hyped garbage

Don't listen to the Hype. It's awful

best movie i've ever seen.

As Good As It Gets

Let's face it: the only two places where politics has also become a form of entertainment are the United States and Westeros. Anywhere else, all these stances, movements and statements would be either formal or plain dull. But the American life managed to turn politics into a reality show, and politicians into media stars, an achievement matched only by the product of G.R.R.Martin's creative mind. But, unlike The Song of Ice and Fire, the American reality show takes place in our own world, and it doesn't seem to have a final season any time soon.So, when life gives you such a never-ending source of inspiration, it is only natural to start capitalizing on it. In that sense, The Ides of March is hardly the first film about politics and political intrigues, although, having been released two years before House of Cards, it still had a lot of unconquered media land around. Combined with a stellar - and I mean it - cast, it could seem that success of The Ides of March is a deal decided. But, just like we're constantly reminded by this very film, there is no such thing as a guarantee of success. But what could possibly go wrong?One problem with this film is its way of creating suspense by first setting the rules and then changing them when you expect it the least. True, politics is a cruel mistress and fair play is not to be expected. But even in cheating there must be some logic and consistency, otherwise the characters' actions become rather random and plot twists forced. A young and ambitious campaign coordinator who's "not like everyone else" because he needs to actually believe in the person he promotes - to become easily distraught and seduced by a most predictable competitors' move. A candidate, all-out solid stand up guy with rock hard principles - to turn out a vicious predator and abuser. A young woman who made a mistake but tries her hardest to deal with the consequences - to simply give up when all is seemingly over. Such things just don't make sense. And even when they do, they are never given much premise to create at least some credibility. As if people act drastically out of character simply for the kicks of it. Such erratic scenario succeeds at creating not suspense in the audience, but paranoia, making you imagine things and see crooked shadows where everything's actually plain and clear.But even that low blow could be justified if The Ides of March managed to deliver some kind of culminating strike, to exploit the inner pressure the film's been building during all its course. Some revelation, light or dark, it doesn't matter, at least something clear and definitive. But that's where the film fell painfully short, just abruptly ending at the moment it's been leading us towards through the whole second act. Instead of even trying to explain the illogicalities it exploited, or at least settling for the plain and coherent ending with no hidden implications, the film decided to play smart and hint at some game-changing turn towards the end, but instead of actually taking that turn satisfied itself with a hollow point, trying to convince us that it's a masterful open ending we could finish in our imagination the way we liked. It seems, George Clooney was too busy with self-adoration, being all dashing and daring, courageous and caring in front of the camera, that he forgot to orchestrate the show behind it. And instead of a true open ending, a smart way of not rubbing in the eyes of the viewer a set of most probable outcomes the film has previously set clear through its actions, we received an empty ending, leaving us with not enough consistency throughout the film to even begin guessing what could be implied or inferred for real and not be a product of our already inflamed imagination. Such move, instead of provoking curiosity and creative thinking, robs us out of the only satisfaction we could get out of this film: the satisfaction of finding out how this unhealthily hectic set of events actually unfolds. Which might be fine for the cruel genre of art house, but, within the framework of political reality show entertainment, equals to no fun at all.

Overall, this movie is good, and a one time watch, but it has a weird leftover taste to it, which doesn't settle. There just is something that with this movie that doesn't make one give it more than 3 stars. It's kind of a like-it but not-a-fan or not-too-interesting relationship going in the mind of the user after the movie.So I'm going to review this movie starting with what went good. The acting by all the lead actors is of course good, and that's not something one can bring this movie down really. With a strong A-list cast, it was bound to have some good performances. And Gosling, Clooney, Hoffman make sure you are not disappointed in that regard. Clooney even did a good job directing, and one can't feel that he really could have directed this. Clooney comes of looking good as and realistic and a presidential candidate and Gosling looks very convincing as the very idealistic Campaign Manager who slowly faces the "et Tu, brute" situation and realizing that not everything is as good as it looks, is forced to change himself. So, overall, there are some good performances in this movie.The cinematography, style of shooting, visual effects, and the catchy soundtrack add to creating that thrilling police air for the movie, which again make it gripping and interesting to watch. It keeps the viewer hooked that something interesting is going to happen soon.But alas, that's where the movie fails. Suddenly you realize the movie's over and that was it. Nothing that "big" happened. The Big groundbreaking scandal you were expecting, is not a love affair of a candidate with the intern. Maybe in the old times, but the current times when you have Trump running, with even wilder stuff for presidential candidates coming and going, where you hear political senators from the US engaging in all kinds of weird sexual acts and other scandalous items, this seems very small. There's that all this for that much? Question left when you are finished watching. You realize the some good acting was just wasted there on something that could have turned out to be really good.It's not the script, the movie has good dialogues and and quotes and the talks seem real. It's the overall story that has the fault. It's not as gripping and as much of polecat thriller as it wanted (or was trying) to be.The reason for Gosling to switch from the good to the "take-revenge" mode just didn't seem that strong enough. It wasn't presented well. There's so much that he could have done to prevent but no, it was just a mess with many loopholes. The movie starts of being very realistic, but when it mixes too much emotion all of a sudden, the reality the movie was going for, suddenly becomes less and brings the whole movie down. Overall, the story is pretty straightforward, and the message that the movie is trying to convey is quite simple, and thus puts a lot of pressure on the lead of the movie (gosling) to make it engaging or thrilling, but unfortunately, the character played by him isn't able to deliver that meat of the story required. The story lacks character development. It lacks the heart and soul it required from its protagonist and antagonist which could have made it a fierce completion and an edge of the seat thriller. The competition/fight/race to outshine each other between Clooney and Gosling's character just doesn't seem something actually worth getting into a rivalry for and doesn't seem to reach the intense heights it could have.And it's definitely not intellectual. It's not a smart movie. It doesn't make you think anything towards the end. It doesn't make the users feel connected to the characters. I couldn't feel myself in anyone's shows in the entire movie. Not a single character that could connect with he audience. You don't seem to learn anything new out of all that drama. Just the same old, same old.Overall, its not a bad movie, pretty enjoyable for a one time watch, but cannot make it to anyone's list of all-time favorites. It's not dull, but also not as sharp and exciting as it could have been. It's polished and refined, but the message isn't really clear.

The Ides of March is a semi-engrossing political drama from the talented minds of George Clooney, Grant Heslov and Beau Willimon. Whilst it never quite engrosses the audience with the same addictiveness that Willimon's House of Cards did, it is still an intriguing ride that is hard to turn off. Clooney's direction is very skillful, with plenty of cold and well chosen shots at key moments in the film.Unfortunately, the acting is probably the film's weakest asset. It is rare that I find the dialogue great but the delivery not up to scratch, but this was one of those times. Clooney's performance is at times a refreshing change of pace from his charismatic nice guy stereotype from every other movie, but without a few key scenes it wouldn't be so refreshing. Gosling is disappointingly bland in what should have been a rich part. Paul Giamatti, Marisa Tomei and Phillip Seymour Hoffman do good supporting work, but none of them are at their best nor can they carry the film. The best asset is likely the supporting performance of Evan Rachel Wood, another stellar work for her resume as a youthful and charming intern with a secret or two.I might end up watching the Ides of March again one day, even if I didn't buy the film's ending. I couldn't help but agree with Governor Morris' logic, and if I'd been him I would have just called the bluff and framed it as a fired employee getting back. But its not high class political intrigue, nor is the acting worth cheering. Its just a decent watch.

I thoroughly enjoyed The Ides Of March. It is a very good look into the dirty side of politics behind all the handshakes, speeches and smiles.The acting is extremely solid. Clooney and Gosling are fantastic and are very well supported by Phillip Seymour Hoffman and Paul Giamatti. All of these four are very well developed in the movie and their interactions come off as very real and very believable. Evan Rachel Wood is also a great addition to the cast and throws a nice curve ball into the plot.I don't really have any negatives to report. If I was being picky, the film does drag just a touch in places, but not to the extent where you lose connection to the plot.All in all, a very good film which I would recommend as a real life look into the less crowd pleasing side of party politics.