Monuments Men

First Hit:  Disappointing execution of what was probably a marvelous story.

The cast was stellar. The story was probably interesting. However the result was a disjointed, lackluster, and mediocre film. When you have; George Clooney (as Frank Stokes), Matt Damon (as James Granger), Bill Murray (as Richard Campbell), Cate Blanchett (as Claire Simone), John Goodman (as Walter Garfield), Jean Dujardin (as Jean Claude Clermont), Hugh Bonneville (as Donald Jefferies), and Bob Balaban (as Preston Savitz) there is an anticipation, if not expectation, of seeing a great film and story.

What hurt this story was that it seemed like a bunch of vignettes strung together to meet the end result of the story. Some of these side stories had me scratching my head and wondering why they were there, one such side piece was the dental work piece featuring Murray and Balaban. Couldn’t understand why it was important to show this.

Then there were the cutaway scenes following Damon when he first came to France, while riding in a cart - what was the point of showing these without some conclusion or reasoning? These are just a couple of moments in this film that just seemed to be there for no real reason or point. There were also awkwardly shot moments, like when Bonneville makes an attempt to kill a German, the whole scene was poorly conceived and executed.

This scene seemed like an afterthought. However, there were also touching moments, like when Damon and Blanchett were having dinner, or when Bonneville gives his thanks for a chance to prove his worth after his alcoholic ways.

Clooney as an actor here was OK, but his direction and screenplay contributions seemed lightweight or maybe he didn’t take this seriously enough. Damon was good, as always, but there wasn’t enough meat in the part to have him give a great performance. Murray appeared to be trying to make something out of nothing and when the audience sees this – it is disappointing. Blanchett was one of the best in her role as a mistrusting woman who finally believes the motive of the US forces. Goodman was OK, nothing special. Dujardin was somewhat interesting as he brought some European flair to the film. Bonneville was nothing special in a minimal role. Balaban seemed to capture the screen when he was in a scene which says something about his strong skills. Clooney and Grant Heslov wrote this screenplay and it seems that they were unclear about direction as was Clooney as director.

Overall:  This film was better as an idea than its execution. I left the theater disappointed.

The Ides of March

First Hit: A very good film which simply shows how a politician’s imperfection and ego leads to the illusion.

We all know that to become a politician one must have a strong ego and a somewhat thick skin.

To run for President of the United States, there are a lot of compromises one might have to make along the way. When they state they want to “serve the people”, there is also a serving of one’s ego. The people who serve these politicians do what they can to “position” their candidate in the best light possible.

We’ve seen in recent past politics, that handlers like Karl Rove and Dick Cheney serve in oddly powerful and conclusive ways.

Here, Steven Myers (played by Ryan Gosling) is the chief strategist working directly for Campaign Manager Paul Zara (played by Philip Seymour Hoffman). They are both working on the campaign to elect Governor Mike Morris (played by George Clooney) for the office of President of the United States. In the other camp there is Tom Duffy (played by Paul Giamatti) who is Zara’s counterpart for the other candidate.

Duffy sees that Myers is good and is guiding Morris for a win. His job; find an opportunity to change the playing field. But Myers ends up having some political collateral of his own and he learns that politics is a nasty game and that some people talk a good game for the people, but in their own lives, things might be not as honorable.

The way this story is played out is clean, clear, uncluttered, and predictable in that I guessed the ending long before it happened. But even so, it was well done, clearly defined, and wonderfully acted. This was a tour-de-force of a number of strong actors doing a wonderful job. Although some advertisements call this film a thriller, it is not, it is a drama all the way.

Gosling is clearly present for this part. He is quick minded and his eyes reflect it. He is naïve and his eyes show it. He is strong and his eyes express it. Clooney is perfect as the smooth talking, handsome, eloquent candidate who hides his indiscretions under an uncompromising smile of slickness. The scene in the kitchen with Gosling when the deal is cut is superb and pointedly packaged. Hoffman is perfect as the guy who lives by his belief regardless of where it takes him. Giamatti is both creepy and elegant as the guy who will do what he needs to get his candidate elected. Evan Rachel Wood (as campaign intern Molly Sterns) is wonderfully captured as the smart beautiful girl who gets intoxicated by the powerful men in politics. Marisa Tomei (as news reporter Ida Horowicz) was good and especially with the turning of the tables (both times), one where she is on top and the other where she isn’t. Lastly Jeffrey Wright (as Senator Thompson) was really strong as the Senator who wanted to get the most out a selling his support by using a bidding process for the highest cabinet job possible. George Clooney and Grant Heslov wrote a very clear and strong script and Clooney did a wonderful job of directing this film.

Overall: This was a very strong Clooney effort and a wonderful film to watch.