The Interpreter
Two Stars
by Norman Wilner, Zap2it.com
Yank out the cell phones and the laptops, and "The Interpreter" could be taking place thirty years ago -- back when the idea of intrigue unfolding within the hallowed halls of the United Nations might actually have meant something.
Nicole Kidman is the titular listening device, a UN translator who overhears a snippet of conversation that she concludes to be part of a conspiracy to assassinate a visiting African dignitary in less than a week. She goes to the police, which lands her in the sights of a Secret Service agent played by Sean Penn in full scowl.
He doesn't believe her; she doesn't trust him. But as the plot piles up around them, they recognize something in one another -- a familiar bruise, a sense of deep pain -- that bonds them on a fundamental level.
And this is where the movie runs into its greatest difficulty: For all its scenes of men creeping around with malice in their hearts and silencers on their weapons, for all its expository dialogue about freedom fighters who become warlords and the motivations of suicide bombers, and for all its delicate avoidance of the whole Iraq thing, "The Interpreter" isn't a very good political thriller.
You keep hoping Sydney Pollack will spin the elements the right way, to make every moment count the way he did in the still-powerful "Three Days of the Condor" back in 1976, but it doesn't happen. The script never quite manages to raise its running-down-corridors plot points to the intensity of the drama crackling between Penn and Kidman. And we end up with two terrific performances trapped in the amber of a movie out of time.
Universal's DVD -- available in full-frame and enhanced-widescreen editions -- comes packed with extras that are, like the movie, a little less than they appear to be. The production featurettes are standard marketing-department stuff: Hey, they shot in the real United Nations! Hey, real UN interpreters don't look anything like Nicole Kidman! Hey, Sydney Pollack is a living legend whose 30-year reputation as a down-to-earth crowd-pleaser polishes up real nice!
Not that any of that isn't true, you understand ... just that it's all as dull as the movie. (The deleted scenes, alternate ending and Pollack's audio commentary don't add much sizzle, either.) Only a featurette in which Pollack explains why he believes his movie should be seen in its full scope proportions, rather than watched in a panned-and-scanned video transfer, seems to have any passion. Of course, it then begs the question why Universal would so insult this beloved filmmaker by insisting on a full-frame transfer at all.
