film review: the ides of march
The Ides of March is a slick political thriller set in the final days of the Ohio presidential primary. Ryan Gosling plays Stephen, a smug yet idealistic campaigner for Democrat candidate Mike Morris, played by George Clooney. In some ways this film sees Gosling step into Clooney’s shoes. Slightly aloof and utterly charming, Stephen knows how to maintain the upper hand – in politics and in personal relationships. However, Gosling brings something sincere to the role, managing to encapsulate Stephen’s naiveté as well as his sharpness. Meanwhile Clooney steps into the director’s shoes again, bringing to the role the same effortless confidence he does in his acting. Along with Grant Heslov and Beau Willimon he is also one of the writers of the film.
When we first meet Stephen he is genuine in his dedication to Morris’ campaign and completely honest about the nature of his role. In the opening speech of the film, Morris states “I am neither a Christian, nor an atheist, I’m not Jewish or Muslim… my religion is a piece of paper, the Constitution.” Similarly, at the beginning of the story, Stephen has no religion, but Morris and his campaign. Morris is almost a dream American liberal candidate – anti war, pro equal marriage rights, striving to improve life for the least of his country’s citizens. In interviews he is perfectly composed and rational. He refuses to make deals with those whose ideologies he opposes. Yet the film remains somewhat balanced in its portrayal of politics by critiquing the left as much as supporting it. Even with the best of intentions a person or party can be corrupted. No-one is above the system. It’s Stephen’s realisation of this that brings the movie to its major conflict.
The cinematography in The Ides of March is typically clean, uncomplicated Hollywood. Given the subject matter, this is a suitable choice and combined with compelling performances from the entire cast, makes for an engrossing film. There is some play between the characters ‘off screen’ and ‘on screen’ personas, but this is primarily something that comes through in direction. Clooney has made some interesting choices here. His own character, Senator Morris, comes across as a genuine, intelligent man, but off camera he bears only a quiet charm beside the magnetic persona of Stephen. Of all the characters Molly is the least convincing. While Evan Rachel Wood is fine in her role, the character’s motivation leaves something to be desired. She is inconsistent – one moment confident and mature, the next helpless. This might work if we had some prior behaviour with which to frame her actions, but unfortunately Molly’s background is rather bluntly told to us in her dialogue rather than shown. As a result, Molly is more of a plot point than a person. Perhaps if Clooney had stuck to two roles in this production, instead of taking on three, the narrative would have been more well-rounded.
The title of the film refers to the date Julius Caesar was stabbed to death in the Roman senate. A seer had predicted the Emperor would be killed no later than the Ides of March (March 15). Shakespeare immortalised this in his play Julius Caesar. The reference is apt enough – political intrigue is at the heart of both stories. Yet the events of the film aren’t milked for drama as a Shakespearean adaptation might be. There’s plenty of conflict throughout, but the film ends on a rather subdued note. This is perhaps the most original thing about The Ides of March as a political thriller – how underplayed it turns out to be and how quietly it accepts a flawed political system. With that said, this is not an overly challenging or insightful examination of politics. The Ides of March is entertainment first, political critique second. In its first role at least it’s a success.
