|
Forwardcharm |
 |
Latest News 13 / 05 / 2012 30 / 04 / 2012 23 / 04 / 2012 22 / 04 / 2012 15 / 04 / 2012 15 / 04 / 2012 02 / 04 / 2012 01 / 04 / 2012 28 / 03 / 2012 25 / 03 / 2012 18 / 03 / 2012 15 / 03 / 2012 13 / 03 / 2012 05 / 03 / 2012 23 / 02 / 2012 14 / 02 / 2012 13 / 02 / 2012 12 / 02 / 2012 23 / 01 / 2012 22 / 01 / 2012 18 / 01 / 2012 11 / 01 / 2012 27 / 11 / 2011 14 / 11 / 2011 13 / 11 / 2011 |
The Interpreter
Directed by Sydney Pollack. Story: A UN interpreter overhears an assassination plot, putting her life in danger. Running Time: 2hrs 9 minutes. Certificate 12A.
Nicole Kidman stars as the Interpreter of the title, accidentally overhearing a plot to assassinate the president of a small African nation. As she's the interpreter for that language, she understands what they're saying. That's the novelty - and is the only new part of the whole charade. Although it's competently created, The Interpreter is nothing we haven't seen a hundred times before and so I found it a mite tiresome.
The Interpreter is a perfectly adequate political thriller. No-one's going to come out of the cinema saying, "that was f**king TERRIBLE," like I did at Sahara last week, and a few people are going to rate it very highly. It's just that when you've eaten a thousand steak sandwiches, it's hard to get excited about the thousand-and-first. I enjoyed this film: I think the average moviegoer will enjoy it: Testosterone Satisfaction Rating: One explosion and a little shooting. To enjoy this film you should: not have seen a lot of these films before.
|
Your commentsThe comments printed here are not necessarily the views of Forwardcharm!
Hi, its Nicole here. Jim, what are you on? I'm a super hot babe and all my films are top viewing!
Hi Jim, Jonathan just pointed out your review of Nicole's film. I, like Nicole, am super hot so know a super hot babe film when i see one and The Interpreter is much better han your review suggests.
|
Cast: Nicole Kidman, Sean Penn, Catherine Keener, Jesper Christensen, George Harris, Hugo Speer.
Sean Penn is the Secret Service operative assigned to investigate and subsequently protect Kidman, with predictable
consequences. Both do fine jobs, but somehow I didn't end up caring much what happened to either of them. The story
pedals along at an acceptable rate but, as with many thrillers with political machinations, the glut of incidental
characters can make following it a little tricky at times, which I'm sure is why I'm left with a couple of fairly
major questions now I've left the theatre. I can't reveal what they are without giving away the story, but they're
not insignificant plot queries. Maybe if I were
to watch it a second time, armed with the knowledge of the ending, then my questions would be answered, but I don't think
it's worth another two hours just to find out. I suspect that if the answers were once there, they were cut to shorten the
running time. I had the same feeling with 
I am being a little too negative. The party I was with all enjoyed it and it's by no means a bad film. It's just
not nearly as good as it could have been. The character development concentrates solely on the main two players
and survives by letting out snippets of information to the viewer here and there, rather than on getting to know
the people. I think this is where the detachment comes from, why we care more about what happens on the political
side than what happens to the people. Maybe seeing a little more of Kidman and Penn's lives would have made them
more believable and more human - but I suppose the running time is pushing the attention span as it is, to have
that kind of character development would have meant cutting part of the story.
