The American (Anton Corbijn, 2010)

[John Cope]

A first response to and assessment of this strangely under the radar picture.

[domino harvey]

I'm looking forward to seeing it but I'm perplexed at its Wednesday release date

[Jeff]

A first response to and assessment of this strangely under the radar picture.

This Dutch reviewer has a similar take. Sounds like Corbijn is channeling Antonioni here.

I'm looking forward to seeing it but I'm perplexed at its Wednesday release date

Focus is definitely nervous about it, and seems like they may be trying to bury it. They originally had it scheduled for later in the fall, which seemed to indicate an Oscar bid. Now they've moved it to a Wednesday at the beginning of September, which is where films go to die. It has screened for a few European critics, but the official critical screenings in the U.S. don't start until Monday night, two days before it opens. It sounds like it may actually be pretty decent, but incredibly noncommercial. You would think that, if it is decent, they would want to build up as much critical support as possible before release. I suspect that Focus thought they would be getting some Soderberghian retro-cool thriller (somewhere between Out of Sight and The Limey) that they could market to the smart and hip arthouse crowd, then expand to mainstream multiplexes and maybe get a nod for Best Actor or Original Screenplay. The trailer and the awesome poster below indicate that they are hoping to convince audiences that this is what they're getting too. Maybe Focus is afraid that reviews like the two released thus far will spoil their ruse.

[Duncan Hopper]

I saw the trailer in the cinema last week before Coco Chanel and Igor Stravinsky, and I can't say I was impressed at all.
But after reading those reviews I'm now really looking forward to it.

[Brian C]

If they are trying to bury it, though, they're doing quite a poor job. I've seen a fair amount of TV spots for it over the past couple weeks, and I don't even watch very much TV. Theatres near me have big cardboard standees. I think I remember even seeing an ad for it on a city bus the other day, but I might be making that up.

Not saying that general awareness is through the roof or anything but this is not what burying a movie looks like.

[Jeff]

If they are trying to bury it, though, they're doing quite a poor job. I've seen a fair amount of TV spots for it over the past couple weeks, and I don't even watch very much TV. Theatres near me have big cardboard standees. I think I remember even seeing an ad for it on a city bus the other day, but I might be making that up.

Not saying that general awareness is through the roof or anything but this is not what burying a movie looks like.

You are right, Brian. Burying isn't the right word at all, but the date they've scheduled it for doesn't exactly exude confidence. Really, what it seems like they're doing is trying to front-load the opening with a big advertising blitz (though Clooney seems to be doing zero press) characterized by misleading trailers and posters. They're also going quite wide (2,700 screens) on opening day. All of this leads me to believe that they're hoping the mall monkeys will check it out over Labor Day weekend to see Clooney in action, followed by a precipitous decline in revenue when word-of-mouth indicates that it's "totally teh boringz" and "doesn't have no story, or action, or nothin'."

[Brian C]

I think this is just how Focus rolls, more than anything. For years, they've had an annual late August/September release:

2009 - Taking Woodstock
2008 - Hamlet 2
2007 - Eastern Promises
2006 - Hollywoodland
2005 - The Constant Gardener
2004 - Vanity Fair

Of those, Eastern Promises is the only one that had a limited release (opened on 15 screens before going wide the next week) and the only one that didn't get released between the weekend before Labor Day and the weekend after. The American is going wider than the others because it has a bigger star, but other than that, this looks like business as usual for Focus.

[Jeff]

Roger Ebert and Glenn Kenny both invoke comparisons to Le Samourai in their reviews, with Kenny also mentioning The Passenger (which is where I thought Corbijn was probably headed), and The American Friend. Most of the reviews I've seen are pretty mixed, offering mild admiration with caveats. Ebert is the only one loving it (but then, he loves everything these days). The Hollywood Reporter's Kirk Honeycutt puts forth a typically anti-intellectual pan ("what viewer is going to trouble to work out that symbolism").

[Finch]

Bill Weber at Slant is more reserved about the film but acknowledges the positives.

[med]

That Bill Weber notice is pretty spoilery. Wish I hadn't read it.

[karmajuice]

Saw this a few hours ago, and I quite liked it. Biking home in the rain afterward made the experience that much more invigorating, too.

While comparisons to Le Samourai and other such films are apt, don't go in expecting anything quite like those. As one might expect, the film is not nearly so stylistically rigorous. Still, it uses its settings beautifully and its pace is measured and sure.

Some reviews have complained that the film is derivative and falls prey to cliche. It's certainly working in the same mode as many like-minded films, but I don't see how that's a flaw, so long as you don't expect it to defy conventions but capitalize on them. For my money, it achieves an emotional impact I've seldom encountered in its predecessors, thanks largely to Clooney's understated performance and Corbijn's sense of restraint.

I have my reservations, of course, but on the whole I was impressed. Glenn Kenny's review strikes me as the most thoughtful of the bunch, and probably the closest to my own opinion.

Also, Violante Placido is attractive and frequently undressed throughout. If all that isn't enough to recommend the film, I don't know what to say.

[Fiery Angel]

Violante Placido is attractive and frequently undressed throughout.

Sold!

[Brian C]

I thought this was pretty outstanding. Clooney really made this one for me, playing the role as a sort of anti-Bond. He's not the slightest bit smooth or charming, and instead comes across as jittery and scared. He's playing a guy who's had one too many anxious moments, and realizes that he's shell-shocked and at the end of his useful life in his profession. His character isn't the usual guy who wants to finish one last job so that he can go live off his riches - he's a guy who's reluctantly tying up his loose ends because he physically can't do this any longer. And that gives the film an emotional resonance that is usually missing from this kind of thing, even if the specific story elements aren't much different than a million other movies.

[HarryLong]

The Hollywood Reporter's Kirk Honeycutt puts forth a typically anti-intellectual pan ("what viewer is going to trouble to work out that symbolism").

Hell of a comment from a guy who also uses the phrase

But the mood is nero e bianco

in his review.
I mean what reader is going to go to the trouble of a hauling out an Italian dictionary?

[Mr. Ned]

I thought this was pretty outstanding. Clooney really made this one for me, playing the role as a sort of anti-Bond. He's not the slightest bit smooth or charming, and instead comes across as jittery and scared. He's playing a guy who's had one too many anxious moments, and realizes that he's shell-shocked and at the end of his useful life in his profession. His character isn't the usual guy who wants to finish one last job so that he can go live off his riches - he's a guy who's reluctantly tying up his loose ends because he physically can't do this any longer. And that gives the film an emotional resonance that is usually missing from this kind of thing, even if the specific story elements aren't much different than a million other movies.

I was pulling my best "I'm busy" gag on one of my usual dinner & a movie friends about this film, but this post single-handedly changed my mind--and all the more pertinent with Clooney in the leading role. He's aged a lot in the last year and half, not so much in phsyique--hairs a bit whiter, face a tad longer--but in how tired and put-out he looks in films, public interviews, etc. and so forth. I've been a big fan of his since Out of Sight (or even From Dusk 'til Dawn, although I saw that much later) and it's kind of sad to see the vigor puttering out in him ...could make for a strong movie experience here, though.

[Tom Hagen]

I love Anton Corbijn. His work on various Depeche Mode videos, of all things, intially opened my young eyes to the possibilities and beauty of 16mm stock. For anyone who's a fan of early ("classic"?*) alternative rock, the man's video and photography work is iconic. He photographed the cover sleeve of The Joshua Tree for crying out loud!

I thought Control was excellent and strangely underrated, and I am quite anxious to see this.

* I honestly don't know what to call this era of music; classic doesn't sound right, and is confusing to boot.

[Brian C]

I was pulling my best "I'm busy" gag on one of my usual dinner & a movie friends about this film, but this post single-handedly changed my mind--and all the more pertinent with Clooney in the leading role. He's aged a lot in the last year and half, not so much in phsyique--hairs a bit whiter, face a tad longer--but in how tired and put-out he looks in films, public interviews, etc. and so forth. I've been a big fan of his since Out of Sight (or even From Dusk 'til Dawn, although I saw that much later) and it's kind of sad to see the vigor puttering out in him ...could make for a strong movie experience here, though.

Yes! Quite right. That's a perfect description, and Corbijn and Clooney really put these qualities to use in the film.

One other thing about Clooney ... he's never been the most physically graceful actor. As smooth as he can be personality-wise, he's always moved a little awkwardly. I remember Soderbergh talking about this back in the Out of Sight commentary, how Clooney walks a little funny, with a little jerky stride that's really distinctive, especially from a distance.

And I think this sort of thing is really obvious in the movie, and to great effect. There's a scene early on where Clooney pulls a handgun, and when he shoots, it's with a little hitch of the arm that doesn't look like anyone who's ever shot a gun in a movie before. It's almost like a little karate chop. There are a lot of tiny moments like that: the way he suddenly turns his head when he thinks he's being followed, or especially a late scene near the river in which he has to he thinks he's about to have a gun pulled on him. He just seems so physically ill-at-ease as a hitman or whatever it is he does in the movie (his precise profession isn't really given), and so uncomfortable in his own skin during the action scenes, that it really adds a lot to his desperation to get himself out of this life.

The more I think about it, the more remarkable this performance seems.

[knives]

I wasn't really a fan of Control, but this was a quietly delightful experience. It's so laid back that I'm afraid that coolness will cause me to under appreciate it. I really loved this particularly as an aware star vehicle. It moves, as far as it's relationship with it's star, a lot like Touchez. The nakedness of Clooney's performance is a bit off as he's still a held together guy and shows it while also admitting that the strength of the Out of Sight days is gone. There's one shot in particular, skinny dipping scene, where Clooney looks a hundred.

[Grand Illusion]

I'll echo the praise. Clooney's screen presence carries the whole piece through. In a small moment, a close-up on Clooney is held as a waiter comes and brings a rose to the table. The waiter just places the rose on the table, and Clooney watches. The performance is riveting in its mystery. Violante Placido also struck me, both for her performance and, well, let's be honest. People will be talking about her after this film.

That mystery extends to much of the film. Not much is spelled out, even The American's exact profession is ambiguous. I have questions, but not the bad kind of questions. When it comes to motivation, everything makes sense, even if the reasons aren't explicit.

Because most of the film plays out in silences, Corbijn and cinematographer Martin Ruhe have a field day with the spatial dynamics. Characters are framed in corners, lots of frames within frames, foreground objects separating characters, shots from behind Clooney show just how limited his peripheral awareness can be, etc. The helicopter shots reveal the winding roads and disorderly construction of the small villages (as opposed to simple grids which would be easy to get around). Excellent compositions.

Corbijn and editor Andrew Hulme deserve immense praise for the pacing. A studio could've easily chopped up some of the atmospheric shots. The relatively longer shots - it's not going to top any ASL lists - allow the suspense to boil from underneath, because every corner and every doorway represent a new threat. Then when cutting is required, Corbijn and Hulme show their mastery of timing. The two scenes that stand out with the strongest editing rhythm are a scene towards the end that takes place at a diner and also the scene where

Spoiler

, at the picnic, The American believes Clara is going to pull a pistol out of her purse.

Sure, the film owes a lot to the Melville, mostly, as well as Antonioni and even Fred Zinneman (The Day of the Jackal,) but there's all sorts of quotes that are there for cinephiles. This is just for fun, but I was coming from this film straight from the new Bergman exhibit at The Academy. I was just explaining one of Bergman's signature shots (featured in a picture at the exhibit) to the non-film-buff friend I went with. I'm speaking specifically of the shot that features one actor in profile and the other actor facing directly forward. The tips of their noses appear to overlap in the frame.*** Then we went to see The American, and Corbijn uses this shot. And in a dramatic moment when Clooney is speaking to a priest no less.

Overall, I wasn't bothered by some of the cliches, like popping up from bed with his gun drawn or the pre-business push-ups routine. The only one that stuck out:

Spoiler

Unfortunately, the offending cliche was at the end. One of my personal pet peeves is how a villain gets shot and drops dead, yet a hero is shot, doesn't notice it, then later touches his stomach, reveals the blood, and dies. It's a common device used even in modern films, such as Blood Diamond or Children of Men, and it's an eye-roller for me.

Still, the execution of the film is so well-done that it deserves a heavy recommendation.

[swo17]

This was a pretty good documentary about what Violante Placido looks like naked, but I might have preferred if it had been a meditative film about the autumn years of a gun manufacturer.

[Jean-Luc Garbo]

All of three scenes hardly makes it a documentary.

[oldsheperd]

This was a pretty good documentary about what Violante Placido looks like naked, but I might have preferred if it had been a meditative film about the autumn years of a gun manufacturer.

Antonioni meets Porky's! The Placido nekkid stuff was kind of superfluous, but tasty!

[jbeall]

Well, I can hardly think of an actress who looks better naked than Violante Placido; on a scale of one to smoking hot, she's a little closer to smoking hot.

Good film. I'll echo Grand Illusion's complaint, but otherwise this is beautifully shot, surprisingly engaging despite (or perhaps because of) its meditative pace, and I especially appreciated the terse dialogue throughout. I actually don't have a problem with

Spoiler

the last shot, with the butterfly. Bill Weber complains that the motif is underdeveloped, but I took that to be the point. Here's a guy whose profession has made him particularly focused but also burned him out. For me, the butterfly (along with the brandy) represents that which lies outside his professional orbit, and therefore that for which he's never had time and/or been unable to enjoy because of his excessive focus.

[AWA]

Saw this tonight based on some kind words here and, while I was expecting to see a film better than what I originally thought, I was delighted to see a terrific film that far exceeded my expectations. What a terrifically constructed work. While much of that construction might be attributed to the novel it is based on, none the less Corbijn employs the cinematography and Clooney's nervous action so well it really makes for a gripping piece. A lot of the praise I'd heap upon it has already been said - especially how the cinematography handles geography and landscapes, there wasn't a point in the film where I didn't think every single location was sinister and about to unleash some kind of attack on him - I would also add I enjoyed how this film didn't stoop to watering down the Italian content. The cultural locale never felt forced, nor did it play into any kind of Mafia-type territory which would've been easy.

You could also probably write a little theory essay on how the film plays like a tale of present day America - with so many people unable to retire, the metaphor is strong... or the nation as a whole unable to retire from it's position as "world's policeman" or whatever... but... ahem... we won't get into that here

Anyways, with regards to Grand Illusion's comments on the ending:

Spoiler

I thought it was also a bit cliched, especially when I suspected he was driving to the river to meet her, where he would be killed by her. They set up the point that sex was his main weakness, right from the opening of the film to the whorehouse fucking, I thought that was going to do him in for sure. They unfortunately went with him getting shot without realizing it at first. Clooney does do a decent job with that dying scene though.

Odd that none of the critics in the press criticizes the film for having a 50-something (plus?) man's love for a 20 something hooker as slightly less than, shall we say, appealing? If more hookers looked like Violante Placido though, I'd have a large personal collection of STDs by now.

[Nothing]

Sounds like Corbijn is channeling Antonioni here.

More like channeling a mid-90s mid-budget middlebrow Euro thriller. Fans of stuff like Revanche should be fairly happy, I guess.

The American is noffensive and watchable, yet bland, only really notable for Clooney's presence + that of a major studio. Whilst it cuts a little slower than most modern Hollywood productions, the 'style' of the film has been hugely overhyped - camerawork is conventionally unobtrusive, plastered over with a by-the-numbers score. There's not a hint of Antonioni in this. Corbijn does have a strong sense of location, he gets good performances from his cast, and the lighting is pleasant. The real weak point is the trite and insanely predictable script (I had the whole plot figured out from literally the first 3 shots), but he's Roland Joffe's son, so he must be good right? ](*,)

This is very much the poorer cousin of Jarmusch/Doyle's The Limits of Control, a film that is genuinely elevated through stylstic bravura.