The Ides Of March

7.11 h 41 min2011X-RayR
An idealistic staffer (Ryan Gosling) for a new presidential candidate (George Clooney) gets a crash course in dirty politics on the campaign trail.
George Clooney
George ClooneyRyan GoslingPhilip Seymour Hoffman
English [CC]
Audio languages
Rentals include 30 days to start watching this video and 48 hours to finish once started.

Included with STARZ on Amazon for $8.99/month after trial

Add to Watchlist
Add to
By ordering or viewing, you agree to our Terms. Sold by Services LLC.
Write review

More details

Supporting actors
Marisa TomeiPaul Giamatti
Grant HeslovGeorge ClooneyBrian Oliver
R (Restricted)
Content advisory
Alcohol usefoul languagesexual contentsmokingviolence
Purchase rights
Stream instantly Details
Prime Video (streaming online video)
Available to watch on supported devices


3.9 out of 5 stars

2754 global ratings

  1. 43% of reviews have 5 stars
  2. 28% of reviews have 4 stars
  3. 15% of reviews have 3 stars
  4. 6% of reviews have 2 stars
  5. 7% of reviews have 1 stars
Sorted by:

Top reviews from the United States

Mike GishReviewed in the United States on September 22, 2020
4.0 out of 5 stars
What The Establishment Wants You To Believe
Verified purchase
Everything that you’re presented by mainstream media which is controlled by the establishment and calculated to make you think and believe what will serve them and not us is misleading/dishonest. They present the truth to us in movies so we’ll think of it as fantasy, then they lie to us in news broadcasts so we’ll think that is the truth. The genius of it should be obvious; when someone tells you the truth, you’ll tell them they’ve been watching too many movies, while in the meantime, you’re believing all the lies you see in the news. You could research things online, using multiple independent sources to find out what’s really happening, but they know that 99% of you are too lazy, complacent, and afraid of what you’ll find out to do that.

All politicians make campaign promises that they never keep, and every voting cycle we fight with each other over which liar we’re going to vote for; we’re too stupid to ever learn, and yet arrogant enough to think we’re qualified to participate in running a democracy. Lucky for us that the entire process is a farce, and the facade they maintain that creates the illusion that we have anything to say about what happens is a lie.

The richest families in the world are united and run everything using debt and credit as their tools. People who are too high profile and influential that stand or speak against them, they kill: the Kennedy’s, Martin Luther King Jr, Gandhi, Malcolm X, John Lennon, Lincoln, Michael Jackson, etc, etc.

Keep that in mind while watching this movie, because no matter what a politician or world leader promises to deliver, he or she’s just their puppet, will take their pay-off, and do whatever he or she’s told once in office, or else.
34 people found this helpful
KReviewed in the United States on February 7, 2021
5.0 out of 5 stars
Exceeded my expectations by leaps and bounds!
Verified purchase
I basically detest George Clooney but I was hungry to watch a political thriller and I couldn’t find anything I hadn’t already seen — in some cases, more than once. I have no particular feeling about Ryan Gosling as an actor or a person and, after this movie, I find I still don’t. He did a very workmanlike job here and that’s about it. But, when I saw Paul Giamatti was in the cast, that’s when I was sold. I’ve never seen a performance of his I didn’t like. And, the late Philip Seymour Hoffman was perfectly cast as a rumpled political hand who’s seen too many wars.

I’m glad I did watch this, despite Clooney. It’s a great film and very well told. While I’m glad it’s free to me on Prime, I wouldn’t have felt bad about shelling out the money to rent it.

I also feel, as a woman and a feminist, compelled to rebut the statements of “Amazon Customer” who said he couldn’t take Evan Rachel Wood seriously when she plays yet another “sex kitten” role while, in real life, she calls out every man in the film business for being sexually inappropriate towards her.

Here’s the thing: she’s an actress. She’s being paid to play a part. That’s her job. The roles she plays don’t necessarily have anything to do with who she is, as a person, and it certainly doesn’t entitle anyone to behave in an improper and unprofessional manner just because of what she portrays on screen. That’s like saying that I should be able to toss Henry Cavill off a building and expect him to suffer no injuries because he plays Superman and Superman can fly. One has nothing to do with the other and it’s the same thing with Woods. She shouldn’t be conflated with the characters she plays. I haven’t followed her allegations in the press, but I don’t need to. In all circumstances, she should be treated with professional respect and that’s all there is to it.
11 people found this helpful
Amazon CustomerReviewed in the United States on September 19, 2020
3.0 out of 5 stars
The story has been done to death, but this is a fairly good retelling
Verified purchase
It’s kind of hard to take Evan Rachel Wood seriously in yet another movie where she plays an amoral, opportunistic sex kitten who throws herself at higher ups for the thrill and power, when in real life she is in the media every other week “metoo’ing” yet another writer, producer, actor, or director who supposedly made a pass at her.

That being said, the story could have easily been called, “The Clinton Campaign”. The only difference is they didn’t show Governor Morris getting on a jet with Jeffrey Eipstein to go to his sex island. Ryan Gosling walked away with this movie, even in the face of heavyweights like Clooney, Giamatti, and Hoffman. It’s a good watch, especially if you like political thrillers.
17 people found this helpful
Christina ReynoldsReviewed in the United States on October 9, 2020
4.0 out of 5 stars
Messy - Just like it should be
Verified purchase
My rating is more of a 3.5 than it is a 4
Than you for reading in advance

The Ides of March is a 2011 American political drama film directed by George Clooney from a screenplay written by Clooney, Grant Heslov, and Beau Willimon. The film is an adaptation of Willimon's 2008 play Farragut North. It stars Ryan Gosling and Clooney alongside Philip Seymour Hoffman, Paul Giamatti, Marisa Tomei, Jeffrey Wright, and Evan Rachel Wood.

In starting this with you it is only appropriate to briefly outline the differences between this movie and the play is based off of. in the play, Morris still holds the same role that he has in this movie (As a Democratic Presidential Primary candidate) But the gravity and the presence he has is invariably different. Morris spends a majority of his time as a voice over in the play but is shown exclusively in person in ‘The Ides Of March.’. Perhaps more surprisingly, however, the scandalous nature of this film centers around Zara (Morris’ campaign manager) as opposed to Morris. I can't come up with a reason why this change was made, but centering the scandals around a presence the average person needs to be “in the know about” Is smart and makes the plot simply more relatable to a larger group of people.

Gosling (Who plays Steven, the Junior campaign manager) is one of those actors who has a very specific disposition about him that remains relatively stable regardless of whatever role he is asked to portray. He has a distinct flair of “young blood” energy that follows him around like a cloud, and this makes him a natural foil and point of contention to other characters that he interacts with. This subsequently makes the conflicts that fall into his lap feel like they are naturally inclined to occur, and we are often not surprised by how often he is met with contempt and/or subtle feelings of begrudgery. This film is no exception - Gosling is the necessary amount of naive and perceptive; We know things will eventually be okay for his character, but the excitement and suspense is in seeing how the resolution comes to a full and complete stop.

The relatively bipartisan nature of the Scandals specifically do force this movie to have very significant real world implications; The nature of the smoothies conflict and said best by Steven himself: When you make a mistake you lose the right to play.” The nature in which these mistakes manifest themselves is explored in a way that any person familiar with politics Isn't pressured to think of these mistakes (And perhaps others) as being ones any person in power - regardless of their political views - is incapable of making. More than this, there is considerable amount of commentary regarding the lengths at which people will go (Sometimes as far as betrayal, blackmailing, and your typical mudslinging) to ultimately fulfill their own needs and goals. In the end it is fair to say that ‘The Ides of March’ is as messy as it is enamoring - but what can I say? It’s just politics after all.

My primary complaint is that the intimate relationship Steven develops with another character is very undeveloped; to be frank, the romantic element was neither necessary or convincing. If I had to guess, I would imagine this was a "safe" way of justifying the amount of information Steven is able to get out of her in such a short period of time. In the same breath, this adds an extra element of "revenge" on Steven's part that at times feels ultimately unjustified and forced. The (potentially) exploitative nature of the situation Steven gets knowledge about is also written in and treated as if it is simply a "mistake", and this was a failed opportunity to connect sexual exploitation/abuse with possible 'quid pro quo' agreements in this line of work. Is it disrespectful? Not inherently. Does it ignore the reality many people (especially younger women) experience when finding themselves in positions where there are significant differences in power? My answer would be yes.

Worth watching at least once for the story. Worth watching at least twice for the cast and their performances.
I would recommend!
2 people found this helpful
John H. PendleyReviewed in the United States on May 24, 2016
5.0 out of 5 stars
in a dirty alley, which is apt for the business being ...
Verified purchase
I'm sure somebody must have noted this, but I've made a cursory search and can't find it: this is an adaptation of Shakespeare's Julius Caesar, as the title surely suggests. Paul (Philip Seymour Hoffman) is Caesar, brought down by his subordinate Stephen (Ryan Gosling), who takes the part of the scheming Cassius. (His last name, Zara, is even derived from "Caesar" or "Tsar.) Gov. Morris (George Clooney is the idealistic Brutus, whom Cassius convinces to depose Caesar. In Shakespeare, it is Brutus who falls from nobility, just as it is Gov. Morris, here. Of course, everything isn't parallel: our Caesar lives, for instance, and will make $1,000,000 per year. That's probably about what losers get in our political world. We even have Brutus's adoring and serene wife, Calpurnia, in the Jennifer Ehle character. Though not all plot points or characters are parallel with Shakespeare's (nor need they be) most are.

I admire Clooney's decision, if it was indeed his, to have the "assassination" occur offstage, as it were, in the backseat of a car we only see from the outside, in a dirty alley, which is apt for the business being done there. Paul goes out with the garbage. I also like the last scene. Gosling's dead expression leaves no doubt about how Stephen's victory tastes to him. And there's one other thing. Stephen tells Molly that she has to go because she has made an unpardonable mistake. Then, he does the same thing and can't abide the same punishment he has so rigidly meted out to her. It's a fine irony, the one on which the story pivots. Makes you wonder which character found the best way out.

As modern political intrigue, the movie works exceptionally well. One can believe it actually happening today. Maybe Shakespeare's audiences felt the same way. Maybe nothing changes in politics.

The sexual indiscretion is, of course, an addition--not in Shakespeare. The criticism that this is a hackneyed plot element might be valid if it weren't handled so movingly, and that is all to the credit of Evan Rachel Wood, whose performance steals every scene she's in. Clooney, Gosling, Hoffman, and Giamatti are all excellent (what a cast!), but it's Wood who, for me, settles the question of how many stars this merits.

Highly recommended,
John Pendley
35 people found this helpful
Max StrangeReviewed in the United States on September 19, 2020
1.0 out of 5 stars
Verified purchase
This movie is full of cursing. It pushes Marxism (redistribution of wealth) and far Left agenda in politics. It shows the nasty world of politics. The movie has no redeeming value with an anti-climactic ending, which is how materials produced by atheists usually end up.
9 people found this helpful
joel wingReviewed in the United States on April 14, 2021
4.0 out of 5 stars
Power loyalty and betrayal
Verified purchase
The Ides Of March was when Julius Caesar was killed by his rivals. The movie focuses upon George Clooney who is running for president and his two campaign managers Philip Seymour Hoffman and Ryan Gosling. Gosling gets involved in a love triangle and a scandal over a meeting he has. He has to decide who he’s going to stand with and who he’s going to turn on. That means it really isn’t focusing upon hardball politics as it seems like at the start. It’s about power, loyalty and betrayal hence the title. It makes for an interesting drama. Gosling at one time seems like he’s on the ropes and then goes in unexpected directions. The film was directed by Clooney as well.
One person found this helpful
The KatReviewed in the United States on September 27, 2020
1.0 out of 5 stars
Unacceptable. Once again Jesus gets the F word as a middle name.
Verified purchase
When will they get it? They could have done better but chose otherwise. Off it went.
6 people found this helpful
See all reviews