User Reviews

I saw this at the Waterfront Film Festival in Saugatuck, Michigan.

Funny movie about a political activist John Logue (played by Breckin Meyer) who makes a drunken promise that if George Bush is elected president, he will move to Canada. After John Kerry is defeated by George Bush, it seems like Logue's life has lost its purpose. Finally, after his friends insist that he keeps his promise, Logue decides to take the trip to Canada. To do so he places an ad for a road partner and chooses the mysterious Chloe (Anna Paquin).

In case you didn't notice by the synopsis, this film does rip on President Bush quite often, so don't be upset if you're from a certain political party, you know what was in store before seeing the film. It started out very well but I felt that it lost some steam in the second half and never really recovered. It's still a good movie, but I wish it would have kept its same charm and comedy that it had in its first half.

Breckin Meyer and Anna Paquin were very good together, they were well cast and did a good job acting. However, there are times where it seemed the film was written by someone the day after the 2004 presidential elections. It probably would've been a better film if some of the dialogue didn't sound like people debating on CNN.

It's a nice film and worth looking out for, but just remember to read what it's about before seeing it because it's not for everyone.

I really wanted to like this film -- it is a great idea! However, the comic undertones of the film quickly gave way to a downbeat drama and the portrayal of one of the most dysfunctional families ever seen on film.

My enjoyment of the movie dwindled as the film went on and on and on. It wasn't really the acting (at least not of the main characters), or even the directing, but rather the writing that was at fault. The script is heavy handed and unbelievable.

On top of this, the writer should have at least visited Canada, or checked out some facts about the country before writing so egregiously. The movie makes it look like Winnipeg is a day's drive from Washington state; Canada border guards do not ask Americans to see their passports at the border - they ask for identification (Social Security number, driver's license, etc.); Winnipeg does not enjoy Chinooks (where weather changes 30 degrees in a day) that's Calgary; By 2004 when this film takes place you would have a hard time finding any Canadian boasting of universal health care; and you really don't hear that tall poppy story up here -- that is a story Americans use to describe Canadians, not a story Canadians use to describe themselves.

Overall, this was a missed opportunity for a very funny, poignant and timely film that really missed its mark. The plot was good, the main actors good, but the actual writing was very clumsy.

This is a typical formula romantic comedy in that the couple fight and insult each other for most of the film then suddenly get the hots for each other at the end after getting plastered on home made Canadian beer. It is an unusual romantic comedy in that I found myself hoping the whole film he would escape from her. She was totally wrong for him. She was an soldier in Iraq. He is a rabid peace activist. She lives on junk food and meat. He is a vegetarian. He is highly idealistic. She is totally self centred. He easy going and rational. She is erratic and touchy. There is no attraction besides sex. Usually such differences just create fodder for humour, but in this movie, it turns into a mild horror.

The movie is mostly them sniping at each other. There are two other notable scenes.

In one they go to meet the boy's father, who seems to think he is Rush Limbaugh, or at least a worshipper. It is quite over the top, packing in every Republican stereotype into a few minutes. It is hilarious, horrifying and depressing.

In another scene, he almost marries a gigantic older woman besotted with him that he just met to help him toward Canadian citizenship. It is just creepy.

Other than those two scenes, not much happens. It is like travels of a handsome young man with his cranky cat companion. She is not intelligent enough to say anything interesting, and not stupid enough to be amusing.

This is a strongly anti-Bush film. It was made by Canadians. It has fun with the stereotypes Americans and Canadians have about each other.

The people who ripped into the movie for portraying a one-dimensional Canada or taking potshots at Bush are missing the point.

Canada as a locale in the movie is merely a convenient shorthand-- it could have been Mexico or the UK or Australia, the point is that it's a foreign country. Calling 'Blue State' "anti-Canadian propaganda" is a bit like calling South Park's portrayal of egghead Canadians "anti-Canadian propaganda".

And, it may be just me, but I felt that 'Blue State' pokes more fun at the Democrat zealot than of Dubya-- for a considerable portion of the movie, and when he's on tirade-mode, it seems to me that John is portrayed as a sad, almost ridiculous figure.

That aside, the leads are believable and exhibit romantic chemistry, and make their characters likable. Especially Breckin Meyer-- as written, John is a self-important, uptight person for most of the film, but Meyer imbues his character with humanity.

Overall a mild political satire and competent, heartfelt romantic road trip.

Worried about disappointing the loyal readers of his internet blog, a political activist decides to make good on a promise he made to move to Canada if George W. Bush was reelected in this Canada/US co- production starring Breckin Meyer. The film is overloaded with political debate (and lots of anti-Bush sentiment), however it nevertheless makes Meyer's road trip less a political one and more a journey of self-discovery in which he learns to be proud to be an American while dealing with personal issues that surface after stopping off at his parents' house along the way. He also learns to become more humble throughout, having built up a false self-image as an important person in the political scene purely due to some campaign work and a blog with a smaller audience than he ever realised. What exactly Anna Paquin's character has to do with his self-discovery journey is less clear. Her role in the narrative is awkward from the get-go with Meyer desperate for companionship as he drives up to Canada. Paquin's character admittedly comes with a few twists that one might not see coming, but the romantic tension between the pair is extremely formulaic and subtracts from Meyer's character growth. All in all, 'Blue State' is a film with enough in it to possibly be worth a look, but with a singular protagonist and a tighter story, it may have been a lot more than just that.

I saw this movie at the Tribeca Film Festival in 2007. I think it won the audience award there. The atmosphere in the theater was electric (Anna Paquin, the director and producer were all there). It is a really great movie. I walked out of the theater feeling uplifted by the experience and in a better mood for it. Not only are the performances spot on (I think this is some of Anna Paquin's best work), but the movie manages the rare feat of being both funny, warm and thought-provoking at the same time. I would describe it as part road movie, part romantic comedy - with some acute political commentary thrown in for good measure. This is not, however, a movie that preaches its politics. The (few) political points it does make are balanced and more importantly very funny. The portrayal of Canadians and Americans view of them is hilarious. It's out on DVD and on netflix, etc. so go ahead and see it. You won't regret it. HIGHLY RECOMMENDED!

At first I find it pretty entertaining, but then after sometime it just keep dragging on and it end up to be pretty much --- boring. I have no idea was the movie about when I first watch it, it seem like a nice independent production movie but in the end it was way too average propaganda movie with an American point of view of Canada.

The main reason I watch it was because I pretty much familiar with the actors Anna Paquin and Breckin Meyer. Most of their movie is pretty much watchable so I went along with it in this one. The story is so-so; nothing great can be said about it; except it makes Canada look like a really dreadful place and people are very much a freak.

Nothing much developed during the course of the movie except we get to learn the reasons why they wanted to move to Canada, and the rest is just gap filler. The paces of the film never change but keep constantly slow and somehow not one single moment of memorable scene.

I say the film might have work a whole lot better with other direction (and better script), cause this is way too simple and boring and nothing much has been added to help to set the mood of the film any better.

The best of the film got to be the casting and that what might be the only things that attract people to watch this movie. Their acting that was kept me watching it and nothing else.

Overall it is not a movie I would recommend to anyone, cause it just plain boring and one sided. There are some potential but the film has been made and it is not up to the par.

Reason To Watch: Anna Paquin and Breckin.

Reason Not To: Dreadful.

Rating: 4/10 (Grade: F)

A bland self indulgent vanity project for Marshall Lewy, I guess. Watching this movie my mind quickly begin to drift to why is it when some liberals don't get their guy, or girl, in office they throw a tantrum and threaten to "leave the country." Many of the Hollywood liberal limousine elite seem to do this with a sickening fanfare and right on cue, never follow through on it. God forbid they go somewhere where they cannot make millions of dollars being insecure unchecked narcissists. Conservatives, by contrast, when they lose an election, get mad, dig in, and vow to make a change next time; stay tuned for that in the coming days, by the way. But getting back to this movie; a "comedy?" Where? When? If I want to laugh at a generous dose of unknowns with a low budget on bleak locations playing silly Canadian stereotypes, I'll go watch my old VHS copy of Strange Brew again. Hey, good idea.

UPDATE- check out "RED STATE"(2011) movie; a great parallel to "BLUE STATE"

The feature tries to inoculate the concept that IF you are an activist , you must be so because YOU ARE NOT NORMAL(Anna Paquin is being used as the ROLE MODEL, apparently the ONLY sane American in the feature.) this is targeting young people by trying to confuse their perceptions of anything that IS "white" OR "black".

(warning)first i must say that i am Canadian by assimilation, and while not having an American voting card, i was just as disappointed of George bush re-election as man others were, especially since his actions in oval office DO have a global impact no matter where you live. "blue state" is exactly about this, more precisely about A disgruntled "democrat" that after the re-elections of 2004 is on his way to Canada, running away from g.w.b because his vote "did not matter".why 2 stars? because this movie attempts to play on my feelings, from "incentives" such as a pretty woman (by the way god forbid for anyone to have such a girlfriend) to "happy endings"(no matter how unhappy this administration could make you). also it is very racist and anti-Canadian.basically over 1 hour of "liberal" and Canadian sympathy that turns into a HATE movie against all the above. (just cant believe that the director would make the only black man in the feature a TERRORIST in concept. WOW, have not seen such covered racism in a while...) . I CAN NOT BELIEVE THEY MAKING A MOCKERY OF THE Canadian PUBLIC HEALTH SYSTEM by implying that IF YOU JOIN THE US ARMY YOU CAN HAVE A BETTER ONE(health care)...WHAT ABOUT THE OTHER MILLIONS Americans THAT HAVE NU SUCH DARK "PASSIONS" or can NOT easily be lied to?

if you are a CONSERVATIVE, you will likely love this movie and i mean that literally, if watch it all..if you are an anti-bush activist you will certainly dislike it (again, must see it entirely.

surprisingly, on the feature's artistic merits, i was quiet WELL pleased UNTIL THE LAST 20-30 MINUTES!. 5 minutes of watching THIS got me hooked up at first. while it is not a "fast" movie per-see, it is VERY rich in ideas and thoughts including self induced criticism.Breckin Meyer plays excellent and seems very comfortable in the character's skin. his attitude creates quiet many comic aspects without getting anywhere close to the "geek" side(and make some mockery out of this). he is also very passionate in a very passive-aggressive way.he represents quit well the typical north American male just as much as Anna Paquin represents its female counterpart. the whole production is targeting Americans only since there are MANY "clichés" that could not easily be applied even to Canadian "lifestyles" for example( then think the rest of the non-English world...). towards Canadians like myself there are plenty of insults (from the the marry-a-Canadian matrimonial agency in its objective or , the Canadian border officer that dislikes American beer because it tastes like "s--t",etc).at times i was not sure if this production took "cheap" shots at me or other Canadians, but regardless, the director did it with "gusto" and i can appreciate that until the twist that makes the whole feature PURE PRO-PRESENT ADMINISTARTION PROPAGANDA.(even the ideas in the movie imply that "bush" OR "kerry" are THE SAME THING) for example i had nor seen or heard of "40 inch" size pizza order, looks hilarious do)). so many clichés about how Canadians have good times at parties drinking tons of beer apparently, he he. or the "tall poppy syndrome" joke that had me burst laughing)))).two poor sensitive Americans being exposed to all this that is Canadian and the Canadians themselves, apparently still having that old fashioned "cave" mentality .check also the quick argument about universal health care in US ARMY...jaw-breaking and disgusting shameless advertisement. there are a couple of scenes that will hit your emotional perceptions quiet strongly. the dialogues are witty, and REALISTIC as seen or heard from "public" versus "private" eye opposing views. a great deal of naivety versus maturity; a real life condition versus a desired one.

the last 20 minutes are a complete racist,xenophobe and naive RIDE hidden within a romantic and stereotype nutshell.one scene i did not find appealing at all ; when a black man says (why had to be black, again with stereotypes??)"i wish that m... dead, look at me i am running from my own country like a refugee" and Anna Paquin hears that......she gives this "superior" stance, very irritating, of a superior "moralist" she sees herself as.it gets WORSE after ...

i CAN NOT BELIEVE i actually wasted my time to watch this, even if i loved most of the movie until it tried to TWIST everything up!(especially from the comments made by the American loving in Canada for 35 years because he ran away from the draft in Vietnam)

A self-mocking indictment against taking life too seriously, as ever the redeeming power of love wins out, with the moral - at the end - being that it is better to act locally than to run away.

As for suggestions that the movie is partisan, I think not, this is merely a matter of character portrayal.

Excellent acting by the hero and heroine. Very enjoyable and absorbing to watch.

A self-mocking indictment against taking life too seriously, as ever the redeeming power of love wins out, with the moral - at the end - being that it is better to act locally than to run away.

As for suggestions that the movie is partisan, I think not, this is merely a matter of character portrayal.

Excellent acting by the hero and heroine. Very enjoyable and absorbing to watch.

Eager to tell a story certain aspects of the plot and characters can take a back seat to a film's desire to push the plot.

The film was successful, however, I feel like proper pacing and better character development would have helped.

The political rhetoric, name and fact dropping get old after a while mostly because their analysis is only surface deep. A desire for more thought provoking facts could have helped validate the hero's desire.

Overall acting felt tense and awkward which made the craft more noticeable and made it difficult to let go of the actor's fame.

It's a unique film in it's story and arguably would have been better in a more independent circuit or with less known actors. An overall style or unique artifact was desired and severely missed.

Considering that this movie is 15 years old when it was made in a bygone era when Georgy-Porgy was the President and this Democrat has a girlfriend who keeps arguing. Neither would I call it romantic nor a comedy. Its a ridiculous situation.

Its late in the year 2004 and John (Breckin Meyer) is in despair. After working very hard on John Kerry's presidential campaign, our man John is astounded that "W" was re-elected. Not only this, Johnny promised friends at a bar, during the pre-election period, that he would move to Canada, should Senator Kerry lose. Uh oh. Packing up, John advertises for a travel companion, to help with expenses and for company, as he will be going from California to Winnipeg. Soon, a beautiful young lady, Chloe (Anna Paguin) responds to the ad and agrees to go with John. However, she is rather mysterious about why she is leaving the USA. No matter, off the two go. John is somewhat disappointed that on their first hotel stop, Chloe insists on separate rooms, for he can't deny his interest in the young lady. They also make a stop in Washington to see John's parents, since its "on the way", but, it is a dismal and nerve-jangling visit. This is so because John's political views and eating preferences are the complete opposite of his folks. The two younger people leave in a hurry. As they near the border, Chloe suddenly gets cold feet and some secrets surface, ones that startle John. Will the two make it to Winnipeg, where the woman who runs "marry a Canadian for residency" is waiting for them? This is a wonderful film, with plenty of humor and heart. As the two principal stars, Meyer and Paquin are terrific and compliment each other well. The supporting cast, mostly unknowns, is fine, also. The scenery is vibrantly lovely while the costumes, camera work, and steady direction add much to the movie's success. Then, too, the script is relevant, humorous, and touching, although those with conservative political views may not care for it too much and yank it out of the machine. Nevertheless, it has some interesting points to convey that every viewer can admire, no matter what their persuasion. So, if you love romantic comedy and/or films with an abundance of weighty topics, get this one tonight.

"Blue State" is set after the John Kerry versus George Bush election of 2004. Our hero, John Logue (Breckin Meyer) a staunch democrat vows to move to Canada as a protest if Bush wins. A group called Marry-a-Canadian.ca contacts him and urges him to join them in Winnipeg. So the move to Canada begins.

The film is predominantly a road trip. John seeks a driving partner for the trip and finds Chloe (Anna Paquin). There is of course a romance sub-plot between the two. The genius of this film is in the writing of the characters. He's devoted to the left-wing political cause; she's much more mysterious. She guesses what he wants to hear, and he believes her. Although John is extremely liberal, the film isn't. They cleverly wrote in flaws to his character, and although the right-wing characters were more soft-spoken they usually got the last word. People from across the spectrum should be able to appreciate the film. Being liberal myself, I connected to John instantly and his weaknesses just made him that much more endearing to me.

The road trip part of the film is extremely well written and moves at a reasonable pace. The Marry-a-Canadian part is just plain weird but luckily they don't spend much time in Winnipeg. And the best part of this film is that it actually has a resolution. I highly recommend "Blue State" to all the John Logues out there.

It's great to say "I'm moving to Canada if so and so wins." But a true patriot stays and fights for what they believe in even when they are faced with adversity.