Take an Oscar-winning director. Throw in two Oscar-winning leading actors, both still in their prime. Give it a team of Academy-recognized screenwriters, a huge budget and permission to shoot at the United Nations. Heck, even Hitchcock was never allowed to do that.
On paper, \The Interpreter"" looked like one of the greatest political thrillers of all time. But somewhere on the way to the big screen all the politics and thrills were removed, leaving it too stupid and vacuous to make a strong political movie and too restrained and intellectual to stand as an action movie. Suddenly, all that Hollywood math added up to a very skillful but entirely bland movie, and an early contender for biggest disappointment of 2005.
The movie centers around Silvia Broome (Nicole Kidman), an interpreter at the United Nations who finds herself in danger after unwittingly overhearing a plot to assassinate the dictator of her fictional African homeland Matobo. While fear for herself and family torment her, Silvia must also deal with a pair of Secret Service agents (Sean Penn and Catherine Keener) who hesitate to believe her story, as they struggle through Silvia's complicated past and the even more complicated power struggle surrounding her native land's politics.
Someone took great pains to baby-proof this movie. There is nothing concretely wrong so much as there is nothing much there, period. The acting, writing and direction are all sound, but every rough edge or sharp corner to the plot has been sanded down, leaving only the silhouette of the movie ""The Interpreter"" should have been-or of any movie at all, for that matter.
The cast does admirable work. The often-icy Kidman seamlessly slips from fear to heartbreak to bravura as the part demands, and ably stands toe to toe with the grumbling, detached Penn. But seeing Penn deliver monologues of mourning to Kidman only serves as a reminder that it was less than two years ago that Penn delivered a mournful and career-best performance opposite Kidman's countrywoman and look-alike Naomi Watts in the far-superior ""21 Grams.""
Meanwhile, director Sydney Pollack takes full advantage of his privileged location. Aside from lending an undeserved air of credibility, the use of the actual UN building provides wonderful visuals for Pollack, whose most inspired work on the movie comes from exploring the building's sleek spaces.
Pollack was once an edgier filmmaker within the mainstream, with titles like ""Tootsie"" and ""The Way We Were."" His few but wonderful acting performances in movies like ""The Player"" and ""Husbands and Wives"" were rare treats. But recent years have seen him mainly producing, with his directing work devoted to forgettable big-name fare like ""The Firm"" and 1995's unnecessary ""Sabrina"" remake. Now, he seems worn-out. His on-screen appearance in ""Interpreter"" makes him look tired, and his directing reflects the same unremarkable work of mere competence.
But it would be a waste to see his best work in a dud like this anyway. ""The Interpreter"" is talky, but its dialogue is never snappy or clever enough to carry scenes. The focus on African genocide and images of juvenile soldiers are timely, but are quickly made irrelevant by the movie's fierce determination to steer clear of reality and assign blame solely to singular, fictional figures of evil and corruption. Action scenes like the much-advertised bus explosion only make it seem like a remake of 1998's ""The Siege"" designed specifically to not offend anyone.
""The Interpreter"" is much like an elaborate sandwich made on stale bread, or an all-star team passing around a deflated basketball. So much talent and resources are invested in this movie, yet it fails, because the core of the movie is the kind of dragging, pointless international intrigue normally seen in third-tier Hitchcock. ""The Interpreter"" should have been unmissable. Instead, it's a cautionary tale.
