A motorcycle stunt rider turns to robbing banks as a way to provide for his lover and their newborn child, a decision that puts him on a collision course with an ambitious rookie cop navigating a department ruled by a corrupt detective.
It's 1949 Los Angeles, the city is run by gangsters and a malicious mobster, Mickey Cohen. Determined to end the corruption, John O'Mara assembles a team of cops, ready to take down the ruthless leader and restore peace to the city.
Stephen Meyers is a young idealist who's brilliant at communications, is second in command of Governor Mike Morris's presidential campaign, and is a true believer. In the middle of the Ohio primary, the campaign manager of Morris's opponent asks Meyers to meet; he offers him a job. At the same time, Morris's negotiations for the endorsement of the man in third place, a North Carolina Senator, hit a snag. A young campaign intern, Molly Stearns, gets Stephen's romantic attention. Republicans have a trick up their sleeve; Stephen may be too trusting, and Molly has a secret. What's most important, career, victory, or virtue? Written by
Audiences leaving George Clooney's latest Ides Of March will feel like they've just finished a watching a really good play.
What makes sense of this is the fact Ides Of March was adapted from a play. In a play telling an audience everything they need to know always helps, especially when the majority of it are only going to see it once. However the difference in film is the aesthetic liberties it allows its' director and I don't think in this Clooney took enough advantage of that.
There is a part to this movie where a business exchange takes place inside of an escalade parked outside of a barbershop. The words being exchanged within that escalade are left to the audience's imagination because the camera never goes inside, but stands staring at it from across the street. Ides of March could've used a lot more scenes like this, but Clooney played it safe with a conventionally linear story line. And I think Clooney put so much more into the story line than he needed to for the audience's sake.
This film didn't leave enough to the imagination of its' audience. While the actors carried out every single demand of this script, the film itself doesn't leave its' audience with enough to make them want to watch it again. The amount of telling done over this show leaves little to no replay value. It feels like the majority of the aesthetic was put into the script when I think a minimum would've been more than enough. Ides of March's script told me a lot more than I needed to know. It feels like the script told me so much that I forgot some key elements to the story. Then again the liberties he took with the script is exactly what allowed Ryan Gosling to take his character to some extremes.
In terms of acting, with names like Ryan Gosling, Philip Seymour Hoffman, and Paul Giamatti, Clooney delivers an all-star studded Sega Dream-Cast. And in terms of his direction, Clooney really leaves Ides Of March to his roots in the stage. However with that said I'm afraid it all felt a little too staged for the silver screen.
For the sake of cinema I think Clooney could've taken a little more of an aesthetic liberty with this project.
40 of 75 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?