The International Reviews

  • May 30, 2019

    Tragic case for Clive Owen, he broods well but with poor dialogue and plot he is the only one holding this chaos of half thought together. All the exciting elements of a Jason Bourne cross the spotlight with nothing of substance. I feel for Owen, he deserves better, if we don't find him a flick as good as children of men soon he will turn to drink and we'll loose this wonderful epitome of a modern English reluctant trudge idiom

    Tragic case for Clive Owen, he broods well but with poor dialogue and plot he is the only one holding this chaos of half thought together. All the exciting elements of a Jason Bourne cross the spotlight with nothing of substance. I feel for Owen, he deserves better, if we don't find him a flick as good as children of men soon he will turn to drink and we'll loose this wonderful epitome of a modern English reluctant trudge idiom

  • May 18, 2019

    Never quite hits the highs and travels safe ground if jaded ground but Clive Owen is as impressive as ever.

    Never quite hits the highs and travels safe ground if jaded ground but Clive Owen is as impressive as ever.

  • May 01, 2019

    fairly interesting, but nothing we haven't seen before. One of my least favourite films of Tom Tykwer.

    fairly interesting, but nothing we haven't seen before. One of my least favourite films of Tom Tykwer.

  • Mar 17, 2019

    The weakest point of the movie is the protagonist, who does not decide on what he has to do to defeat the villains. Problem that never gets over. I liked that it shows that the big banks move, many times, outside the law something that we have seen a lot in real life.

    The weakest point of the movie is the protagonist, who does not decide on what he has to do to defeat the villains. Problem that never gets over. I liked that it shows that the big banks move, many times, outside the law something that we have seen a lot in real life.

  • Feb 21, 2019

    I really thought this movie had some truth in it when they talked about why the bank would want to purchase billions in weapons and other expertise to rebels in return for considerations and incentives should the rebels manage to accomplish a coup of their country. Meaning mineral rights or oil or some other commodity the bank can control. I thought it had a great script and I don't believe it's plot was out of the realm of possibility.

    I really thought this movie had some truth in it when they talked about why the bank would want to purchase billions in weapons and other expertise to rebels in return for considerations and incentives should the rebels manage to accomplish a coup of their country. Meaning mineral rights or oil or some other commodity the bank can control. I thought it had a great script and I don't believe it's plot was out of the realm of possibility.

  • May 21, 2018

    Almost everything about The International seems like it should be an all-time favorite movie for me. I love a good action movie, I’m always fond of political intrigue and conspiracy plots, I think Clive Owen and Naomi Watts are good actors, and more. So why did I find it to only be good and not at all great? I think a lot of it has to do with the construction of the plot. They don’t do the best job of setting up what is going on, what the particular goals are for the two sides, or what is at stake. I think those elements are established at some point, but the movie doesn’t do the best job of making it all clear from early on, which is what I think it needed. There is also the fact that the identity of the enemy and the actions they are taking is never obscured for the audience. That means, instead of sympathizing with the plight of the protagonists, we know more than they do and wait for them to catch up. Clive Owen is not bad in The International. He seems befuddled for a lot of the film, but I guess it works for his character. I could never get a handle on how much field training he had, so I couldn’t decide if his action scenes were a little too under control or not. Naomi Watts was terrible in this film, though. I don’t know what was going on, but she doesn’t have that much to do in the movie, and yet her lines were clunky as if she was reading from cue cards. I’ve seen her act quite well in the past, so I know this is a fluke, but it was awkward. I kept wondering why she was even in the film, because she was so underused. In fact, her role was so insignificant I probably will forget she was in the film given some time. There weren’t any other standout performances in the film for me either. The bad guys were the prototypical white guys of some foreign descent, and the cops who help out our heroes were straight out of a TV procedural. Despite all this, I have a feeling whenever anyone talks about The International they only have one topic on their mind, because it is what makes this movie worth watching. The noteworthy sequence of this film is a massive shootout in the Guggenheim Museum. This scene felt like it was almost half an hour long, and it was non-stop excitement. They used the unique architecture of the setting to create some spectacular shots, and I don’t think there was more than thirty seconds where the guns remained silent. The characters were terrible shots, because they constantly would hit those waist-high walls instead of the people standing right behind them. But who cares about that kind of realistic mumbo-jumbo when we get to see Clive Owen fighting alongside an assassin who was supposed to kill him? I’m not kidding when I say this one action sequence salvaged the entire film for me. It wouldn’t be a complete failure if this scene was missing, but it would be forgotten in no time. I may not rush back to re-watch the film again, but I’d like to see that shootout any time.

    Almost everything about The International seems like it should be an all-time favorite movie for me. I love a good action movie, I’m always fond of political intrigue and conspiracy plots, I think Clive Owen and Naomi Watts are good actors, and more. So why did I find it to only be good and not at all great? I think a lot of it has to do with the construction of the plot. They don’t do the best job of setting up what is going on, what the particular goals are for the two sides, or what is at stake. I think those elements are established at some point, but the movie doesn’t do the best job of making it all clear from early on, which is what I think it needed. There is also the fact that the identity of the enemy and the actions they are taking is never obscured for the audience. That means, instead of sympathizing with the plight of the protagonists, we know more than they do and wait for them to catch up. Clive Owen is not bad in The International. He seems befuddled for a lot of the film, but I guess it works for his character. I could never get a handle on how much field training he had, so I couldn’t decide if his action scenes were a little too under control or not. Naomi Watts was terrible in this film, though. I don’t know what was going on, but she doesn’t have that much to do in the movie, and yet her lines were clunky as if she was reading from cue cards. I’ve seen her act quite well in the past, so I know this is a fluke, but it was awkward. I kept wondering why she was even in the film, because she was so underused. In fact, her role was so insignificant I probably will forget she was in the film given some time. There weren’t any other standout performances in the film for me either. The bad guys were the prototypical white guys of some foreign descent, and the cops who help out our heroes were straight out of a TV procedural. Despite all this, I have a feeling whenever anyone talks about The International they only have one topic on their mind, because it is what makes this movie worth watching. The noteworthy sequence of this film is a massive shootout in the Guggenheim Museum. This scene felt like it was almost half an hour long, and it was non-stop excitement. They used the unique architecture of the setting to create some spectacular shots, and I don’t think there was more than thirty seconds where the guns remained silent. The characters were terrible shots, because they constantly would hit those waist-high walls instead of the people standing right behind them. But who cares about that kind of realistic mumbo-jumbo when we get to see Clive Owen fighting alongside an assassin who was supposed to kill him? I’m not kidding when I say this one action sequence salvaged the entire film for me. It wouldn’t be a complete failure if this scene was missing, but it would be forgotten in no time. I may not rush back to re-watch the film again, but I’d like to see that shootout any time.

  • Apr 28, 2018

    I'm kind of stunned by those who reviewed this unfavorably. It's a very well-done, intelligent thriller. Perhaps after the 2016 election, viewers will be less inclined to think that an international banking scandal is implausible. Great action and dialogue, excellent cast and performances, and an excellent score. And, Yes, the Guggenheim sequence is stunning.

    I'm kind of stunned by those who reviewed this unfavorably. It's a very well-done, intelligent thriller. Perhaps after the 2016 election, viewers will be less inclined to think that an international banking scandal is implausible. Great action and dialogue, excellent cast and performances, and an excellent score. And, Yes, the Guggenheim sequence is stunning.

  • Jul 22, 2017

    Just a terrible waste of two hours.

    Just a terrible waste of two hours.

  • Apr 07, 2017

    Good political thriller with a great gun battle in the Guggenheim Museum and I always love Clive Owen, Naomi Watts and Arrmin Meuller-Stahl. Suspenseful watch.

    Good political thriller with a great gun battle in the Guggenheim Museum and I always love Clive Owen, Naomi Watts and Arrmin Meuller-Stahl. Suspenseful watch.

  • Nov 20, 2016

    'The International' begins well, sags a bit towards the middle (but will probably still maintain your attention) and just fizzles out in the end, especially after the shootout scene. Up till then, I was fairly engrossed. The acting is decent, with Clive Owen and Naomi Watts turning it some strong performances, though they both could have done with some more meaty dialogue. Still, it manages to create a sense of international intrigue, mystery and suspense. It's just a shame that the convoluted plot eventually carries more weight than the film can bare, racing at breakneck speed in the final act in attempt to explain things which hasn't been previously explained. Such a shame as the film showed some real potential, especially in some taut direction by Tom Tykwer. It's not dreadful, it's simply disappointing, being less than the sum of its parts. 3/5

    'The International' begins well, sags a bit towards the middle (but will probably still maintain your attention) and just fizzles out in the end, especially after the shootout scene. Up till then, I was fairly engrossed. The acting is decent, with Clive Owen and Naomi Watts turning it some strong performances, though they both could have done with some more meaty dialogue. Still, it manages to create a sense of international intrigue, mystery and suspense. It's just a shame that the convoluted plot eventually carries more weight than the film can bare, racing at breakneck speed in the final act in attempt to explain things which hasn't been previously explained. Such a shame as the film showed some real potential, especially in some taut direction by Tom Tykwer. It's not dreadful, it's simply disappointing, being less than the sum of its parts. 3/5