“The Interpreter” is about as much fun as untying a knot.

When it serves a purpose, like untying a boat from a dock, it seems like a meaningful experience. But let’s say you decided to take on the challenge of untying a painful little knot in the center of a simple piece of string. After about an hour of work, you’d probably ask yourself what the hell you were doing.

I found myself this perplexed about an hour into “The Interpreter” – a movie that had me guessing for its first half until realizing how all of the answers had been simply dumped into my lap.

Corruption and conspiracy abound inside the United Nations (imagine that), and a possible assassination plot is overheard by a shady interpreter (Nicole Kidman). A Secret Service agent (Sean Penn) is assigned to investigate her claim and protect the target. He ends up wrapped up in a wider-ranging conspiracy that leads to international espionage and a threat to the beautiful interpreter’s life. In movie terms – way more than he bargained for.

Sydney Pollack, director of “Out of Africa” and “The Firm,” is known for his dialogue-driven plots. Shortly put, Pollack is a thinker’s director – a man who engages an audience more through intricate detail than visual style.

That’s not to say Pollack’s work lacks flair. Following in line with his other pictures, “The Interpreter” is beautifully shot and handsomely constructed. It flows at a slow, driving pace that convinces its audience to stay put. You don’t dare get up to leave because something must be coming at a moments notice – a key plot device, an explosion or a new threat to one of our main characters. So something must happen in “The Interpreter” sooner or later, must it?

Yes, it must. And Pollack would likely argue that it occurs in the film’s hastily untied conclusion. It’s always sad to see a film with such promise and potential cap itself off with a main character holding a villain at gunpoint while another main character explains all of the film’s secrets to the gun-pointer – all in hope that the gun-pointer drops the weapon. At some point, Hollywood will realize that audiences are tired of these moments – I just pray it occurs in my lifetime.

As the film begins to reveal its secrets, you can slowly see heads of the audience members start turning toward one another. People love to tell their partners how they’ve figured out the plot.

However, “The Interpreter’s” conclusion only yielded blank stares. This made me wonder: Had the audience lost interest, or had they just not been able to figure it out?

Or perhaps quite the opposite. Maybe they had figured it out hours ago and were waiting for a new surprise. There has to be something that can catch an audience of hundreds off guard in a political thriller. Anything … at all.

But there would be nothing – just a hastily slapped together conclusion that throws our two main characters so far out of character you’d think we’d get a lower third saying, “Meanwhile, in bizarro world … “

Such a pretty picture that falls just so short can be as frustrating as anything featuring Ashton Kutcher. Yet “The Interpreter” is not a very bad film, but it’s really not that good. I did not leave angry, but like a disappointed kid at Christmas.

Just a little sad.