The Ides of March (2011)

Don’t “Beware the Ides of March.” – watch it. 

George Clooney’s behind-the-camera accolades have proven his directorial talent, and that he has a great eye for stories with depth. To merely mention Confessions of a Dangerous Mind and Good Night, and Good Luck is enough proof of the aforementioned talent. His latest directorial project, The Ides of March (2011) helps solidify his behind-the-camera, as well as his on-screen, reputation.

The film follows Stephen Meyers (Ryan Gosling), an idealistic Junior Campaign Manager for a potential Democratic Presidential Candidate Mike Morris (George Clooney). At a key moment in his political career Meyers finds his moral fibre put to the test. Adapted from a stage play entitled Farragut North by Beau Willimon, The Ides of March shows an ugly insight to world of politics. While shows such as The West Wing (1998) show the depth of talent behind Presidents and Presidential candidates, they often show a more positive view, Clooney’s view of American politics is far more cynical and dark. Analysis of this film is made tough because key scenes and moments throughout fit around important plot points and it is important not to give these away. In spite of this, there are other ways to discuss a film without delving into specific scenes.

Although planned to be shot in 2008, a dark political drama didn’t fit in with public opinion. Clooney was forced to put the project on ice: “President Obama got elected, and everyone in America was in such a good mood.” Clooney went on to admit that “that mood lasted about a year and it was over.” But it is important to screen a film to like-minded audiences; the optimistic America of 2008 would have rejected The Ides of March. But it’s now 2011 and the director feels that “It’s a very difficult time to govern. There’s a cynicism out there. Cynicism is winning over idealism right now.”

Ryan Gosling’s Stephen Meyers faces a tough question: When you find yourself under attack do you look after number one, or stick to your guns? His moral integrity comes across almost as naivety at the start of the film, and it’s this naivety to the use of dirty tactics that causes the inevitable disequilibrium in the film. This naivety is shown early on, despite his protests, through the political clichés he uses to describe Morris which come across as hero worship. This doesn’t seem natural for a consultant as experienced as he claims to be. However, despite this, Gosling plays his Junior Campaign Manager with depth making him believable as a character and a person.

Clooney’s role is essentially a bit part, allowing Morris’ politics to take a back seat to the characters. Despite not having much screen-time, Clooney shows Morris’ charming exterior, both in public and behind closed doors with his wife. But in a key scene Clooney allows a darker side mixed with a hidden vulnerability to show through. This scene is made all the stronger due to his lack of presence and the constant use of implied presence.

Philip Seymour Hoffman is one of two highly lauded indie actors in this film. Like the rest of the cast, he is a bit part in comparison to Gosling’s Meyers with only a few scenes in which to shine. One of his key scenes is played out behind the stage while Morris speaks to Cincinnati. Hoffman’s “It doesn’t matter what you thought! It matters what you did! It matters what you didn’t do!” speech to Gosling makes him feel like a normally proud parent who has been let down making the audience feel for both characters in the duologue.

Paul Giamatti is the other incredible indie actor to appear in this film, playing Hoffman’s opposite in the Ohio primary. Is he a bad guy? Is he just another good guy fighting for the opposition? He gets even less screen time than the other supporting roles, which could normally be used as an excuse for a lack of dimensions, but he manages to round out the character nicely.

Evan Rachel Wood plays Meyer’s love interest, Molly. She plays with the characteristics of a teenage girl with a crush, changing deftly to a mature political intern trying to climb the ladder depending on her surroundings. There didn’t appear to be a weak-link in the cast whatsoever. 

Politics seems like a key theme throughout the film with the story revolving around the Democratic primary for President. Political links have already been drawn due to the postponement of the film due to Obama’s election, but are there more links to be made. Morris’ campaign poster is clearly inspired by Shepard Fairey’s now iconic ‘Hope’ poster for President Obama’s campaign. Is Clooney drawing parallels between Morris (and his darker side) and Obama? Or simply drawing parallels between the campaigns? The answer isn’t clear but is presumably decided by the political inclination of each audience member. The reality however is that politics isn’t that important as a theme in this film. The republicans never appear so it doesn’t allow for comparison; it’s an in-house battle which doesn’t even comment on the policy of Morris’ opponent. The reality is that the political setting could be swapped for any other industry in which somebody is in the public eye with consultants and advisors. It would not be far-fetched to imagine the narrative within the parameters of the film or music industries for example. The key theme that hides behind the political façade is in fact morality and integrity. Meyers’ reaction to having his moral fibre tested is the most important factor for the narrative. The consistent use of dirty tactics used against each other within the same party, and even within the same team of the party, show just how far people some people are willing to concede their own integrity to win. The other important point is how the audience react to all these tactics. The characters you choose to side will say a lot about you. 

Having not seen the original play it is difficult to comment on the adaptation from stage to screen, but there are some key differences that I am aware of that are worth noting. The first key difference is the addition of Mike Morris. In the play he is only ever spoken about, he never appears in person on stage. So Clooney was able to write this part for himself from scratch and although he doesn’t feature a lot, his presence seems important. This fact can also be related to the political television drama The West Wing. In the pilot the President only featured for a brief moment and this was supposed to be the start of how things would continue. But Martin Sheen’s Presence tested so well with audiences that they changed the format of the programme to feature President Bartlett more regularly. It could be that Clooney thought the charming head of the campaign would test just as well with audiences.  It has already been noted that The Ides of March is far more cynical than The West Wing, but it is worth mentioning that the lighting matches this. While Aaron Sorkin’s regular corridor meetings are lit close the point of over-exposure matching the positive overtones of the series, Clooney’s film is haunted by shadows throughout.

The second important difference is the time setting; the primary is set to take place on March the 15^th, hence the new title The Ides of March. The title clearly harks back to Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar. The title was a deliberate change, and with Beau Willimon helping to write the screenplay the reason wouldn’t have been the separate the play and film. “Some of the themes in the movie seemed Shakespearean,” Clooney says. “We’ll leave it for people to decide who’s Cassius, who’s Brutus and who’s Caesar.” To explain which character in the film represents which Shakespearean character would need to explain the film in too much detail, but I will say this, opinions can, and should, vary on the answer to that question. If you’ve already seen the film think about who each character could represent, if you haven’t keep this in mind while watching it: Who represents Caesar the powerful leader? Who represents Brutus, his close friend and murderer? Who represents Cassius the conspirator who persuades Brutus into committing such an act? And who…if anyone, represents the avenger of Caesar’s death, Mark Anthony?

Written by Edward L. Corrigan 10/11/2011

Quotes taken from:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/film/starsandstories/8839392/George-Clooney-a-Julius-Caesar-for-our-times.html