Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy

[BestGirl]

I believe it is. Consider the facts:

Spoiler

We don't really get to know Smilie. He's a guy who was forced out of the job. He tells of a story of a man who he thinks is the mole, but we don't ever see it in the flashbacks. He uses the fib that Karla stole his lighter to thwart any suspicion on him because if someone noticed the lighter at the cafe, they would just assume it was Karla's (that might be over-thinking, sorry). The man who Smilie ends up putting in the slammer was the man who screwed his wife; he had every vendetta against him

Spoiler

I did think it was strange that Smiley could remember every detail of his conversation with Karla except for the most crucial one: what Karla looked like.

Spoiler

Okay, I actually don't think George is Karla but I think I'd love him even more if it were so.

 

[TheVileOne]

Nope.

Spoiler

Karla is a real person. And it's not Smiley. Smiley is actually legit.

Also, here is what you guys need to realize. Bill Haydon was the mole and was reporting directly to Karla. Karla was the one that told Haydon to **** Ann Smiley because it would cloud Smiley's judgement. Karla was the one that recruited Haydon to spy for the Soviets in the circus.

Also, remember Jim Prideaux talking about being interrogated by a smallish man that looked like a priest, THAT WAS KARLA! The man that killed Irina in front of Prideaux was Karla.

The next two books in this trilogy by Le Carre are actually about Smiley's chess match with Karla and trying to catch him.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

I saw this over the weekend and didn't really like it. I'm fine with movies being deliberately paced as I do have a pretty decent attention span but I thought that the movie was just plain slow, boring and completely UN-involving. I love subtle performances but I just didn't see anything special about Oldman's performance at all. I thought he gave the least interesting performance in the whole piece. It's a mystery to me why this movie is being praised so much but everyone is entitled to their opinions.

5.5/10

 

[BestGirl]

Nope.

Spoiler

Karla is a real person. And it's not Smiley. Smiley is actually legit.

Also, here is what you guys need to realize. Bill Haydon was the mole and was reporting directly to Karla. Karla was the one that told Haydon to **** Ann Smiley because it would cloud Smiley's judgement. Karla was the one that recruited Haydon to spy for the Soviets in the circus.

Also, remember Jim Prideaux talking about being interrogated by a smallish man that looked like a priest, THAT WAS KARLA! The man that killed Irina in front of Prideaux was Karla.

The next two books in this trilogy by Le Carre are actually about Smiley's chess match with Karla and trying to catch him.

Spoiler

Yeah, I know all this. I read about the Karla trilogy on Wiki so I knew George couldn't be him. I was just having a little fun.

Carnotaur's point is what if everything we thought we saw isn't true? What if that priestly guy, who we're clearly supposed to think was Karla, wasn't him? What if Karla is really George, who's been working for the Soviets the whole time and used this mole scheme to get Control's job?

 

[Project862006]

I saw this over the weekend and didn't really like it. I'm fine with movies being deliberately paced as I do have a pretty decent attention span but I thought that the movie was just plain slow, boring and completely UN-involving. I love subtle performances but I just didn't see anything special about Oldman's performance at all. I thought he gave the least interesting performance in the whole piece. It's a mystery to me why this movie is being praised so much but everyone is entitled to their opinions.

5.5/10

it is not being hugely praised imo it is being praised on the fact that they hope its great due to director and the actors

a huge spy thriller mystery film by GWDT director with a cast of Strong,Oldman,Hardy,Hurt,Hinds,Firth,etc. not surprised why people were excited

 

[Pink Ranger]

I just enjoyed the novelty of Gary Oldman actually playing an Englishman for once. I've so rarely seen that.

 

[Doctor Jones]

Now that I think about it, the plot was pretty difficult to follow at times.

What was the significance with the man who kept Smiley's lighter? It popped up later on, and it was completely lost on me. There were times where I just did not understand what was going on, therefore made the plot unengaging.

 

[Doctor Jones]

I think what would have been more interesting was

Spoiler

that Ricky Tarr was really behind the manipulation of everybody the entire time and fabricating the entire thing instead of Haydon being the mole. That one scene of Tarr sending the telegram, grinning and saying that line would have been an interesting reveal, where for a second, I actually thought this happened.

 

[Kane52630]

it is not being hugely praised imo it is being praised on the fact that they hope its great due to director and the actors

What's sad is that critics are passing this as a great film even though they said in their reviews that they didn't fully understand the plot...

I'm shocked the score is that high on Rottentomatoes.

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/tinker_tailor_soldier_spy/

Yeah the performances are good and it's got a nice setting/music but you can't overlook the hard to follow plot.

 

[TheVileOne]

The significance of the lighter is that the guy who has it is Karla, the head of the Soviet Spy Network. Smiley handed it to him during a meeting and Karla kept it.

 

[flickchick85]

I don't get it. The plot is pretty damn straightforward. It's only hard to follow if you're only half paying attention, imo. I thought this was a brilliant movie, loved the atmosphere, performances, cinematography, all of it. And it didn't even feel slow to me, because the intrigue level was so high, and there were scenes I found so stressful I might as well have been watching an action thriller.

And btw, the praise is from people who HAVE seen it, I don't get where comments like "the praise is from people who hope it's good" come from, or even make sense. Obviously, the critics saw it. It's been out internationally for months. I've seen it twice and will definitely be seeing it again before it leaves theaters, because the 2nd time was twice as good as the first. Some people just think it's an awesome, near-perfectly-crafted movie. No need to make up flimsy excuses like for why it's receiving praise.

 

[I SEE SPIDEY]

I know you weren't responding to me flickchick but I'll say this anyway.

I think that the majority might really love the film but I think that some are giving it a pass because they think that they will look dumb if they call a movie like it boring. I thought that it was flat out boring and hard to follow and I was not "half paying attention." It's rude to insinuate that one is dumb or has ADD just because they don't care for the film. I'm not calling anyone dumb for liking it.

 

[flickchick85]

I know you weren't responding to me flickchick but I'll say this anyway.

I think that the majority might really love the film but I think that some are giving it a pass because they think that they will look dumb if they call a movie like it boring. I thought that it was flat out boring and hard to follow and I was not "half paying attention." It's rude to insinuate that one is dumb or has ADD just because they don't care for the film. I'm not calling anyone dumb for liking it.

For the record, I didn't suggest anyone was "dumb" or "had ADD" for finding it hard to follow. I suggested they were only half-paying attention (which can happen for all sorts of various reasons - saw a late show, had other things on the mind, was expecting a different tone, etc), which you're right, was wrong to assume and I apologize, but is still a very different thing.

That said, I think it's equally off-putting to suggest that people are only liking it to seem smart - which insinuates that they are pretentious pseudo-intellectuals if they say they didn't find it hard to follow. Some people followed it just fine and loved it. And like you said, I was mainly responding to Project, anyway, who straight-up stated that most of the praise is from people who just love the cast/crew involved and therefore "hope it's good," which is flat-out BS. Some people were enthralled by this movie. And I'm one of them.

I have absolutely no problem with people not liking the movie - that's what makes the world go 'round - but I get annoyed when they start projecting BS reasons onto why some of us loved it, as if they can't accept different tastes.

 

[The Morningstar]

What is exactly hard to follow about this movie? I also thought it was pretty straight forward. As straight forward as possible anyway, considering it's SUPPOSED to be a twisty, puzzle of a story.

And I don't mean that in a smug "I got it and you didn't way". I had to watch it twice.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

I still have to see this movie, but is this another "Inception" situation in which people make it harder to understand than it really is or is this movie legitimately confusing?

 

[The Morningstar]

I still have to see this movie, but is this another "Inception" situation in which people make it harder to understand than it really is or is this movie legitimately confusing?

It is confusing. But it's meant to be. It's a proper, twisty, spy thriller. It keeps the audience guessing just like it keeps the characters guessing. I can understand why some people don't like that. But then i ask, what did you expect?

It doesn't hold your hand and have exposition heavy dialogue like Inception explaining things.

 

[flickchick85]

I still have to see this movie, but is this another "Inception" situation in which people make it harder to understand than it really is or is this movie legitimately confusing?

It's pretty much the opposite of Inception, imo. The screenplay is quite minimalist, as opposed to super exposition-heavy like that movie.

 

[The Morningstar]

There is a lot of silent scenes too. Where Oldman is just sitting there, not saying a word. But you can almost see the cogs in his head turning as he is thinking. That's why Oldman is getting so much praise. He does a lot of "telling" just with his face and eyes. Pretty much all the characters are like that, really.

 

[chamber-music]

I saw this and liked it. Smiley is a cool spy in an unconventional way and his one weakness was very human and believable.

I have never read the books or seen any previous adaptations but found the movie easy enough to follow.
I also found Inception and Donnie Darko easy to follow. David Lynch is probably the only filmmaker whos movies I can't follow although I do like them.

This film was one where you had to pay close attention to what people say or don't say. It demands more of the audience than some other films do.

I had the moles narrowed down to 3 by half way through the movie.

First movie I have seen in which Stephen Graham doesn't play a violent thug or criminal.

I liked how the spy world wasn't all flash or good vs evil. Its more two sides in a chess match constantly trying to outwit one another and recruit people to there side.

 

[Matt Mortem]

Just got through seeing this. I liked it a lot. It was a decent film. I do have the same criticism I'm seeing from a great many reviews that say the plot was somewhat hard to follow. I was fine up until they started revealing the mole; from there it just seemed to take a hard turn I had difficulty keeping up with. It was a matter of something confusing would happen in the plot and I'd just have to take a minute and piece it together (or hope the film would do that for me). I did enjoy the film very much though. The setting was great, the music really did it for me too. I'd give it a solid 8/10

 

[echostation]

excellent film... really liked it... Gary Oldman man what a tour de force Allah praise to be him and his performance

 

[Rowsdower!]

excellent film... really liked it... Gary Oldman man what a tour de force Allah praise to be him and his performance

But... don't you think that people will confuse this film with The Dark Knight Rises since Gary Oldman is wearing glasses and a trenchcoat and Tom Hardy is there too, large biceps and all? People probably aren't going to enjoy this movie because they'll be sitting there anxiously waiting for Batman to show up and when he doesn't show up they'll be angry and wondering why everyone in Gotham has a British accent and what are Sinestro and Sherlock Holmes doing there and Bane never puts on his mask but at least he's easy to understand and didn't that other guy win an Oscar for playing the King of England in a Bridget Jones movie or something?

 

[Thebumwhowalks]

What is exactly hard to follow about this movie? I also thought it was pretty straight forward. As straight forward as possible anyway, considering it's SUPPOSED to be a twisty, puzzle of a story.

And I don't mean that in a smug "I got it and you didn't way". I had to watch it twice.

I'm sorry man, but I just thought that was really funny, it's like, can't you answer your own question?

 

[Doctor Jones]

edit.

 

[The Morningstar]

I'm sorry man, but I just thought that was really funny, it's like, can't you answer your own question?

Well no I did follow it the first time. But it's one of those movies that gets better with repeat viewings because you pick up on the smaller things.