Print Topic

SimplyScripts Screenwriting Discussion Board  /  Movie, Television and DVD Reviews  /  The Interpreter
Posted by: AmericanSyCo (Guest), April 23rd, 2005, 5:08pm
A "Thumbs Down" from me and Paul W.S. Anderson didn't have anything to do with the film?  I know... I'm a little shocked myself.

Every now and then a film surfaces that can only be described as a "taut, political thriller."  All of these thrillers tend to not only look alike, but also have some sort of topical theme whether it be terrorism, genocide, or the faulty U.S. medicare system.  In Sydney Pollack's new thriller, "The Interpreter," it's the first two that get the celluloid treatment.

Nicole Kidman plays Silvia Broome, an interpreter for the United Nations.  Her job is to sit in a booth with a microphone and interpret anyone who is speaking a foreign language into the earpiece of the American representive.  Unfortunately, one night after the place has been evacuated due to faulty security equipment, Broome heads back into the office to pick up her bag she forgot earlier.  While doing so, she accidentally stumbles into a conversation about the assassination of a world-famous and much hated African leader who is headed to the U.N. to make a speech in the coming days.

Assigned to the case is Secret Service agent Tobin Keller (played by the ever sour-faced Sean Penn).  His job is to figure out when the terrorists would strike and what, if any, role does Broome play in the whole thing (as she herself has a bit of a strange past linked to the African leader).  Of course, as in any "taut, political thriller," the two begin to connect with one another and a friendship is formed.

The problem with "The Interpreter" is not necessarily that it's bad per se, but that every cool part seems to have been lifted from another film.  Even during the most intense scene (which takes place on a bus with a bomb in it), I could not help but be reminded of "The Siege."  This is quite strange as Sydney Pollack is behind the camera, and (besides 1998's "Random Hearts"), he tends to be right on the money when it comes to hard-hitting dramas like this one tries to be.

There's also the problem of the contrived script.  The "witty" banter and one-liners in this one are so awful that your eyes will be rolling every five minutes.  Sometimes a character will say something so inane and out-there that you'll wonder whether or not this was edited incoherently.  My "favorite" conversation goes something like this:

"Black or white?"

"No thanks, I just ate."

"No, her skin.  Is she black or white?"

What the hell does that even mean?  Did I miss something?  Of course, there's the one guy in the audience who laughs at this crap for reasons he probably doesn't even know.

And then there are tremendous leaps of logic as well as some hefty melodrama to wade through.  Not to mention, some of the sequences are just weird for the sake of weird (most notably the part that is featured in the preview showing a masked-man outside of Nicole Kidman's window).  Also, if you can't figure out who the villain is twenty minutes in, then you're probably half retarded... probably.

In the end, the best way to sum of "The Interpreter" is as such: if Paul W.S. Anderson had "taut, political thrillers" on his résumé, this would be it.

** out of ****  
Print page generated: May 14th, 2024, 12:15am