Ides of March Review- By Michael Carlisle

Title: Ides of March

Year: 2011

Director: George Clooney
Country: U.S
Language: English

As you can tell from my reviews on Moneyball and The Help I’m not really a fan of recycled material that is not used in an interesting or innovative way. Harold and Maude is an example of a film that had the recycled rich and poor person love story however the way it was used was absolutely fascinating. Ides of March is a recycled story about the corruption of politicians and the crushing experience of running an American political campaign. Hey everybody, did you know that politics can often be crooked? You did! Wow! Ides of March tells us something everybody already knew about American politics. It’s corrupt, we get it. If this was made back in 2000, when George Bush stole office from Al Gore, then perhaps this film could have had some steam. It might’ve been incredibly controversial and still known to this day. However this is 2012, we are near the peak of the information era, this film presents old news.

Forget republicans, this film is really only about democrats. Because surely a democrat can’t be corrupted right? Enter Stephen Myers (Ryan Gosling), a press secretary who’s job is mainly to lie. He works for a fella named Mike Morris (George Clooney) who’s campaign manager is Paul Zera (Phillip Seymour Hoffman). They’re running against Michael Mantell and Paul Giamatti. Wow, this film has a noteworthy cast selection. Many people will see this film, just because of the great cast. I would argue that, like in many films, a huge ensemble cast likely means that the film is utter crap.

Surprise, surprise. Every character except the young fella (Ryan Gosling) is cynical and underhanded. Well, for a short while at least. See the theme in this film is that even good democratic politicians can become corrupted by their ambitions and the world around them. You might think of Ides of March as a less interesting and less funny political version of All About Eve. There seems to be a great resemblance between Ryan Gosling/Stephen Myers and Anne Baxter/ Eve. While this film may evoke discussions on the nature of man, it has done nothing that every other political film has done before.

Like I said, the film reveals no new information. In the era of information everything this film presents has already been well known. The story has been written several times, and that “insider story” is completely lost. The dirty laundry that’s attempted to be exposed has already been out years ago. The acting in this film, because it is filled with established actors, is well done. There are few films, if any, that Phillip Seymour Hoffman and Paul Giamatti have acted poorly in. Ryan Gosling is incredibly convincing, as he is in many of his films like Blue Valentine and Lars and the Real Girl.

In conclusion, I think George Clooney was too aware that he was trying to make a serious political film. He thinks this film airs more dirty laundry than it actually does. This is 2012, the era of making dirty political films is over. Quite shoving the idea down our throats, we understand that politics is a dirty minefield. We understand that politicians can become corrupted. Recycled material can only be fresh if you do something creative with it. Piss on it! 1/5

Next 5 Reviews

1. Midnight in Paris- 2011
2. The Hunger Games- 2012
3. 50/50- 2011
4. Inception- 2010
5. Keyhole- 2011