“The Ides of March” Political Throw-Up

Genres: Adaptation and Drama
Running Time: 1 hr. 42 min.
Release Date: October 7th, 2011 (wide)
MPAA Rating: R for pervasive language.
Distributors: Sony Pictures Releasing

Director: George Clooney

JJ Rating: D+

A political person decides to run for President. A group of people help him run. One of those wonderful people double dips by going to the other camp to “discuss” switching. Then all boring breaks lose. Ides of March.

2 Good Things About this Film

  1. Ryan Gosling is always good, period. I can't think of a single film where he's disappointed me. I can think of other films he's been in that have been disappointing...IE Ides of March, but none are specifically because of him.
  2. There are several great shots, beautiful shots.

11 Bad Things About this Film

  1. Two white men running in the Democratic Primary? Really? How the hell is that creative? Movies are fantasy. They are not really reality and if you're bound by what is real, you will get nowhere fast. I cannot believe a party of HOPE AND CHANGE would go for just two white men. Just a tad bit of creativity. A woman. A black woman. An Asian woman. A gay man. Two white men...is so every President since before Obama. The entire time I sat there this irked me. Such a great opportunity to display no differences between race, sex and sexuality and they just drop the ball. Could have been a great tale that ushered in interesting thinking like Guess Who's Coming to Dinner, but ohno George had to be BORING.
  2. After discussing a bit of why I dislike this film with a writer friend, I've come to the conclusion I hate political films. I can't think of a single film that's based on President that I like...I did like Dave. They are so similar to mob movies. In mob/gang movies the boss has moral ideas that he doesn't follow and it's an obnoxious display of hypocritical rule and that's how political films are...they're so full of hypocritical characters and it's annoying. Yes, hypocritical characters exist in other genres, but in mob/gang and political films they're magnified 1 billion times with a bullet on top. Ick.
  3. I like Paul Giamatti, but he has this breathing thing that comes out with every character he plays and it's like they're all the same because of it. I just know when he purses his lips, he's going to do it. He's going to breathe like every other character he's every played and I'm going to be yanked out of the film's reality because of it. Though in this film being yanked out would have been a saving grace.
  4. If the lines were any more cliched, it could be a film of don'ts for screenwriters.
  5. The music sucked.
  6. Rachel Maddow....seriously? Who watches that and admits to it? Her name probably got Googled a lot due to this film. She probably got more viewers by film proxy than she does on MSNBC.
  7. CNN? That's so 1990's.
  8. I read how people thought George Clooney did a fantastic job. I'd ask them what film were they watching, cause what I saw was the same old, same old...nothing new to brag about. He wasn't terrible and he wasn't great. He was just there.
  9. I'm surprised there was no chanting scene.
  10. Long Day's Journey into Night clocks in at 3 hours. I watched it and it felt like it was no longer than 2. Why mention this? Cause Ides of March clocked in at 1 hour and 42 minutes and felt like it was 4 long, boring, political history class hours.
  11. I really hated the posters. Uncreative doesn't even begin to cover it. You have the ability to reach out to artist around the world and get them to create an awesome poster and you don't use it? I don't understand why bland was so important...to focus on the storyline? Oh, no please say that's not it...cause there was NOTHING to that storyline that has not already been done on the screen or real life.
  12. Ruins the term Ides of March forever. I use to think it was cool to be born on the Ides of March, but now that there's a film by the same title and it wasn't good. That's all it had to do was be good so that I could still be proud of that term. It couldn't even do that much. Thanks Goeroge for that black eye. Much appreciated.

In conclusion I would wish this to win a few Razzies, even though it won't, and I hope it dies in obscurity (which I know it won't). It is one of the worst political films I've ever seen and since I hate the genre to begin with, that's saying a lot. If you wasted your time seeing it, don't tell me you liked it, cause I won't change my mind. Any movie that has the chance to change up the current perspective of how things are and doesn't do it...sucks by default. Ides of March earned the D+ and all the glory that it brings. 

1 comment:

Theo Academy said...

You hate this movie for all the wrong reasons. Name one movie with a good poster that has come out this year. You don't like it cause they showed CNN? That proves to me that you care about all the wrong things. Also, you say it has to be more creative, and you criticize its creativity. You hate Paul Giamatti's breathing? Guess what, you have to breathe to live. Also, you say it isn't unique, but you say it's bad because there's no chanting scene. Won't the chanting scene make it seem like every other political movie that exists? You don't like political movies. Do you really think you're in a position to review this if you hate all political movies? I will give you the George Clooney thing, though. Not bad, not good. Just like he always is (besides O Brother, Where Art Thou?).

Hollywood Dump on Facebook

In addition to the articles we post here, we also link to stories we think are interesting and post them to our Facebook page. If you're on FB, become a fan!