The American is one of those films that seems like it was made many years ago and only just released. It has much more in common with 50s character dramas than modern thrillers, and is a complete 180 from the frenetic pace of the Bourne franchise. It’s a quiet, contemplative study of a man, and the way he interacts with the world. The pace is almost lifeless, akin with a photo gallery. There is absolutely no rush to the proceedings, and yet the film doesn’t lose your interest. It holds you hostage and forces you to absorb every detail of its phenomenal cinematography. George Clooney makes for an incredibly subtle protagonist, and this is probably his best acting work to date. It’s a good thing too… because if he wasn’t on his game, there would be little else to help you pass the time.

There is approximately 5 minutes in which Clooney is not on screen, and he is sorely missed for those brief periods. You can’t avoid a strong sense of attachment to his unnamed gunsmith, and just as you begin to think that you know everything you need to, a small sliver of new information throws your preconceptions out the window. Every detail is important, as there aren’t any overblown set pieces to draw attention away from them. You are both hyper-aware, and paradoxically relaxed, content to allow things to play out, but always trying to stay ahead of the curve. To call it masterfully constructed is a laughable understatement. This is a film which challenges you, and rewards those who accept the terms of its vintage arrangement.

Now, though the film feels like a thematic successor to the slower classics of yesteryear, it does have some problems. For one, it isn’t nearly as deep as it could be, deciding to play shallow with the dialogue and the character relationships by refusing to stoop to any level of less than subtle exposition. We never have the strong foundation of truly knowing the people we’re meant to identify with, and instead of getting the first act of set up, we’re confined to the much less informational second and third act of the classical spy narrative. Combine that with the minimalistic approach to the editing and you have an almost austere feeling to the piece. The audience doesn’t feel uncomfortable watching the movie, but it certainly isn’t inviting.

In the end, it’ll all come down to your own personal preferences. The pacing will probably be the most contentious component of the film, as contemporary audiences have developed a taste for fast-paced editing as of late. Older generations will get a bit of a breath of fresh air here, and will certainly have no problem following the action. The ending of the film is also ripe for criticism, as it takes a more artful and less satisfying turn than

one would have expected. I personally love the ending, but I figure it’s better to cover my bases. The film is a series of very simple ideas woven together into a tight fabric, so you can either address it as a whole, or pick little incongruities apart. The more I think about it, the more I find to dislike, but while the devil is in the details, the details are merely the support structure for a peculiar, and editorially dated exercise in character portraiture. Will it leave you in awe? Doubtful. Will it change your views on the world? Not a chance. Is it worth seeing in theaters? I’d give it a definite thumbs up in that regard. Don’t expect a balls to the walls action flick, and you may just find yourself enthralled by the beautiful imagery on display. Relax, and let it all sink in.

Synopsis: An assassin hiding out in an Italian village while he anticipates his last-ever assignment tempts fate by seeking out the friendship of a priest (Bonacelli) as well as the affection of a local woman (Placido).