8 replies to this topic

[okok]

with George Clooney. Good movie.<br><br>

[Rational Madman]

I think it's a fairly stupid title, because I imagine the title pretty much gave away the conclusion for most viewers.

Edited by Rational Madman, 17 January 2012 - 10:35 PM.

[mikeinnaples]

I think you overestimate the knowledge of most viewers in the general population.

[Rational Madman]

I honestly haven't read any reviews, because I was quite turned off by the trailer, but let make an attempt to summarize the plot with the following points:

-Displeased with the Democratic Party, the filmmakers create an idyllic candidate that promises to challenge the incumbent president---whom is also a Democrat.
-The insurgent's chances are greatly bolstered by the characters portrayed by Ryan Gosling and Phillip Seymour Hoffmann, whom are experienced political operators that become enchanted with the challenger.
-Working in concert, all cynicism is replaced with passionate idealism.
-The character of Ryan Gosling develops a relationship with the candidate that's analogous to the bond between Marcus Brutus and Caesar.
-The supporters of the establishment candidate use all possible means to put down this brazen rebellion, which includes making a Faustian-like offer to Ryan Gosling's character.
-Like Caesar, the challenger is sincere in his desire to implement revolutionary changes, but unfortunately, he has a tragic flaw: a criminal background, sexual indiscretions---maybe involving Scarlett Johansson, or an authoritarian character.
-Whatever the flaw, Gosling's Brutus decides to switch sides, and defend the old order.
-Working with the conspirators, Gosling's character releases damaging information that leads to the brutal assassination of the candidate's character.
-The challenger's fortunes are doomed, and the incumbent seems certain to win the contest.
-But tragically, the beliefs that drove Gosling's Brutus are proven false. Perhaps this is revealed in a stirring speech by Jeffrey Wright's character---the Vice President, whom could be the movie's Mark Antony.
-After winning the sympathy of the voting public, Jeffrey Wright's character manages to win the election, but it's a pyrrhric victory.

Seriously, though, I hope I'm wrong, because I can't imagine why the filmmakers would seemingly reveal so much of the plot line, both implicitly and explicitly.

Edited by Rational Madman, 18 January 2012 - 12:05 AM.

[okok]

Regarding the plot, Rol mixed a few things up here, but i think what this movie is noteworthy for is its insight into the mechanics of political and social interactions. Generally, it follows through (except for some shallow rationale offered by Gosling's opponent when he tried to win him over).
Save for that, it's an evolutionary brawl, but/and a cunning one. Ponder the pithy speechwriting Clooney may deliver. And Gosling's response to his best friend. But i don't want to spoil it for you.

[Rational Madman]

Yeah, but how closely did the plot mirror Shakespeare's Julius Caesar?

[okok]

You're probably right about that, but i have to admit i didn't read the book.

[Rational Madman]

Well, I haven't seen the movie, so I was curious. But I must admit, when I first heard about the film, I was somewhat eager to see it, because I have immense respect for some of the work of the filmmakers---Good Night, Good Luck. I guess it'll just be easier to find out myself, since I have no intention of ever seeing the piece.

[Rational Madman]

Okay, I was almost completely wrong about the question of allegory.