The Ides of March

George Clooney has proven many times in his directing endeavors that he is no stranger to sophistication, and a political investigation literally seemed like a treat for him. And yet I'm disappointed, and I must admit that I'm quite taken aback that there was no sophistication this time around. I expected him to dig into the highest-ranking politicians, but for the second half to labor through transparent twists towards disillusionment and broken hearts is too certain a step. Allowing the viewer to see into the fastest verbal machine guns and then easing towards morality is little more than a minor betrayal. (02/04/2012)

Like The Candidate and Primary Colors, The Ides of March shows us what we won’t see on the television news and what we rarely read about in the newspapers. It gives us a look behind the scenes, allowing us to get to know the men and women whose precisely balanced statements such as “I’m nobody, I’m anybody” make other men and women seems so outwardly convincing and trustworthy. The demystification process does not end with the removal of decorations and the greater interest in the preparation than in the live performance (just as Moneyball shows the “programming” of baseball games instead of the games themselves). Based on the stage play  Farragut North, the screenplay uses rapid-fire verbal exchanges to depict politics as not very fair juggling of valuable information. Given the existing information overload, however, the winner is not the one who knows more, but the one who is better able to manipulate facts and use them to his or her own benefit. Trust, friendship and other key concepts in the hierarchy of values lose their meaning because it is clear that it is much easier to gain someone’s interest if you put a knife to their throat (even if only in the figurative sense). The Ides of March takes into account the roles of various advisors to an even greater extent than earlier election dramas and makes outwardly powerful governors and senators mere media constructs that are dependent and manipulable. The film perhaps goes too far in relying on the power of words – it is directed in a generally unconventional way and underappreciates the power of images, but thanks to the elite cast, I still enjoyed it immensely. The actors are excellent without exception and their well-balanced performances in accordance with the functioning of politics make it impossible to draw a clear line between the villains and the good guys. We find ourselves in a place beyond good and evil, in a world where everything is relative. This opaqueness and uncertainty about who to trust elicit a feeling of hopelessness by which, in my opinion, the film fulfilled its purpose and George Clooney did his civic duty. 80% (01/23/2012)

It's not entirely George Clooney's fault, because he was once again successful behind and in front of the camera, but The Ides of March, I would say, is his least successful directorial effort to date. From my point of view, everything is mainly due to the choice of substance, because political dirt, intrigue and the fact that the person who smiles and means well (not only) during elections can be a scumbag is nothing new. And since nothing actually happened in the 100 minutes of that I didn't expect, the plot didn't really progress, and I felt like a lot of it was missing. Especially the ending was too rushed and bland. Nevertheless, the film is very well shot and acted, accompanied by Desplat's wonderfully listenable music, and it’s certainly not boring. It's just that compared to Clooney's previous works it's nothing special.__P.S. I found Ryan Gosling incredibly unsympathetic, but that's probably how he was supposed to come across. (02/15/2012)

A conflict of careerism versus loyalty in an easy-to-follow script with precise direction, leading to magnificent acting performances. The Ides of March dispenses subplots and has fewer characters than we are accustomed to from similar films, but this allows the movie to place more focus on its characters. That it looks more like a great HBO opus rather than an ambitious cinema production is a failing only to the point that it’s enough to watch it at home (as opposed to the more visually stunning and atmospheric Michael Clayton, which was more enjoyable on the big screen). (02/15/2012)

When Ryan Gosling played the lead role in the series "Young Hercules", he probably didn't even dream about meeting such great actors on the screen. In his career, he has already met actors like Steve Carell, Julianne Moore, or younger ones like Emma Stone or Michelle Williams, but he catapulted into the first league with the film "The Ides of March". Of course, he also made a name for himself in the movie "Drive", where he was perfect. In the film "The Ides of March", however, he met actors like George Clooney or Philip Seymour Hoffman. This is the damn first league. Not only was he able to easily compare himself to them, but he also played the lead role among them. "The Ides of March" is a film by George Clooney, who directed and wrote the screenplay. "Ides of March" is the term for the day when Gaius Julius Caesar was killed. It was March 15, 44 BC. "Ides" is the English version of the Latin "idus", which represents the middle of a given month, in this case, March 15. However, "The Ides of March" is definitely not as drastic a story as the killing of Caesar, but it is still a fairly good metaphor. The film tells the story of the backstage of elections, which is definitely not kind and friendly, although I think it could be harsher. The main trio of men is absolutely excellent, but their performance does not guarantee that the story will be sufficiently consistent. It's just a fragment, nothing is properly explained, nothing is concluded. More: http://www.filmovy-denik.cz/2012/09/rebelka-perfect-sense-sprosty-holky.html (02/26/2013)