Timing is just right for ‘The International’

The timing couldn't be better.

The script to "The International" was probably written three or four years ago or more. At the time, the writer chose for his villain a symbol of heartless greed: a giant bank.

Back then, banks were flying high, and using one as a villain might have seemed a risky move. But now, everyone hates banks.

The film even has a line, presumably written before the current economic crisis, stating that this bank wants to put everyone -- people, companies, governments -- in its debt.

"The International" is the sort of film that demands you pay attention; you have to be willing to think while you watch it. If you do, you will be reasonably richly rewarded. If you would rather have the movie wash over you, you will likely find yourself lost, or at least unengaged.

Clive Owen stars as an agent for Interpol, and Naomi Watts plays an assistant district attorney for New York City. The two have joined forces in a jurisdictionally questionable investigation into a giant Luxembourg-based bank, the International Bank of Business and Credit, known as IBBC.

That name is important because it intentionally calls to mind the Luxembourg-based Bank of Credit and Commerce International, known as BCCI. In the 1990s, BCCI -- then the seventh-largest bank in the world -- collapsed because of massive fraud. The bank also was involved in laundering money, worked with several dictators and was suspected in arms trafficking and supporting terrorism.

The movie's IBBC is not dissimilar. It wants to broker the sale of missiles and small arms to Third World countries, thus controlling their debt. With such high stakes and minimal morals, the fictional bank does not hesitate to kill everyone who stands in its way.

Director Tom Tykwer ("Run, Lola, Run") does an excellent job of creating an atmosphere of paranoia and systemic corruption. The particulars of the story are beyond unlikely, but with the right tone set by Tykwer, we accept every moment of it.

Tykwer also stages one standout action scene, a shootout at an iconic New York location. Though more ammo is used here than at Corregidor, the extended scene pulsates with danger and dynamic action; it is a brilliant use of the (re-created) building in which it is set.

The other impressive parts of the film, however, are more thoughtful. First-time writer Eric Warren Singer examines some of the larger moral issues, such as how and why one compromises his political passions, and asks, "Should you sacrifice your ideals for the greater good?"

If Singer slips up, it is in devising the intricacies of the plot. He occasionally takes the easy (not to mention the hoary) way out, such as when he has an assassin leave a footprint, which Owen happens to recognize as the same footprint from another assassination -- a footprint made identifiable because of a leg brace worn by the killer and easily traced back to him. And even then, the killer would go unnoticed except he is recognized at random on the street by a cop.

It isn't airtight filmmaking, but it is intellectually intriguing and exciting. And it is certainly well-timed.

Contact Daniel Neman at (804) 649-6408 or .