Lisa and I watched THE IDES OF MARCH. We were a bit puzzled. Fromt the trailer, I thought it was the story of a brilliant political operative who discovers that his boss has done something bad and needs to confront him.
/* not actual spoilers but some discussion of the plot */
To us, it seemed like the story of someone who had an almost total lack of political awareness, such as the need for loyalty, or the possibility that people might be willing to do backhanded things to win elections. It seemed like the story of a self-righteous guy who leaves a path of destruction in his wake, while feeling terribly wronged by everyone. To us, it seemed like almost every step he took was a misstep; that a political wunderkind wouldn't do any of those things.
What was odd about it was that we had a feeling we were supposed to root for the guy; that his victory was supposed to be some kind of victory for righteousness. By the end of it, I was rooting for him to get assassinated.
Did anyone see the movie and feel he was a legitimate hero?
Labels: watching movies
He was a "hero", let's put it this way. But I think that was the point: to show how bankrupt the whole political charade is. There is no redemption - in either the system, or the film.
Tell me if I'm wrong.
I guess. "Politics is full of s***heads" hardly seems worth making a movie to prove. I expected more from George Clooney, really.
I thought the arc of the film was underwhelming, though I do like George Clooney. I think he's a fine actor (who's to say who's best?) and have generally appreciated him as a director. I thought he was robbed of the Oscar for obvious petty reasons.
When was he robbed? What were the reasons?
Yeah, got to the end of that one and went, 'Eh?' I think the point was, everyone is corrupted by politics? Hard to say, but yeah, wasn't really rooting for anyone by the end of that one...
Back to Complications Ensue main blog page.