The Ides of March - Movie Review

Soothsayer:
Beware the ides of March.
Caesar:
What man is that?
Brutus:
A soothsayer bids you beware the ides of March.

The Ides of March was Julius Caesar's undoing. He was done in by a conspiracy led by one of his trusted advisers, Brutus. Brutus viewed Caesar as a threat to the very Republic he had overthrown. This threat led Brutus to plot against Caesar, in his mind, to save the republic. The open ended film The Ides of March ties into its title, which is never actually discussed directly in the film.

The Ides of March is a political thriller with a modest temperament. The forgettable formula in this film was saved by a stellar cast that kept it slightly more interesting than it otherwise might have been. Stephen Myers (Ryan Gosling) is a young, politically astute, media savvy operator. He answers directly to the campaign manager (Paul Zara, played by Philip Seymour Hoffman) for presidential candidate Mike Morris (George Clooney). The campaign has weeded out most of the competition and has locked into battle with one other candidate, Senator Pullman (Michael Mantell). Pullman's campaign is headed by another seasoned operative in Tom Duffy (Paul Giamatti).

Duffy realizes Myers' potential, tricking Myers into no-win situations. But Myers is sharp. While less experienced than the other operators in this campaign, Myers understands the importance of shaping the message. He also understands that knowledge is power. Even perceived knowledge. In a world of political intrigue and power politics, Myers maneuvers like a veteran, setting the stage for the ultimate betrayal.

George Clooney and Grant Heslov created the Ides of March screenplay, which is based on the book Farragut North by Beau Willimon. I wish someone other than Clooney had done the screenplay. The screenplay itself was fairly balanced, but there were some nuggets, like Democratic operatives arguing that they need to play dirty like the Republicans. I think Mr. Clooney forgets that the Administration he supported played the race card against the Clintons during the Democratic primaries, making them obviously familiar with dirty politics. However, the screen play does not really get deep into party politics. In fact, it doesn't get deep into anything, other than the way campaigns operate. The story itself was forgettable, with subplots that lacked credibility. I think they may have tried too hard to tie the story to events ripped from the headlines. The story felt forced.

The cast was phenomenal. While I don't care for Clooney's politics, I like his acting. He was rock solid as the Governor. But Gosling carried this film. I have always been partial to Gosling, but without him, this film would have been a complete dud. Throw in Giamatti and Hoffman, two more of my favorites, and the cast was awesome. The performances were fitting and believable. The only cameo that irritated me was Chris Matthews. I want to vomit any time I see that cackling hack. The film could have done without him. Just another bone that Clooney threw to the left...along with some red meat speeches, which actually gave the film mild credibility. The cast exceeded the script but only elevated the film to a mild recommendation.

The Ides of March could have been much better. I didn't like the subplots, especially the whole intern angle. It just lacked authenticity. Not the part about a politician and an intern. This particular subplot. It didn't play out right. It also failed to add a suspense element to the film. Instead, we have a somewhat straight-forward examination of dirty tricks politics. But we all know that part already. I wanted something exciting. Some drama. Something. Instead, we get Ryan Gosling carrying an average script on his shoulders, preparing to deliver a speech that only Brutus might know the context of. Beware the Ides of March. 6/10.