"Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy" (2011 film)

Just saw this film this evening -- it is excellent.

It is based on the 1974 novel by John le Carre (same title, only with commas). I'd read the novel, but it was probably 20 years ago, so I'd forgotten enough to still be guessing at the discovery at the end.

A number of good things about the film: It is not a modernization. It is set in the early 70's. Spies do their spying by taking pictures of documents, or stealing them, and meeting other spies in cafes. There are no USB connections or hacking or any of that kind of thing. The color palette of the film perfectly suits its setting -- maybe even makes it look a bit older. And everyone is smoking, almost all the time. It is very much like le Carre's fiction in that the spying is decidedly unglamorous, at least most of the time (and when it isn't is when the trouble comes).

There are outstanding actors in outstanding performances -- Colin Firth, Mark Strong, Ciaran Hinds, and someone named Tom Hardy who's apparently been in a number of films, but I'd never seen any of them, who has a small but important part in this, and he's probably the best. At the center is Gary Oldman, as George Smiley, who I'm sure will get a lot of praise, but actually seemed to my mind to come up just a bit short in imbuing Smiley with an on-screen three-dimensionality. What I recall from the novel is that Smiley is pudgy and bald and Oldman isn't that, which is too bad.

This was also without a doubt the best-looking presentation on screen of any film I'd seen in quite some time. Pathetic really as what that probably means is that it's the first film I've seen in years which was both in good shape and properly handled by the theater staff. But at least I felt I got my money's worth, which is much rarer nowadays.

I recommend it.

EDIT: Would it be possible for a Gort to edit the title and remove the frowny face? I'm not sure how that got there -- I didn't mean to put it there. Thank you (and feel free to delete this edit as well).

 

I thought you despised it with the frowny face. Nice review.

 

Great review, I'll be seeing this soon. Hard to miss with all the great actors, Gary Oldman is way over due for an Oscar

 

Thanks guys

The above should read: "There are no USB connections . . ."

I must have just missed the editing window.

 

Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy

We went to see this last night--fantastic film.
(I did not watch the mini series--let's get this out now)
Gary Oldham is fantastic--one of those intimate, subtle performances like DeNiro and Duvall in True Confessions. He has turned a corner in his acting talent--a shoo in for an Academy nomination.
Really good supporting cast (especially John Hurt), but Oldham carries the film.
The theater was packed with an all adult audience--good to see a lot of people over 30 will come out for a well made, non-video game-ish, intelligent movie.

SPOILER ALERT:

Question for those who read the book/saw the mini-series:
Why did the teacher kill Tailor at the end--anger cause he found out who betrayed him, was he ordered by the Russians to do it, or to stop his friend from being sent to Russia?

 

It's been awhile since I've read the books, but I believe Bill Haydon's killer was never revealed--although Jim Prideaux was certainly suspected. If he were the killer, I'd say revenge and anger were the motives.

 

I watched the movie yesterday. I loved it! Oldman was, as you say, fantastic.

Spoiler

Regarding the killing of Tailor: I haven't read the book or watched the mini-series, but I think they had a relationship and as Prideaux knew what was in for Tailor (having been tortured himself) I guess he wanted to spare him the suffering. Why do I think they had a relationship? The picture of them both which Tailor took with him. The eye contact they had at the party. And why else would he cry when he shot him?

 

Ouch guys, those are brutal spoilers up above in this thread. Put them in a spoiler box!

I started a thread on this film last night: http://stevehoffman.tv/forums/showthread.php?t=273272 Perhaps we could get a Gort to combine them?

Answers to the questions above:

Spoiler

Early on in the book, Prideaux snaps the neck of a bird. (This is alluded to in the film, but not done on camera.) After Haydon is discovered to be the mole, he is later found with his neck snapped in the same way -- it is obvious from the manner of death that Prideaux did it. Why he did it is almost as obvious -- it is most definitely not a mercy killing. It is an act of revenge for Haydon's betrayal. The film mucks this up a bit as it implies that Prideaux knew even before going to Hungary that Haydon was the mole -- but that's not the case in the book (or at least I don't recall it being the case in the book). And in the film Prideaux has to shoot Haydon, as simply showing him dead with his neck snapped would not make clear to filmgoers who killed him.

 

Spoiler

But why did he cry as he shot?

 

I read the book and watched the UK TV series with Alec Guiness which was IMHO superb. Looking forward to going to watch the movie at some point.

 

I like that one a lot. I watched it on You Tube recently.

 

Spoiler

It's a good question. I think in the book the manner of death suggests he killed him without remorse. Perhaps the filmmakers had a slightly different take on it, maybe even the one you suggest. But I'm inclined to think it's just supposed to represent regret over how their friendship turned out.

Isn't Mark Strong great? If you haven't seen "The Guard," see that. He has a supporting role in that with some great lines. Cool film.

Cheers mate

 

No, I haven't seen it, but he is great so I will have to. Have you seen Rocknrolla? He's doing a supporting role in that as well and is really good.

 

Tom Hardy - The new Mad Max!

 

Hi,

release date was last wednesday here in France, and I expected it .

Well, I wasn't disappointed ! greatest movie I've seen in a long time, everything's perfect.

 

I need to see this - enjoyed the book

 

I like that they use that song about "Mr Woo": a song that I only know from the 5 second sample of it in Big Audio Dynamite's "Megatop Pheonix" album!

 

I think this might have a good life in rentals. It is a near perfect film. Everything fits together in it's world. It is such an understated film to watch unfurl. Gary Oldman's performance is so restrained that the moment he does anything above a shout is excitement - and that's a good thing in this film.

Gary Oldman deservedly gets a lot of recognition but what about Colin Firth's performance and character? It is brilliant and nuanced in so many ways.

 

I got 40 mins in and gave up.

I grew up with the book and then the Alec Guinness series, both outstanding.

The (necessary) filleting of the story to fit the film's running time leaves out huge chunks of good stuff; Gary Oldman is understated to the point of immobility, and the set designers fall into the usual trap of assuming everything in the 70s was brown!

Very disappointing, I thought.

 

Having never read to book or seen the Alec Guiness version I came at this cold. Must say it was a little confusing. When the mole was revealed, I thought. 'Oh, now that's who?" -- the revelation got about as much reaction out of me as Gary Oldman showed during the film. Just too dense ( the movie, not me hopefully) give me Burton in "the spy who came in from the cold"

 

I have this on rental sitting on my pile.

I also still have a VHS player and my dad has the double tape BBC version which I got him one Xmas in the early 90's.

Hmmmm.....new abridged version or a nostalgia trip?

 

BBC all the way. If you've got the best to hand, why settle for anything else?

 

My views precisely. Far too slow and the stiff upper lip thing was utterly overdone.

 

Finally got round to watching this last night.

Major disappointment. I was kind of expecting a Brodies Notes adaptation but not as bad as this.

Yes Oldman nearly falls back off the screen, as he is so low key. In fact I wondered if it was a dummy with anyone saying his lines.

It jumps about all over the place making it hard (for me as it wasnt as gripping as I'd hoped) to keep track. I was wondering for quite some time why Mark Strong's character was living in a caravan when a few minutes before he had been elsewhere. I felt a lot of backstory was missing that would have helped explain the motivation for a lot of characters. Only one of the xmas party scenes made any sense to me (the last one).

Smiley's bit where he makes the great leap as to who is the mole (or does he? as he knows someone is going to turn up) just happens with him sitting in a chair staring off into space with train signal lights going green and red. Ermmm is that the best way to show thought processes/deductive reasoning?

All in all I did feel as though I should have either read the book to fill in the 80% they seem to have chopped out but then I would still have been disappointed. Or watched the TV series with Guinness to fill in a lot more but still disappointed.

A waste of two hours really. I'm asking my Dad to bring his VHS sets of TTSS and Smiley's People for me to watch instead.

 

I agree, ya know I hate when people say certain movies are slow or there is not enough action,because most of my favorite movies are like that ...BUT..
I just watched this the other night and it was very low key......maybe this is how it goes down in the real world ?
It was a little confusing, I am thinking that this movie may need multiple viewings.
I do own the Guinness set but have yet to watch, maybe I should do that before I watch the movie again?