MovieChat Forums > The American (2010) Discussion > So who is this guy? (Spoiler Content!)

So who is this guy? (Spoiler Content!)

posted 11 years ago by CaperGuy
8 replies | jump to latest

Somebody called this film an underrated gem?? Really? You've got to be kidding. Here's an American who travels through Sweden and Italy for the express purpose of doing an assassination but he spends more time hiring hookers and creeping around the townsfolk pretending to be a photojournalist with no particular knowledge of the subject. A grade schooler would have seen through him as easily as the priest seemed to call him out. So there's that.

The endless stream of prostitutes and bedroom scenes leads me to think that this guy is not sure what he really wants. Is he trying to prove his manhood by hiring these women? Why hookers? Why not just get a decent woman? He started out with an apparently decent woman who cared about him but he did not hesitate to blow this beautiful woman's head off under the pretense of eliminating witnesses. He is no James Bond.

He proceeded to quickly build a silencer and some gun parts with spare engine parts from an auto garage using only crude hand tools and no machine or power tools. Then he achieved match grade accuracy with this contraption. This is grossly unrealistic to the point of insulting.

The action in this film is so slow and disjointed as to be nauseating. This is a film for those who need to believe that George Clooney is a good actor or for women who are infatuated with him. If you like a good suspense thriller or an intelligently produced drama, then you should pass on this film.

So, then, who is Jack/Edward? Is he a MacGyver wannabe? No. He lacks the technology. Is he a James Bond disciple? No. Bond had an honorable purpose, he worked for his country and he knew how to pick his women. Is he a reincarnation of Maxwell Smart? No. This is supposed to be taut drama.

I don't know who this guy is, who he is trying to be or why I spent part of my Friday night watching this film. That's why I turned it off. I couldn't bear to finish it.

As a man thinketh in his heart, so is he. - Proverbs 23:7

[–] rodabroad 11 years ago

I agree. The movie had me rolling my eyes after less than 5 mins. in when Jack and his girlfriend are strolling across the frozen lake and the professional assasin doesn't shoot until AFTER he ducks behind a rock??!!! Yeah right. Real professionalism there. It was an obvious plot device to put him in a "dangerous situation" from which he can escape and ride out the rest of the film. Of course if the Swede assasin actually did the job he was supposedly capable of, there'd be no Jack and hence no film.

[–] pjmcgill142 11 years ago

Yeah right. Real professionalism there.

there must an instruction manual for this sort of thing, then. Or a place where one can train...

"Today's lesson will cover what to do when strolling with a girlfriend and attacked by Norw... sorry, Swedish assassins. Pay attention, there will be a test! And don't be thinkin' 'I'll just jump behind a rock and THEN start shootin'. The last student who did that didn't make it into the second week."

[–] very3 11 years ago

why not get a decent woman and not hookers? dont you remember in the beginning of the film he had to kill a woman he suppsedly cared about when she got caught up in his life when his secret life caught up with him and hitmen tried to kill him?remeber his boss telling him the hitman code....."dont make friends".

he is dealing with hookers to fullfill sexual needs rather than find a decent woman.

[–] bond_98 11 years ago

All i know is Bond or Bourne never needed to pay for sex. I think the problem with this movie is it lacks human connections. I know the character is supposed to be distance emotionally. But a character can be too distance to the point we just dont care.. We don't know why Jack loves Ingrid. Other than she a hot piece of ass. The only thing i enjoyed about this movie was when Jack was talking to the priest. If the whole were just people talking about philosophy. I would have love it. I know that they were trying to pull of some Clint Eastwood Man with No Name kind of thing. But they couldn't pull it off as well as Clint Eastwood.

[–] pjmcgill142 11 years ago

All i know is Bond or Bourne never needed to pay for sex.

No, every girl just fell into Bond's bed. Lucky devil. Although after a while, you'd think he'd figure out the pattern. First girl in the mission always dies; second girl is good to go until the next mission. And Bourne did pretty well, but I digress; Sex is one of those primal urges, and if you lead this sort of life where one finds it necessary to finish romantic relationships so violently as we saw in the opening scenes, I would suggest it easier and less complicated to find solace with another professional. It seems a more realistic interpretation than the Bond/Bourne depiction.

I think the problem with this movie is it lacks human connections.

I don't know any hired assassins but I would pretty much think they do not connect to people all that easily. When human life is just a commodity to these guys (and girls) I wouldn't think they'd be the type that let's you into their lives easily, if at all. Clooney played this side of his personality very well, I would suggest. He then decides to quit and connects with Clara.

Now, I haven't seen Leon; the Professional for many years and am keen to revisit it, but I don't recall him being in the Bond mould either. I tend to think of professional hitmen as closer to psychopath than gentleman spy.

[–] patrick-413 10 years ago

I wish you would have finished it. Then I'd have one more person to share the pain of the butterfly flying up into the sky at the end, probably the single worst moment of overly-pretentious filmmaking I've had the misfortune to see in years.

The more I think about this abominable movie, the more upset I get that I wasted an evening watching it.

[–] tokyojapan 10 years ago

Saw this in the theater back in 2010 or whenever it was when it came out. A few months back I went to a garage sale with my mother at some church down the road and they had the DVD for a buck so I picked it up and I've been watching it recently, good movie.

The movie is based on a novel so you should expend reality for a second for that reason alone.

Is the film under-rated? Yes and no. I think its more of a cult film than "under-rated" or "over-rated." I love the movie. I live near quite a few military bases and 2 of my ex-roommates were military guys, both army. And I know quite a few rednecks so I've seen people work on guns before and hunting rifles.

The way he made the suppressor makes me think he has experience working for a gun company or maybe the CIA. Regular Green Berets/special ops guys don't really make weapons. He was a craftsman, some kind of machinist gunsmith.

I'm guessing he was in the military and then got out and went to work for some gun company.

The NRA would hate this movie though because he uses a European gun as his sidearm and its small, not a big cannon like Charleton Heston would use.

Considering he works for a guy named "Pavel"(Russian name) who's eager to have him killed I'm guessing his boss hired him for a job and then kept him on. But for some reason wanted him dead, probably to shut him up or tie up a loose end.

Its a cult movie -- so its not for everybody but I hope that answers your question.

[–] geoffrey-jackson 8 years ago

This film is a fragment of a person's life.

I liked it's blandness but that's probably because at the moment I'm going through a lot of spy/special-ops films, TV series and novels at the moment.