Interpreter
Terri
First, I'll start with the acting, which was superb, especially Nicole Kidman. I'd give her an A+. Sean Penn was excellent, although a little bit out of synche with his stereotypical role, as a tough guy who is not ultra sensitive at the core. In this movie he was more sappy and it worked, but not at the same level as Nicole's performance.
Yet, Sydney Pollack's casting the two of them together showed genius in that he said he didn't want to cast the male counterpart of Nicole in Sean's role, but someone who would contrast with her style and beauty.
The casting was delicious in the sense that sweet and sour sauce makes both taste better than either one alone. There the accolades diminish. There was an aspect of drama to the story and I felt the tension viscerally at times, that is when I had more than a faint impression as to what was going on and why.
If you're the type who is satisfied with "I know something exciting is happening here. I can see and feel it and that is enough for me," then this movie was made for you. If on the other hand you are more fastidious, like I am, and like to have a pretty good idea as to what's happening most of the time, then you are likely to be disappointed by this script.
The photography was excellent, the prolonged look at the interior of the United Nations Building (first permission in decades), intriguing, and lip service (I never felt "in the moment" with it, as portrayed) to idealism, inspiring. To a considerable extent the building was another character in the movie and, since it's an actor who's been on screen so little, it added an ambiance and credibility the movie would not otherwise have had.In the end, it was entertaining, although I was able to leave the theater a few minutes early to beat the traffic, once it became entirely predictable.
I freshened up and returned just in time to see the romance between Sean and Nicole resolved, in a manner I had expected, and still beat the crowd to the door.
Although there was considerable electricity between the two of them, those aspects of the plot remained just below the surface throughout the movie. While they added a dimension to the plot, it remained a subplot and, as such, never became what you'd call fulfilling. I'm sure the audience wanted more than what we got. In conclusion, I'd have to agree with the audience and the critics. I give it a solid B--a clear thumbs up, but not a movie I'd change may plans to rush out and see. If you want to be entertained for two hours and six minutes, it will do that for you.
Other than for the acting, though, you'll probably forget about it within two weeks. I'd mark it down as fluff.
Terri said she liked it and thought the acting was very good, but the plot didn't seem organized. She had a difficult time following it. And it wasn't one of those movies, like The Sixth Sense, where she figured out an important plot point on the way home and said, "Wow! That was clever."
There were far too many loose ends for that. It would be more like darning socks and fixing holes in them for weeks, that is, if you cared enough to focus on this movie for more than a day or so after walking out the theater door.
Nonetheless, she gives it a thumbs up.
