockbuster. Fool me once . . . Actually, "Running Mates" has its likeable moments and it did close with an uplifting plot turn, though it was one you could see coming. The scenes came fast, which I thought worked, and the editing kept the story moving.The disappointments were in the utter phony silliness of certain aspects of what was a crackling good presentation much of the time. For example, the character of the Texas VP hopeful; that style wouldn't have worked in a good movie or TV show 40 years ago. The four women all having something in common with Tom Selleck's Gov. Pryce was a forced issue and hard to believe -- and also unnecessary. The vice-presidential decision coming on the night of Selleck's acceptance speech was likewise fiction and likewise not necessary; just a cheap hook to keep viewers tuned in all the way to the final credits.There were a lot of good vignettes, the real TV personalities gave the movie a newscast feel, and Selleck and Bob Gunton as the reluctant VP candidate were the best of a good cast. Overall, a slick production that was certainly watchable. But it seems to me if you're doing this kind of thing during a political convention and tying in so many real events, you'd want to make the entire movie as real as possible. The production/directorial decisions that deviated from that are hard to fathom.

roger.nelson The indiscriminate use of the "P" word turned me off to this made-for-TV movie. It had enough stars in it to make it a success, but I never used language like that and can't understand why TNT aired it as is. They edit other films for broadcasting with unacceptable language, so why is this one any different?I grew up learning from my parents and peers what was acceptable language in mixed company and what was not. Maybe that's what is wrong with the world today.Sincerely,RN