I know its in an entirely different setting but it kind of reminds me of The Interpreter which was also boring.

Yeah, from the ads it reminds me of that movie too. It even stars a blonde (who happens to be Kidman's good friend) like that movie. Best thing is that Clive Owen has replaced Sean Penn.

Starting to wonder if I should even bother going to the screening, free and all. Before winning tickets, I was planning on going this weekend as the advertising has been decent in making it look good and I have always like Naomi Watts.

I am seeing it on Thursday at 6 am.

Don't ask...

Go see it. Its a free screening, why not. I like Naomi Watts alot more than Kidman too. Likewise Owen over Penn.

Decent conspiracy drama/thriller. While it does definitely suffer from a distinct lack of action and is very talky at times, the performances are good (Watts isn't in it as much as I would have liked though, disappearing for long stretches), the plot is interesting and the reshoot-added action sequence (glimpses of which can be seen in the trailer) is very well-done and definitely the highlight of the film.

Grade: B

It reminds me of that too, except I thought INTERPRETER was very good. I can't see this one being as good.

Is the action scene really a reshot?

That's the rumor. I'm not sure.

Would explain why it didn't feel like the rest of the film at all (not a bad thing, though).

It's okay. Not quite what the marketing portrayed, and a decent little action/thriller that lacked the thrill. The shoot-out in the museum is pretty cool, and Clive Owen kicks ass, but the story is kinda blah. Ends without a real conclusion (well, there is one, but not a satisfying one).

The International comes flyin' at ya with a sheaf of such zen warrior aphorisms. It clearly has been written by a thought filled man.

And best of all... ain't it sweet to see the role of bad guy portrayed by... a bank!

Of course, the whole thing is a big schmozzle of plot piled on more plot - - but that's okay, because director Tom Twyker just seems to be using it as a rhythmic moodtrack to his visual stylings.





As you can tell from the first frame, this is a Clive Owen movie. He's clearly the star and his character's the heart... the iconic soul of the film. Clive Owen is the white knight riding through battle in his quest to slay the demon king. And he's great here - - much better in fact, than in his other recent and disappointing film Duplicity.

...and is it just me, or is Naomi Watts acting proficiency directly proportional to the amount of clothing she removes in a movie? And thus unfortunately for The International, she t'weren't nikkid this time.





So all in all, I quite enjoyed this one. As mentioned above, it's nice to see corporations as villains once in a while (naturally rare since corporations finance media). We get the opportunity to see us humans as the mere replaceable cogs in the machine we actually are. Forget this week's Monsters Vs. Aliens - - it's a false dichotomy perpetrated by the transnational establishment - - it's really: Monsters & Aliens. The corporate entities preying amongst us are both.


out of

The movie feels like it's twice as long as it is. The acting is decent, but the
movie is just not that entertaining. Well, one scene is, the shootout at the
Guggenheim Museum (at least I think that's the location, I get lost in the
details of this wordy movie). The end is also not very satisfying, which always
turns me off.

B-/C+ (voted B, but in writing I realized it wasn't that good)

I thought it was a pretty terrific potboiler, and easily comparable to stuff like Michael Clayton and The Constant Gardener. It's plain to see why it did so poorly, though; it's not an action film at all, and foolishly advertising it as one (as well as releasing it in the adult-unfriendly month of February) was a big mistake.

It's also not boring at all: it takes its time, but it's well worth it. The one action sequence is brilliantly shot and positioned in the middle of the mystery, neither out of place nor out of tone, perfectly supporting the admittedly dialogue-heavy surrounding scenes. The script may not be as taut or subtle as the aforementioned films, but the movie more than makes up for it with some pretty terrific camerawork and a general sense of sheen and luster.

There's more than a few problems (especially if you choose to nitpick the Guggenheim shootout), but the film moves at such a clip that you hardly notice them. You could also say it's highly topical and relevant, especially today, but that's hardly the point. This is a smart, polished thriller, and it's a shame it didn't do (or get received) better.

I swear, right after I saw it I figured that if anyone at KJ would really like you, it'd be you. Really.

(that said, I also think it's underrated a bit)

My whole family loved it too, though, especially my dad, who is not known for his love of modern film.

I'm actually kinda surprised at the poor reception it got. It's certainly not significantly worse than Michael Clayton or something. It can't just be the poor, misguided marketing, can it?

Well, the reviews weren't bad...rather mixed. Didn't it end up with something like 55% at RT?

Anyway, I find Michael Clayton quite overrated and like The International better than that one. More exciting, bigger scope and all. Of course, the acting doesn't come that close to Clayton's, but the visual style and the scope of the plot make up for that.

I liked it, but with heavy reservations.

Whenever the film just wants to be an exciting thriller, it's pretty great. The opening scene, the assassination, the chases and "shadowing" scenes, the Guggenheim shootout. I thought this stuff was really well done. Also the film is beautifully shot and directed, and well acted.

There was a pretty intense 30-40 minute batch in the film. It starts with the assassination, and ends with Guggenheim. Action isn't the only reason why this was the best part - This is also the only time in the film where the protagonist actually knows what he needs to do to reach his goal. There is a mission. A quest to fulfill. I got intrigued, because I could finally anticipate something. Does our hero succeed? Fail? There was momentum there.

For the rest of the movie he just mopes around and faces one dead end after another. He is trying, yes, but he doesn't really have any idea what he should be doing. So as an audience member, I found it kind of hard to care.

The reason for this passive story is that this movie doesn't want to be a conventional thriller. It wants to be "more" than that. So for most of the time it lacks clear conflicts, and a clear task for the hero. There's no progress. The hero can't really make any difference.

All that is realistic, but it's not very exciting to watch.

There is another film that I thought did a similar thing very well: Zodiac. I know most people find it boring for the aforementioned reasons, but I found it very interesting.

The main reason why I found Zodiac more compelling in its realistic and unconventional approach was the fact that the movie really allowed me to understand the processes that the characters had to go through. It was very detailed, and I got a really good picture how police detective work was done in the 70's. I like movies that give me realistic and accurate information about a world I don't know about. Despite seeing countless of cop movies and TV-shows, I actually felt as if I was learning new things with Zodiac, and getting a more accurate picture of that particular world than I had before.

But I felt that The International was pretty superficial in this sense. I didn't REALLY get a good picture how the politics and bureaucracy work in this "real" world - The film obviously was trying to paint a real world instead of a fictional world. But in the end I learnt nothing I hadn't already seen in countless of other movies of this type. I thought that International was just as superficial as any popcorn espionage movie, like Bourne series or Ronin, but at the same time it didn't want to be a popcorn espionage movie.

But thanks to some terrific moments I'm still glad I saw this film.

6/10

This is a boring film.
You mention Zodiac, that's fantastic.
This really drags everywhere. The script isn't real good either. Half-developed characters, plotholes etc.
I only watched it because of Clive Owen.

What a complete waste of two hours. The International is nothing more than an action piece that is way over the top during its action sequences and a film that switches back and forth way too much leaving the viewer not knowing what the fuck is going on. Clive Owen is so plain in his role and Naomi Watts is just too much in second gear that you don't even care if she shows up or not. The enemy is very shallow and a bit confusing throughout the entire film and when the film ends you're not really sure what exactly was resolved. Speaking of the ending, the film just ENDS. There is no sense of explanation or aftermath, it just ends. Also when the film takes an interesting turn, it happens and then is completely ruined by a ridculous resolution. Absolutely horrible. No Stars

I can't believe how many people are dead wrong on this one.

Damn! Something must be wrong with me! I have to agree with trixster.

Certainly not the best movie out there but pretty entertaining with a real memorable sequence. Didn't find it boring at all, especially when compared with Duplicity that I saw the same day (a Clive Owen day). Now that one really was a weak effort.

Incredible...trix and I actually agree on a film!