The American (dir. Anton Corbijn; George Clooney)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jason's Ultimatum said:
First movie I walked out of in about, oh, say 15 years. I knew the movie wasn't going to have any action in it, but I was hoping for at least some thriller elements. It's just George Clooney paying for
sex and walking around.
That's it. :lol :lol

Easily the worst film of the year, surpassing The Losers.
Click to expand...

I knew it, you're a viral marketer for the Bourne franchise and Universal.
 
I knew coming in the movie wasn't going to have action, dude. I wasn't expecting Bourne or Bond. Hell, I was hoping the entire movie would've been more like the intro in Sweden. :lol
 
Jason's Ultimatum said:
DP gave The Losers a 7/10, so I don't give a fuck he criticizes my opinion on The American. :lol
Click to expand...

:lol I have yet to re-watch The Losers but it was a lot of fun the first time around. I completely stand by my score. As for The American, I can see why someone would walk out of it. No surprise there.

What point did you give up?
 
Jason's Ultimatum said:
I knew coming in the movie wasn't going to have action, dude. I wasn't expecting Bourne or Bond. Hell, I was hoping the entire movie would've been more like the intro in Sweden. :lol
Click to expand...

So more action? The film doesn't hold your hand and it tells you almost everything visually. It's a low key, tense film and it demands that you pay attention. If you drift out for even a little bit you could miss a detail that sets up the tension later. It asks a lot of its audience and if you're willing pay attention, you'll be rewarded. If you want your typical gunplay broken up by obvious exposition and capped off with a plot twist, you'll have to look elsewhere.
 
Was it really action, though? I considered the Sweden scene more on the "thrilling" side. Not action, but I can clearly guess what was going to happen in the end.

DP, I actually don't remember when I gave up. Maybe close to the first hour?
 
I love, love "slow burn" thrillers...I'd say I prefer them to the high action/chase thriller. But this sucked. My wife and I both hated it. I'm sure it worked well as a book, and I appreciated how real the movie's environment felt. The performances were good as well (for the most part), there just wasn't a lot to work with.

The butterfly thing was particularly ridiculous. Oh, hey, an endangered butterfly in his favorite weapon dealing spot. Hmmmm, I wonder if that means he's going to die...oh hey! Just in case I didn't get that from that scene, he's got a butterfly tattoo on his back. Good thing! And just in case I forgot about it by the time he died, we had a shot of the butterfly flying away from his body at the end. Puh-lease. What an eye-rolling shot that was.

I remember the priest having some particularly bad lines, too, but I can't recall them off the top of my head. All in all, the priest was probably the worst character in the film.

Forgettable, awkwardly paced (not to mention one or two seriously overlong, unnecessary montages), iffy script...pass. Don't get me wrong, there was some stuff I liked...the brief action scene in the middle, the "gun scene." Long, leisurely shots of Violante Placido's incredible body. Not worth it though, at least at theater prices. If you're curious wait for DVD.

edit: I think one of the big problems with this film is that Jack's actions in the opening scene
immediately condemn him to death. The minute he shoots that innocent woman you KNOW the narrative demands his death. It quickly becomes all about the journey rather than any emotional investment in these cold, callous characters. The journey just wasn't interesting enough to make for a good film.
 
I'm annoyed that they recorded scenes for this near where I live in Sweden. There was massive Clooney hype for a couple of weeks. Then they decided to place the action elsewhere, so you can't tell where he actually is.
 
echoshifting said:
I love, love "slow burn" thrillers...I'd say I prefer them to the high action/chase thriller. But this sucked. My wife and I both hated it. I'm sure it worked well as a book, and I appreciated how real the movie's environment felt. The performances were good as well (for the most part), there just wasn't a lot to work with.

The butterfly thing was particularly ridiculous. Oh, hey, an endangered butterfly in his favorite weapon dealing spot. Hmmmm, I wonder if that means he's going to die...oh hey! Just in case I didn't get that from that scene, he's got a butterfly tattoo on his back. Good thing! And just in case I forgot about it by the time he died, we had a shot of the butterfly flying away from his body at the end. Puh-lease. What an eye-rolling shot that was.

I remember the priest having some particularly bad lines, too, but I can't recall them off the top of my head. All in all, the priest was probably the worst character in the film.

Forgettable, awkwardly paced (not to mention one or two seriously overlong, unnecessary montages), iffy script...pass. Don't get me wrong, there was some stuff I liked...the brief action scene in the middle, the "gun scene." Long, leisurely shots of Violante Placido's incredible body. Not worth it though, at least at theater prices. If you're curious wait for DVD.
Click to expand...

I found the
scene in the cafe (where she goes in the bathroom) particularly thrilling. I really enjoyed the priest + Clooney's talk about bastards as well.
It's anything but "forgettable" though, if only for Corbijn's photography.
 
Stumpokapow said:
yikes

25 "in the between"->"in between"
17 "you're"->"your"
9 "vain" -> "vein"
7 "you're" -> "your"
5 cut half the commas, "in which" -> "during which", "fiance" -> "fiancee"

there are 10 sentences in a two page article that start with "and"
Click to expand...

That list is kind of scary. I like Mission Impossible 3 more than most probably, but they have it at #5, above 2001 and Inglorious Basterds. What the Eff?
 
Expendable. said:
I found the
scene in the cafe (where she goes in the bathroom) particularly thrilling. I really enjoyed the priest + Clooney's talk about bastards as well.
It's anything but "forgettable" though, if only for Corbijn's photography.
Click to expand...

Great scene:
When he takes Clara to the spot by the river after having shown it to the assassin, so tense. Actually every scene at that spot by the river was excellent.
 
Jason's Ultimatum said:
First movie I walked out of in about, oh, say 15 years. I knew the movie wasn't going to have any action in it, but I was hoping for at least some thriller elements. It's just George Clooney paying for
sex and walking around.
That's it. :lol :lol

Easily the worst film of the year, surpassing The Losers.
Click to expand...

Have you seen The Limits of Control? If you have, is it similar to that?
 
Expendable. said:
Come to think of it, it's almost exactly like that movie.
Click to expand...

Jason's Ultimatum's description, the premise of the film and the supposed beautiful cinematography instantly remind me of it :lol It seemed to be equally divisive as well.
 
Expendable. said:
I found the
scene in the cafe (where she goes in the bathroom) particularly thrilling. I really enjoyed the priest + Clooney's talk about bastards as well.
It's anything but "forgettable" though, if only for Corbijn's photography.
Click to expand...

I'll give you
the bathroom
scene, the tension there was spot on. There are moments of greatness here, saddled by a mediocre script and some seriously awkward pacing.

Spire said:
Great scene:
When he takes Clara to the spot by the river after having shown it to the assassin, so tense. Actually every scene at that spot by the river was excellent.
Click to expand...

Really?
All the butterfly stuff down there? I thought all that was lame.
I didn't think anybody here would buy into that. To each his own, I suppose. I'm glad you guys enjoyed it; it just didn't click with me or my wife at all.
 
echoshifting said:
I'll give you
the bathroom
scene, the tension there was spot on. There are moments of greatness here, saddled by a mediocre script and some seriously awkward pacing.



Really?
All the butterfly stuff down there? I thought all that was lame.
I didn't think anybody here would buy into that. To each his own, I suppose. I'm glad you guys enjoyed it; it just didn't click with me or my wife at all.
Click to expand...

I can agree with the butterfly stuff, but the stuff with the
gun and purse
was excellent.
 
echoshifting said:
Really?
All the butterfly stuff down there? I thought all that was lame.
I didn't think anybody here would buy into that. To each his own, I suppose. I'm glad you guys enjoyed it; it just didn't click with me or my wife at all.
Click to expand...

The thing with the butterfly takes up maybe 45 seconds, and no, it didn't bother me.
 
I just saw this. It was a solid movie with really beautiful cinematography and an excellent performance by Clooney in the lead. The script, I think, tries for moments of poignancy that it wasn't able to achieve, but it's well-directed enough that that doesn't matter terribly.

I didn't connect the butterfly thing to his death at all; it was much more of a plot- and tension-building device than it was a piece of symbolism, though I guess it existed on that plane as well. What makes this movie effective is that you start to see its world in the same way as its protagonist. JU said that the movie is just "Clooney walking," but the walking is the whole point; we see from the first that there is no moment of safety for him, so long stretches of him walking fill themselves up with tension because we share his fear that the fatal bullet can come from anywhere. Plus, long takes of him walking let us see how lonely and isolated his existence is. It wasn't a 'thriller' in the conventional sense, but it was tense as hell throughout. It's a sparse film with a narrow focus, like Melville's Le Samourai (comparison by Ebert), and though it has its artistic limits, it is still successful.
 
Movie was technically competent, seemed to achieve what it wanted to achieve creatively, but just wasn't entertaining to watch.
 
I saw this today and really enjoyed it. It's a very slow moving movie that reminded of movies from the 70s. I kind of got a Le Samouraï vibe from it.
 
Spire said:
The thing with the butterfly takes up maybe 45 seconds, and no, it didn't bother me.
Click to expand...

Hmmm...well I'm not going to try to convince it bothered you, but it was a significant part of the film. More than 45 seconds.
The nickname, the tattoo, the bad cgi butterfly which happens to be fluttering about every time they go down there...etc.
It's a presence throughout the film. I feel this was one of those "moments of poignancy" SPoD is referring to, and like him I didn't think it was successful. But, I'm not going to argue about it anymore, it just stuck in my craw the entire film.
 
echoshifting said:
Hmmm...well I'm not going to try to convince it bothered you, but it was a significant part of the film. More than 45 seconds.
The nickname, the tattoo, the bad cgi butterfly which happens to be fluttering about every time they go down there...etc.
It's a presence throughout the film. I feel this was one of those "moments of poignancy" SPoD is referring to, and like him I didn't think it was successful. But, I'm not going to argue about it anymore, it just stuck in my craw the entire film.
Click to expand...

But it was more about
the plot aspect of it than any sort of symbolic/poignant meaning. The butterfly was recurring because it represented the fact that he had no way of separating between his work life and his personal life. The female assassin lady calls him Mr. Butterfly because he seems to care about the butterfly, Clara calls him Mr. Butterfly because of his tattoo, and it unsettles him that his work life is 'crossing over,' so to speak.
 
Thought the story was all right. Acting was all right. Cinematography was amazing. Audience was plain stupid. Probably had 10 people talking, saying obvious things like "They are going to try to kill him", or "Wow, those are nice titties" every 30 seconds. The absolute worst experience I've had in a theater.
 
God this was a beautiful movie. On the surface the story is nothing we haven't seen before but Corbijn and Clooney make it feel fresh.

I appreciated its terse, tense style. Every scene was coiled and tense. The dialogue knew to just get out of the way of the great visual storytelling on display here.
 
Jason's Ultimatum said:
First movie I walked out of in about, oh, say 15 years. I knew the movie wasn't going to have any action in it, but I was hoping for at least some thriller elements. It's just George Clooney paying for
sex and walking around.
That's it. :lol :lol

Easily the worst film of the year, surpassing The Losers.
Click to expand...

Go back to Matt Damon and let people appreciate good movies please
 
2wc199s.jpg


BTW, junior. That's how you use a period.
 
Expendable. said:
in honor of The American: The 25 Most Memorable Opening Scenes In Film.

Such a great opening. Loved the initial credits as well.
Click to expand...
No Saving Private Ryan? Seriously?

I know these lists always get "No ______? That's crazy!" responses no matter how good the actual list is, but making a list of 25 without Saving Private Ryan is absurd. Making a list of 10 without it is absurd. Maybe even a list of 5.
 
That was one paranoid movie. The entire time I was thinking, "Holy shit, that guy didn't put sugar in his coffee! It's a bomb dear god it's a bomb." When it ended I had to check my watch because it seemed only 60 minutes long. I was basically as paranoid as the main character.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Wolfs - Official Trailer (2024) Brad Pitt, George Clooney
21
2K
roosnam1980 replied
Caught Stealing – Official Trailer | Dir. Darren Aronofsky
10
306
Ammogeddon replied
George Foreman passes away at 76
43
2K
MrA replied
George Lucas told an impossible story in Star Wars
2
79
2K
Randall365 replied
Ken Burns’ American Revolution hits this year
14
304
EverydayBeast replied
Top Bottom