Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy

[sugarhigh]

I liked it. Yeah it was slow, but the plot was interesting and all the actors were superb.

[Malle Babbe]

Yeah, given that it was a dense spy movie, I went and looked up the synopsis before going to see it. I loved the world building aspect, very 1970s and grimy; in a way it is the anti-James Bond spy movie, and given the fact that La Carré worked in the intelligence biz before his cover was blown by Kim Philby, this is probably what it was actually like back in the day.

Nearly everyone in the Circus looks on the edge of burnout, seems to subsist on scotch and tobacco, and not really have a life outside of work, which consists of poring over endless minutiae in the hope that you make a crucial connection that holds WWIII at bay and hoping that if meet a grim end, it is a swift one. Tarr's demand that he get let out after the mission, with the line that he wants a life, and not be like the other folks at the Circus was a telling moment.

That, and I found myself thinking, "Wow, two years before I was born was a long time ago..."

I also liked the cosmic irony of the ((mole telling Smiley that while he betrayed his own country, boning his wife was totally nothing personal.))

[hushhush]

I saw this and liked it, but, like petitesuite, I had read the book and thought that the film version captured the mood of the book really well. I really felt like I was watching a movie that was actually made in the '70s and not a movie made in 2012, and I kinda just went with that.
The pacing was on the glacial side, but the books are that way. There's usually a lot of smoky back-room meetings and paper-shuffling and relatively little action. This being the case, I've always questioned whether LeCarre's books really translate all that well to film. I think it's a catch-22 for the filmmaker. If someone took the Bourne route and overhauled the book to make it more modern and fast-paced, then LeCarre and fans of his books would likely be disappointed. If the film adaptation stays really true to the book, then it's going to be something along these lines with the grime and the whispered conversations.

[huggingotters]

Just saw this and really enjoyed it. It felt so old school and I liked the grimy feel. Gary Oldman is one of our finest living actors.

[lpatrice]

I've seen it twice, loved it. I was not bored at all, of course I have read the books, so maybe I was not bored because I know what was going on. In my opinion it is a fine movie. Wonderful writing and superb acting.

[Deleted]

So far the only people I know/have spoken to about the movie who liked it and could follow it are those who read the book. And that's great, but I just think if you had to have read the book in order to follow it then the movie failed.

[chiquita]

I saw it on Friday. I don't think I read the book (if I did read it, it was in the late '80s, and I don't remember it). I really liked the film and didn't have trouble following it. There was only one part when I was unsure if it was a flashback or the present, but I figured it out soon enough. In addition to great acting, I thought the film looked great; it felt like 1970s England. The friend who joined me for the film didn't seem to like it, however.

[Dharma]

Haven't read the book (but I will now!) and I had no problem following the storyline. I loved that it was a who's who of British character actors and "stars". I love Ciaran Hinds and Tom Hardy was sure pretty to look at.

[bklynred]

Saw this once and taking my mom to see it tomorrow. I've had trouble with le Carre's books but liked the movie.

[Deleted]

I just watched it. The book is one of my all-time favourite books. I love it. I've read it more times than I can even remember, and the same goes for the "sequel" Smiley's People. I did not like this movie. The look and feel was great, the cast was very good: I especially thought Ricki Tarr (Hardy) and Alleline were perfect, and Colin Firth made a good Hayden as well. Oldman also made a very good Smiley, and John Hurt was a good fit as Control. And still I just could not like it.

There were too many changes to the story that removed some real elements of action and drama (for example, how Smiley feels he's being watched towards the end of the story, and how Prideaux ends up shot: much more dramatic in the book). Yes, LeCarre's books are slow-moving and packed with information and "cerebral" stuff, but Tinker Tailor the book actually does have some action-y things in it, and all of it was cut, pretty much. I also felt that the roles of Prideaux and Roy Bland were almost miscast: not bad actors, but just not resembling what I had imagined. Same with Jerry Westerby (a small part I know, but he's a recurring character in LeCarre's books and looked nothing like what he is described as there).

And the Christmas-party scenes at the Circus... oh my. Christmas parties with spouses invited at the secret spy agency? What was that? And why was Guillam gay in the movie (NTTAWWT!)? He's a bit of a ladies man in the books, and I just didn't understand why they put his boy-friend in there at all, it was such a throw-away bit. Why change that if it doesn't even really matter to the story?

There were so many things changed, and none of them (imo) made the story easier to follow or more engaging. I never felt we were allowed to understand or get to know any of the characters, and that also drained some drama from the whole thing.

Sorry to rage on about it, but I was very disappointed. Maybe it's just that I like the book too much, and end up expecting too much from any adaptation... It looked good, it was well-cast (partly), but just too slow and too many changes that added nothing to the story. Bah humbug. I guess I'll still cheer for Oldman, because whenever he was talking in a scene everything perked up a bit.