The corruption of politicians isn't exactly a route that has gone unexplored in popular media. Political scandals since the dawn of television have been given merciless attention, from the Watergate scandal to the Bill Clinton/Monica Lewinsky affair to events as recent as the rumored poll riggings in Ohio during the 2004 presidential elections. Events such as these have been given extraordinary attention and provide significant background for the new George Clooney-helmed political thriller, The Ides of March. But where this film differs from previous filmic sojourns into the scandalous world of politics is that the film's focus is primarily from the perspective of the campaign managers.

The spotlight is on junior campaign manager and press secretary Stephen Meyers (Ryan Gosling). His keen political savvy and ability to manipulate his colleagues like pawns on a chessboard make him the ideal diamond in the rough for smooth-talking Democratic presidential candidate Governor Mike Norris (Clooney) of Ohio. Along with the relatively straight-laced senior campaign manager Paul Zara (Philip Seymour Hoffman), Meyers at first seems assured to push Norris off the campaign trail and into the White House. However, the sinister efforts of the man in charge of Norris' opposition, Senior Campaign Manager Tom Duffy (Paul Giamatti), make things inevitably complicated. Duffy seeks to recruit Meyers to his campaign, and Meyers' indecisiveness in response sets off an unfortunate chain of events that threatens Norris' chances at the presidency. Throw into the mix an alluring underage intern, Molly Stearns (Evan Rachel Wood), who sets her hooks in Meyers, and a snooping investigative reporter, Ida Horowicz (Marisa Tomei), and Meyers is left virtually helpless as the façade of friendly faces in Norris' campaign unravels and the true nature of back-stabbing politics is exposed.

What is immediately fascinating about the dynamics of the various players in March is how equally innocent yet inevitably corrupt they all are. Despite the guilt they share, they are, at their core, shown to be relatively nice people. The friendly, optimistic Norris appears to be determined to keep his campaign honest despite the pushing of his staff to accept the backing of the corrupt Senator Thomson (Jeffrey Wright). This move is perhaps ironic considering the fallout to come involving Norris, Meyers and Stearns. But Meyers too, who remains the focus of the film, is shown to be a relatively earnest young player in the rough politician's game. His singular morally compromising quality is that he wants to get ahead. But what politician doesn't?

Stearns, whose affair with Meyers results in a threat to the entire campaign, can be accused only of making the mistake of being attracted to politicians. Even the shark-like Duffy, who seems to view Meyers as a quick but enjoyable snack to whet his political appetite, admits that he takes no real pleasure from his devious acts. The only player here who remains morally incorruptible is Zara, but his honesty and loyalty to Norris proves a slap in the face, and for all his preaching of morality, he winds up the loser in the end. And so the problem is, as Clooney positions it, not with the people involved, but with the nature of politics itself.

March is Clooney's fourth directorial gig to date, and despite his proportionately little experience directing, his ease behind the camera is firmly on display here. His style is relatively minimalist, utilizing simple and interpersonal camera set-ups, never overwhelming the audience with his vision (except for an interesting, albeit obviously intentioned shot of Meyers' tiny shadow cast over a giant American flag) and instead lets his cast do the work for him. With Good Night, and Good Luck, Clooney proved his masterful handling of an ensemble cast. The Academy Award-winning actor could have easily let himself take center stage here as the wily Norris, but by letting Gosling stand out, he allows for a unique cinematic take on backdoor politics.

The cast does an excellent job in its supporting roles. While none of them are really standouts, they aren't required to be, and they're all excellent, noteworthy actors who essentially do the job expected of them. Clooney himself is particularly enjoyable as the slick and charming Norris (but then again, isn't he always?). Hoffman presents the voice of reason within this backstabbing world, and his honesty and frustration as Zara come across with ease. Tomei delightfully portrays the typically side-switching and ruthless journalist who fits in well with the manipulative populace of the movie. Wood is simultaneously provocative and sincere as the ill-fated Stearns and represents the pinnacle of what can happen when the tactics of politicians are pushed too far. Paul Giamatti is Paul Giamatti (and admirably smarmy as always).

The real standout, however, is Gosling, who does a great job playing the different sides of Meyers. Equal parts cutthroat manager, sensitive playboy, vulnerable novice and vengeful opportunist, Gosling balances the multi-faceted role to such a great degree that you're never sure if you really like him or not. He has likable traits for sure, but his opportunistic nature sometimes offsets those traits. But by the end of the movie it is clear that, more than anything else, Meyers is a victim of circumstance and of his chosen profession. That's not to say he can't be implicated by the decisions he has made, however. And, while not absolved of sin, he is, at the very least, understood and not without sympathy.

The Ides of March is a thoroughly enjoyable film. The only downside is that Clooney overlays his message perhaps a bit too emphatically. The message of the film is in fact evident within the first 30 minutes (though most people probably got it with the trailer): Politics is a game of moral compromises, anyone who gets involved is likely to sacrifice their integrity in the process and even the most good natured of people will be eaten alive if they don't get with the program. This is something we all know about politics already, and one can't help but wish that the movie's ending was at least a bit more subtle (Clooney instead beats the viewer over the head with his summation).

But that's okay because March is a riveting film, entertaining from the first frame until the last, and if nothing else, presents a unique vantage point into the backdoor of political managing that we've never really been given before. So while the message is old, the angle is new, and it makes for a fascinating look into a world we already know and despise—but now we get to despise it more.