The American

[MacGuffin]

Trailer here.

Release Date: September 1st, 2010 (limited) 

Starring: George Clooney, Bruce Altman, Thekla Reuten, Paolo Bonacelli, Violante Placido
 
Directed by: Anton Corbijn 

Premise: Alone among assassins, Jack is a master craftsman. When a job in Sweden ends more harshly than expected for this American abroad, he vows to his contact Larry that his next assignment will be his last.

[Ravi]

Best title ever.

[Pubrick]

yeah the title seems to take itself as seriously as the movie, and that's VERY.

what that trailer needs is a good dose of humour, it would be awesome if at the end of the trailer when the title comes up and the somber music just kinda trails off, if they would hold on the title and cut straight to this song - and it would just go on like that until the song ends. i guarantee EVERYONE would see this movie. also if after every time clooney says something serious, for example after he says "i don't think God is interested in me" it would cut straight to that song.

that would be so awesome. it's like this idea i had with cine (whoever that is) about how much better The Passion of the Christ would have been if at some point near the end of the movie, like right after satan screams into the sky or whatever, they would cut to a static shot of papa smurf..

.. except of him sort of in mid-action like about to open a door. and just held on that for 20 seconds.

all this thinking about how to make ultra-serious movies better led of course to the final piece in the last official edition of cine and P's drawing corner: Smurf, Interrupted (scroll down a bit, and beware you are entering a xixax BLAST FROM THE PAST!)..

[Captain of Industry]

A million film ideas, a million ideas, and this is what Corbijn wants to do?  A fucking sniper flick?  Fuck that.

[modage]

Existential sniper flick.  It looks very European.

[Captain of Industry]

  Are you saying those adjs. elevate the concept?  Because while I agree they're favorable qualities for some films sometimes to possess, I mean Leon > Shooter, it doesn't automatically redeem a base concept, and I'd still prefer something else from Corbijn.

[Gold Trumpet]

It reminds me of Jean Pierre Melville homage. If there is a bit of humor hidden in the story, the film will likely bleed into an homage of the Conformist as well. Stylistic filmmakers go through these motions and if a filmmaker today can do a really good rendering of Melville (mixed in with today's elements), I am nothing but excited. Melville's films are candy and still entertaining today. It's a timeless template to base a story on.

[Captain of Industry]

Why would 'timeless' be applied to films which have lingered for a stretch of forty years?  Relevant, sure, enduring, okay, but timeless?  That's not criticism, that's soothsaying.  I also don't agree that all stylistic filmmakers need 'go through these motions,' I hate these motions, I hate that filmmakers can become trapped in them for commercial reasons, and that this is what they have to make to put people in the seats, and I hate the passive way they're received.  'It's an existential sniper flick,' oh it's a 'Jean Pierre Melville homage,' I mean these are formulas and conventions.  It's idea recycling in Hollywood, it's idea recycling when it's Corbijn too.

Maybe it'll rise above.  I haven't even watched the trailer (is he serious?  I'm serious).  Maybe Martin Booth did some shit for genre like Jonathan Lethem is doing for genre.  If it's the year's best movie, so be it.  Just imagine a year in which the best of the year is a movie with a premise 'Alone among assassins, Jack is a master craftsman. When a job in Sweden ends more harshly than expected for this American abroad, he vows to his contact Larry that his next assignment will be his last.'

[polkablues]

This is why we're better off judging a book by its cover than trying to judge a movie by its log line.  GT's right; even the great directors deal in pastiche all the time, and Corbijn's new enough to directing features that he might still be experimenting, pulling bits and pieces from his influences and laying them over a familiar story as he tries to discover his vision.  

I don't see any problem with a director retreading an over-used plot if he brings something new to it.  It's that "if" that's the key, and there's simply no way of knowing for sure from the description or from the trailer.

[Gold Trumpet]

Why would 'timeless' be applied to films which have lingered for a stretch of forty years?  Relevant, sure, enduring, okay, but timeless?  That's not criticism, that's soothsaying.  I also don't agree that all stylistic filmmakers need 'go through these motions,' I hate these motions, I hate that filmmakers can become trapped in them for commercial reasons, and that this is what they have to make to put people in the seats, and I hate the passive way they're received.  'It's an existential sniper flick,' oh it's a 'Jean Pierre Melville homage,' I mean these are formulas and conventions.  It's idea recycling in Hollywood, it's idea recycling when it's Corbijn too.

Maybe it'll rise above.  I haven't even watched the trailer (is he serious?  I'm serious).  Maybe Martin Booth did some shit for genre like Jonathan Lethem is doing for genre.  If it's the year's best movie, so be it.  Just imagine a year in which the best of the year is a movie with a premise 'Alone among assassins, Jack is a master craftsman. When a job in Sweden ends more harshly than expected for this American abroad, he vows to his contact Larry that his next assignment will be his last.'

That doesn't make any sense. The purpose of a stylistic filmmaker is to be able to look back and put their spin on various styles from earlier periods. It's almost impossible to name a stylistic filmmaker who doesn't invest in homage of some kind. Even the major filmmakers of the 30/40s or 60s who based their films on new editing styles were still doing homages to others. Hollywood convention throwbacks are about looking back to old styles (which have some merit) but they are also about short cutting a story for convention's sake to be more entertaining and mass consuming. Those elements I dislike more, but taking from filmmakers who challenged audience expectations is another thing.

Your reply mainly sounds like a disagreement with Jean Pierre Melville and if you do want talk about him, I would be all for it.

[Captain of Industry]

Why would 'timeless' be applied to films which have lingered for a stretch of forty years?  Relevant, sure, enduring, okay, but timeless?  That's not criticism, that's soothsaying.  I also don't agree that all stylistic filmmakers need 'go through these motions,' I hate these motions, I hate that filmmakers can become trapped in them for commercial reasons, and that this is what they have to make to put people in the seats, and I hate the passive way they're received.  'It's an existential sniper flick,' oh it's a 'Jean Pierre Melville homage,' I mean these are formulas and conventions.  It's idea recycling in Hollywood, it's idea recycling when it's Corbijn too.

Maybe it'll rise above.  I haven't even watched the trailer (is he serious?  I'm serious).  Maybe Martin Booth did some shit for genre like Jonathan Lethem is doing for genre.  If it's the year's best movie, so be it.  Just imagine a year in which the best of the year is a movie with a premise 'Alone among assassins, Jack is a master craftsman. When a job in Sweden ends more harshly than expected for this American abroad, he vows to his contact Larry that his next assignment will be his last.'

That doesn't make any sense. The purpose of a stylistic filmmaker is to be able to look back and put their spin on various styles from earlier periods. It's almost impossible to name a stylistic filmmaker who doesn't invest in homage of some kind. Even the major filmmakers of the 30/40s or 60s who based their films on new editing styles were still doing homages to others. Hollywood convention throwbacks are about looking back to old styles (which have some merit) but they are also about short cutting a story for convention's sake to be more entertaining and mass consuming. Those elements I dislike more, but taking from filmmakers who challenged audience expectations is another thing.

Your reply mainly sounds like a disagreement with Jean Pierre Melville and if you do want talk about him, I would be all for it.

Well you're replying to material not present in my post, but which I perhaps unintentionally invoked.  It's not style I have a problem with, nor am discussing (or even mentioned for that matter), it's thematic content.  Existential sniper film and Jean Pierre Melville homage both represent qualifications for dull thematic material in my mind.

And if I am engaging in pessimism against the posters in this thread it's simply because I don't believe there's a lot of mileage to be gained out of a lone wild horse sniper narrative.  But I could be wrong, dead wrong.

[Gold Trumpet]

I looked at your post again and I am replying to what you talked about. You say Corbijn making a Melville homage film is no different than a Hollywood recycling. I dealt with how homage is essential and Hollywood recycling is ultimately different so if Corbijn was doing a Melville homage, it would be different than something generally found in Hollywood. As far as Melville is concerned, the style is the content so both go together. When I see shots of Clooney alone and exercising in isolation, I see something right up Melville's alley.

But I also like Melville and I think we're talking about personal tastes here. There are other European styles that people like and I don't but my personal taste says nothing to how relevant the style is.

[picolas]

i get the sense this is just a poorly edited trailer.

[SiliasRuby]

I'm so happy with George Clooney's picks for films since 1998. He's getting smarter and smarter with his choices. Even his "failures" are interesting.

[modage]

Awesome.