The Ides of March

Directed by: George Clooney

Written by: George Clooney, Grant Heslov, Beau Willimon

It's not too often that a good political thriller comes along anymore, but "The Ides of March" fills that need exceptionally well.

Stephen Meyers (Gosling) is an up-and-coming campaign strategist who has hitched his wagon to the presidential primary campaign of Governor Mike Morris (Clooney) because of Morris's take-no-prisoners and tell-no-lies style. But when Meyers is contacted by a rival campaign manager (Giamatti), it begins a chain of events that threatens to destroy Meyers's career and derail the Morris campaign entirely. It is in this face of adversity that the characters reveal their true selves and what they are willing to do to take power.

To start, the acting in this film is fantastic. Gosling is just about the weakest link, and it's merely because he under plays his part, which is a bit tough to deal with given that he's protagonist. Marisa Tomei's character of the nitty-gritty-political-journalist is completely unnecessary except to advance one minor plot hitch, but she does a solid job considering the minor role. Clooney and Giamatti are at the top of their game, as is Philip Seymour Hoffman.

What this film does exceptionally well, which has not yet been tackled by a modern political thriller, is show the workings of a modern campaign. Not since "Primary Colors" has a high-profile film tried to cover contemporary election tactics. And "Primary Colors" was based clearly on the Clinton campaign, but "The Ides of March" is not based on an actual campaign, although there are references and allusions to some recent strategies.

There movie does rely on a cliche plot twist at a major key point, which is rather disappointing. (I can't give it away here, as it is basically the climactic turn.) I just felt that with all the creative starts and turns, there could have been something more original to use at that point. To give credit, that one twist was predictable, but how that twist plays out and affects the story is more more effectively done.

Kudos to Clooney for making the film. It was effective and enjoyable.

Win Win

Directed by: Thomas McCarthy

Written by: Thomas McCarthy (Screenplay, story), Joe Tiboni (story)

There aren't too many movies that tell stories that truly capture real life, even if the story isn't real. Many movies attempt to, but they usually become overly dramatic or become unbelievable or rely on deus ex machina tricks to help wrap up the story. "Win Win," though, effectively captures the complexities of the struggling middle class in this early 21st century recession.

Mike Flaherty (Giamatti) runs a small and struggling law firm. When an opportunity to earn some extra cash arrives, he becomes the guardian for the elderly Leo (Young), takes the monthly guardian check, and then dumps Leo in a retirement home. But when Leo's estranged teenage grandson Kyle (Shaffer) arrives suddenly and alone, Flaherty takes Kyle into his home without explaining the shady financial dealings. With Flaherty, though, Kyle begins to come out of his shell, and Flaherty falls deeper into deception.

"Win Win" manages to tell and sell a story that is "realisitic" without falling into the trap of making it "gritty." All of the characters - especially Amy Ryan who plays Flaherty's devoted wife - are archetypes easily recognized from everyday life. No one is idealized; everyone has their faults.

Part of what makes the film great is that it asks us to make a moral judgement about the Flaherty character. But this judgement is complicated. Although he starts the film by making a terribly ethical decision - one which will affect the course of the movie at several points - we're also shown the realities of the financial dilemma which led to his decision. Over the rest of the film, the audience also sees his generous and loving side in his dealings with his family and Kyle. He is neither purely good, nor purely bad. He is in the middle. He is an everyman.

Someone (and I forget who - you can google it, if you want) described "Win Win" as "a wrestling version of 'The Blind Side.'" And, in a sense, it's true. "Win Win" strips down the glossy veneer of the "The Blind Side" and made it a more personal story. With "The Blind Side," there were issues of class, race, and financial status at play, but with "Win Win" the story is much more down to earth and a more realistic and contemporary story (even though "The Blind Side" was technically a true story). (And don't get me wrong - I loved "The Blind Side" and I think it's a great movie. But I feel that "Win Win" is a much better examination of the American conscience in these troubled times, and better reflects life for the average person.)