The Ides of March
Directed by George Clooney
Written by George Clooney, Grant Heslov and Beau Willimon
Starring Ryan Gosling, George Clooney, Philip Seymour Hoffman, Paul Giamatti, Marisa Tomei and Evan Rachel Wood

The Ides of March takes a fascinating, cynical look at the cogs in a well-oiled political machine, namely a presidential campaign shaped by public perception and political pundits. George Clooney plays Governor Mike Morris, a charismatic politician who eschews foreign oil dependence and war and espouses the value of job creation and free education. To the disillusioned masses of America, Morris is the real deal, a beacon of hope and change. Sound familiar? Morris is trying to win the Ohio Democratic primary, which will effectively make or break the remainder of his campaign.

Stephen Myers (Ryan Gosling) is an idealistic campaign staffer who buys completely into Morris’s image, and believes that he is making the world a better place by helping the governor get elected. Despite his highly touted experience, Myers is naïve about the true nature of modern day politics, and once he becomes fully immersed in the seedy side of the game, he evolves into the very type of shrewd player he so despised when the story began.

An excellent cast includes Marisa Tomei as a ruthless political reporter, Philip Seymour Hoffman as the Morris campaign manager, Paul Giamatti as the opposing team’s manager, and Evan Rachel Wood as a beguiling intern who beds Myers. The performances are top-notch, but I must say this was not my favorite turn by Ryan Gosling. He has appeared in a lot of films this year, and by now his earnest, plaintive facial expressions are beginning to wear thin. Giamatti and Hoffman are much more enjoyable as two pros going tit for tat in the corrupt game of politics. Clooney was born to play the role of slick and likable Morris, and Rachel Wood is quite strong in her limited role.

The Ides of March excels as an expose on what goes on behind powerful campaigns, and I have no doubt that a lot of what we see on screen is very close to the truth. Integrity, values and honesty have no place today. It comes down to which candidate is willing to play dirtiest. That’s a jaded, but realistic view. Clooney’s fictitious candidate would never, ever make it as far in real life as he does in the film. He’s too controversial, and he won’t (*gasp*) cop to an affiliation with any organized religion.  It would be easy to surmise that Clooney might be pushing a political agenda in the film, but no one (and no party) emerges unscathed in reputation. Considering the fact that we (Americans) are entering an election cycle, the film is a bit depressing and bleak.

Clooney directed and co-wrote (though the story was adapted from the play “Farragut North” by Bea Willimon). I’ve got no quibble with Clooney’s direction, but this is a story driven narrative, and I had a hard time reconciling some of the components.  Mainly, this came down to the character of Stephen. We are asked to believe that he is whip-smart, and that he has amassed more political know-how by the age of thirty than most men do by forty. In the same breath, we are to believe that he is so traumatized by his first brush with dirty politics that he does a complete 180. Clooney establishes Myers’ character too well in the beginning for me to buy into that change. It didn’t ring true. The time frame was too condensed. There are also some glaring issues with Rachel Woods’ intern character, which will likely become clear if you see the film. She is supposed to be sympathetic, but her actions speak otherwise.

Those expecting an action-packed political thriller will be disappointed with the pacing of the film. This is a thoughtful, methodically-paced psychological thriller. It will undoubtedly become required viewing for anyone interested in politics, but due to the character inconsistencies, I found it good, not great. – Shannon

SCORE: