When it comes to the superficial glitter of Witchcraft maybe he should be...
I loved this film, it’s patient, it’s quiet & it’s intelligent. I was kinda bummed when looking at this stacked British cast that Jared Harris was not in it, I later found out that he was signed on to this film, but due to scheduling conflicts w/filming Sherlock Homes: A Game Of Shadows that he had to drop out, but Toby Jones signed on in the role & since I loved Harris as Prof Moriarty, it was a win/win...
You get out of this film what you put into it...
Not a movie that you can leave for a couple of minutes for a trip to the kitchen. Be sure to push pause. A complicated story that requires your utmost attention. A bit too complicated. However the performances of Oldman, Cumberbatch, Hardy, and Firth make it worth the while. Don't give up on it.
I added two stars having viewed it again to honor the life of John le Carre, a brilliant writer. Rest In Peace.
Great movie. Great spy mystery/thriller. It’s not in the same vein as a James Bond film with tons of action and a high body count but it’s done more in a cerebral way. A European look to the film. Gary Oldman is fantastic in this. Great cast.
I understand a lot of the comments about this movie; that it’s difficult to follow and it’s slow. That’s what I thought when I first saw it in theaters. It made me fall asleep to be honest. But I love espionage movies so I decided to give it another chance later. I’ve watched this movie three times total and each time I better understood the story and all the puzzling aspects of this film. So when you first watch it, you’ll be lost, especially if you’re not familiar with le Carré or espionage films. But with a little patience and watching it a few times more, you’ll really appreciate it. The story is very intriguing as well as the character George Smiley. And of course, if you’re a fan of Gary Oldman like I am, you’ll like this movie. My dad introduced me to le Carré and though I haven’t read his books yet—I’m in the middle of reading his first novel—I’ve loved all the recent adaptations of his works and I particularly love the Cold War setting. Check this one out!! I know this isn’t the most popular movie, but I really hope they make the sequels for the Karla trilogy.
Incredibly slow and boring
This was the most boring, slow movie I've ever seen.
I’ve now watched Tinker, Tailor a half dozen times and I’ve needed to in order to peel back the layers and catch the nuances and permutations. The two main characters in Smiley’s life, his arch-nemesis and his wife are only glimpsed- their faces never revealed- brilliant! The actors portraying all the characters are uniformly superb. Gary Oldman is particularly good as Smiley. The mole’s motivations seem thin to me but perhaps it’s just one more aspect of the banality of spycraft, as revealed by Le’Carre. The viewer must watch and listen carefully but will be rewarded.
This is a _very_realistic_ spy film, and very British. Reflecting the normal, rather boring, business of the intelligence world (including agency politics and personalities), we follow one of the author's favorite characters as he conducts a mole hunt. If people are looking for a spy "thiller", they won't find it here. TTSS is very close to real life. It reflects the days of the good old boy upper class world of the old MI6. Boring for some. Interesting for others. Faithful to the best-selling book.
The cast and acting are excellent, no question. I had a hard time following this movie, though. Pacing was weird too. Something seems wrong, but I can’t put my finger on it exactly..is it the directing, the editing, the story?..I don't know. Maybe its just not produced well.
Actually this movie has some very good elements. The acting and cinematography are great. The main problem with this film is the pacing and story. Particularly figuring out who the spy is. To put in perspective I was 12 when I saw this film, and I understood the whole film clearly.
For those who say “if you didn’t like it you have no attention span or aren’t intelligent” that’s not true.
A 12 year old who likes all movies figured out who the spy was in the first 15 minutes, and was pretty disappointed he was right. Now either I’m a genius, have amazing luck, or the movie has a few flaws.
Mild Spoilers. But nothing specific
Particularly for me I thought the spy was focused upon too much. The other suspects are not given much screen time or their stories are not given much time. Making you automatically assume it is who it is.
But what is given is still interesting. Although a few scenes in the film seem out of place or could have easily been cut and would have changed nothing. Particularly scenes with mark strong who while fantastic in the film, his character only serves two roles, but receives more screen time then the suspects.
Also Gary oldman swimming while probably meaning something in the book is not something that was needed multiple times.
I just went ‘wow’ after watching this movie. I started following John Le Carre’s books and found most of them fascinating. I wish ‘The Cold’ book had an updated movie because 1965 version is too old and not as visually appealing as the new TTSS movie. I also feel the story of Leamus feels very incomplete in the TTSS movie.
without the wit. Dry toast that is burnt. Imagine Brovil fresh from (where ever). Now rotten Brovil left out in the open for a few days. No difference from fresh or bad you say? Still inedible you say? Well that's this movie. From start to finish.
That one Bloke1066
The trailer had me absolutely hooked in with its music and the seemingly awe-inspiring cast.
And then the movie arrived - what? Where is the music? What is the cast doing? What's with all the whispering (through the entire film). All the separate plot-lines don't add anything in to the movie, and the main story line was bland at best. I don't understand. Where's the wit, the intrigue? What happened to this movie?
No Explosions. No car chases. Just a fantastic film that keeps you on the edge of your seat guessing. The nuances of this film are more powerful than all the crap the pack "thrillers" with these days.
As a former Cold War warrior I was completely lost in this film which captured the entire essence of an era. To the last detail this film hit the target. I now "get" Le Carre. Brilliantly cast and directed. Applause to those responsible for setting the mood with attention to detail that never fails. I lived it and I loved this movie.
I might actualy like this movie if I could get through the whole thing without falling asleep. I need to consult my Webster's Dictionary to look up the term "Thriller" again. Apparently it means something so boring and anti climactic that you want to slit your wrists after 30 minutes. This movie should be marketed as a cure for insomnia.
The first time I watched it I will admit to being confused. Watching it a second time brought it all together. After the second viewing I was impressed.
Would highly recommend for those who enjoy a well written, albeit slowly developing story. The reason for my 5 star rating is the acting. Every character you meet in this movie is believable and the actors simply fill up the screen. There is less actual dialogue than a two hour drama usually contains. Much of this story is told through the faces of each character. The somewhat haunting score and grey color tones are in line with the nature of true spy stories, affecting the lives of all involved in a way much less flashy than James Bond… but no less deadly. The cold war spies seem so much more real and tragic. This is where TTSS excels, through world class actors… not action.
This movie is not for 007 fans or those with attention deficit disorder. It is slow. I guess you just have to have grown up during the Cold War to really appreciate it. To younger viewers it may be as bad as watching dry. LeCarre relishes portraying espionage in as mundane a manner vein as he can as if in a permanent contrast to the James Bond franchise. But to me this movie was fascinating in it's detail and nuance. Gary Oldman steps away from the villain schtick to make a very convincing spymaster of the old school.
Back in the days when we lived in the shadow of imminent nuclear annihilation we had spies like these. Thanks to the internet nowadays anyone can play at espionage. Back then agencies really relied on their their best and brightest. They worked intrigues both mundane and dark-the Brits with their talented amateurs, the Americans with their endless cash, and the Russians with their brutality. These well trained men and not a few women were aging veterans of WW II, with all the baggage that implies, living lives as dull as accountants but making decisions with international consequences. And often very flawed ones at that. The only irony LeCarre never got around to pointing out is how the world changed around them without their noticing it.
This movie is very complex and subdued. The majority of Gary Oldman's incredible performance is on his face, he says very little. However, when he is in a room he absolutely commands it with his quiet confidence and intelligence. The supporting cast is among the best I've seen giving marvelous depths to these supporting players. Its all about what's not said in this movie the camera looks deep into these men's souls and even that close we still don't know who's heads or tails. Do not watch it in passing, it commands your full attention. Cheers.
I don't know about the other reviews but this has to be one of the smartest movies ever made. It's slow for a reason but never boring. The acting is spot on and in particular Gary Oldman's meticulous, precise and taciturn Smiley. Every word is important and he says more with few words. You can see how his brain is a steel trap and misses nothing. I saw this in the theaters which was in fact a bit confusing with the back and forth of time but not impossible to follow. I bought it because I am truly starting to love Benedict Cumberbatch's acting and he's not wasted in this movie playing Smiley's right hand man. Nevertheless, I have now watch it several times and each time there's something revealed that I missed before. So it's full of tiny surprises that make you appreciate this movie all the more. I loved watching everyone of the characters evolve even Colin Firth who has never been one my favorites actors. Tom Hardy is heartbreaking in this as well. It's a spy movie with intellect.
This movie was extremely boring. So slow, and it felt like nothing was happening. It was well acted, but to slow. couldn't take it.
This is a amazing, thought provoking movie. It is slow and methodical. Simply amazing!
It is indeed slow paced but it's a good movie. Watch it for Gary Oldman :)
Hmmm, well, it was well acted…and the music was great, adding to the suspense. The only problem was the plot really. OK, I admit that I have never read the book, or made it through any Le Carre book, so perhaps I'm the wrong person to see, let alone rate, this movie. But here goes my complaint: I simply didn't understand it. I mean, OK, we find out pretty quickly that there's a double agent in London during the Cold War. But I never really understood who it was -- one was obvious, but the others? Was there more than one? I was never sure…I don't know, even, whether this was left ambiguous on purpose or whether it was just a muddy plot. Finally, I don't know whether this a good thing or a bad thing, but to me at least many of the scenes seemed clearly shot on sets rather than on location, so I was surprised to find out in the credits that there were a multitude of film crews thanked for their work in various world locales…so they weren't sets after all. Life imitating art I suppose...
I watched this movie with a couple of drinks in my system, and due to the intricate details and the nature of the story, I found it boring and pased out. However, days later I re watched it through to the end and it was phenominal, an excellent thriller that will leave you intrigued and delightfully confused.
Boring. Pretentious. British people mumbling through a movie in dimly lit scenes with no resemblance of a coherent plot. I had to watch it with both Wikipedia and IMDB open to understand what the heck was going on.
I'm sure the director feels this was exactly what he wanted.
I expected this movie to be like a Bourne movie when I watched it judging by the theater poster (I was wrong of course) but I was disappointed to find that it was extremely boring. Sure, the acting was good, but the lack of dialogue and suspense just wanted me to snooze rather than stand on my toes.
I do say that Gary Oldman did a fantastic job, but the fact he barely said anything just killed it.
A great movie if you are intelligent enough to follow the story and understand the references.
…. because I was convinced I'd want to watch it twice-- you know, like the Sixth Sense. Once for the initial intrigue, and then once more to spot the clues once I knew the ending.
Instead, it took me four hours to watch the movie ONCE. I found myself zoning out during each scene, then rewound the scene to watch it again because I missed it the first time. I also dozed off halfway through and rewound to watch the missed scenes. I was DETERMINED to watch this movie and somehow made it to the bitter end.
What makes this movie so boring?
First, the storytelling is terrible. We glimpse snippets of conversation, but never enough to understand the point or the plot. Characters are often referred to by their names, and I couldn't remember anyone's names. I had to bring up a list on Wikipedia just to know who was being talked about.
Second, the 1970's atmosphere is sepia-toned and generally hideous. I'm sure it accurately reflects the decade, but the 1970's generally produced tedious cinema and this representation is no exception.
Finally, the "aha" moment was mediocre. I didn't know any of the characters well enough to feel surprised or interested when the mole was revealed.
Final verdict? That was four hours poorly spent. I will NOT be watching this one again.
There's a lot that could have gone right with this movie. A great story (Cold War spy thriller) with a great cast. But the entire movie is bogged down with constant back-and-forth flashbacks that make absolutely no sense. Plus the characters are not well developed, or even developed at all. It's very hard to follow who's who, and when you are in the sequence of events. When you're watching the movie, you just know there's a great story there waiting to be told well, but you miss half of it because you either can't hear/understand the actors (bad editing) or the out of sequence nature of the film confuses you. Leave it to the British to make an exciting spy story dull as exciting as a wake. Overall not a recommended movie.
Pace mau ne a not slow but if you are in the mood, watch it! Great cast and well written story
The Hawk Watcher
I am a huge fan of British movies that make you think. I actually enjoy slow movies that want you to be patient and let the flavor of the story marinate to bring out the complex plot or develop the characters in a non-stereotypically way. With a cast like this, I was sure I was going to be cinema heaven for a few hours.
Simple put, I was wrong.
There is little to endear you to this film. The acting is mostly very good, but the story lacks. (Colin Firth somewhat "slips" his voice into his role in The King's Speech a time or to. He must have been as bored as I was and was forgetting what the hell he was doing on this set!) Great actors who follow the directors bland ideas and a story that has so much potential but never realizes it, left me day dreaming of other movies they were in and some of their stellar rolls.
Save your time and money and don't watch this one.
Slow paced. Issue with plot development. Nearly fell asleep.
From Le Carre's book, I imagined Smiley with a razor sharp and cunning mind masked by a somewhat bumbling, fumbling, diffident exterior. The Gary Oldman character does not fidget, but is almost sphinx-like.
The crux of the book is character development and and a sinister plot. The screenplay glosses over details necessary to understand the plot, and spends a lot of time on flashbacks to a party, and interviews, such as with the character Ricky Tarr. I think the movie could have contained more action, better plot development, and better explanation of obscure jargon and references such as "circus." Albeit, some effort is made.
The photography is dark, and images important to plot development are fleeting. Such as a view of a document. Also, the costumes are not entirely true to the 1960's.
This was a relatively low budget movie. Not all of the settings are ideal.
I think the biggest problem is with the screenplay, and plot development. Also Oldman's performance is too stoic. But that's just my opinion.
Just awful. I don't understand the criteria for the Tomatometer but whatever it is, at 83% "fresh," it's broken.
I have a high tolerance for slow movies. I'm patient and willing to give movies a chance. I'm a big fan of Gary Oldman. I almost never turn off a movie, even a bad one. This is the first movie I've given up on in years. This movie is so mind-numbingly boring they probably use it in Guantanamo Bay to get confessions out of terrorists. I wanted to like this movie, but it was god awful. All of the dialogue is mumbled (with occasional, nonsensical yelling) The plot (???) went no where. It has something to do with British Intelligence during the Cold War. Or something. I think someone might have been a Russian double agent. Oh, how terribly surprising. I couldn't care less about any of the characters because I had no idea who they were, what they were doing or why I should care. Someone gets killed fairly early in and my emotional reaction to it was similar to realizing I wasn't getting out of this DMV line anytime soon. So yeah, it's amazingly boring and confusing in a way that makes you say 'mehhhh'. I only gave it two stars out of respect for Mr. Oldman. If you like old English guys in suits who mumble in 1960's style rooms, then this is the movie for you. I guess. Good luck with that. Maybe you should get a hobby instead.
Lovingly produced, discretely filmed. A fine ensemble cast.
Boring, slow moving. If you enjoy a bunch of grey hairs walking down rainy streets saying not much of anything then get his movie. It was a waste of my time and money and would not recommend it at all. The plot unfolds so slowly it verges on putting you to sleep. I appreciate intellectual movies that allow you to deduce the meaning of the author, however this one was just a total drag.
Skywalker in Transit
I was excited to view this film based on the preview and the fact that Gary O. was starring. But my, was I disappointed! This film is very very dark in nature, and Oldman's performance is not stellar. Rather, he is trying too hard to play the role and somewhere lost himself in his valiant efforts. The film could have been quite amazing, but it wasn't.
I found the movie rather hard to follow. It tried to do too much in too short of a time.
I genuinely wanted to enjoy this movie, but I simply could not get emotionally invested in any of the characters or the main plot. Slowly paced movies can be deep and intriguing, if they draw in the viewer. I found I didn't really care who the traitor was by the end. Frankly, I don't understand why everyone is so impressed.
I grant that the set pieces, the camera work, and the overall tone were well done, but that is only part of a movie. The suspense seemed to be resting mostly on the general atmosphere created, not the plot itself, and the movie poorly conveys exactly what is at stake. Intellectually, I understand it's in the Cold War, and the security of the West is at stake, but that is too abstract. I also found the music somewhat distracting in parts (too bright/happy feeling).
This should have been a miniseries to more fully develop the characters. I suppose this is one of the movies where you "had to read the book" to get it.
I so badly wanted to love this movie. A who's who of great British actors, a time period that I have an unhealthy obsession over and what should have been a great spy thriller plot. Sadly I have no idea how this movie ends... I walked out. It looks like a made for tv movie and is paced like a nursing home scrabble game. There is zero character development, zero plot development and zero reason to care about the on screen happenings. So sad for Gary Oldman.
Very hard to follow and boring
The only thing the movie managed to was bore me. Well written, casted, acted, directed, shot, scored, just not captivating AT ALL.
Fletch F. Fletch
You will be forced to allow the movie to kind of saturate you without fully understanding what's happening for the first 30 minutes or so. It's a period piece set in the early 70s, British accents are thick and many things are referred to without being explained. It's a little frustrating and you may even begin to wonder if you're just not smart enough to figure it all out! Believe me, I started to wonder too! Then Tom Hardy's part of the film is delved into and his character's story, and suddenly it slowly begins to gel. The performances are universally excellent, particularly (and obviously) the amazing chameleon that is Gary Oldman. He is always interesting to watch even when the film early on is a bit hard to follow. It is easy to see why the old miniseries was and is still so popular as there is a lot of material crammed into the film's running time, but if you stick with it the movie becomes very rewarding. Recommended more for those who appreciate a more dramatic and less action oriented thinking Man's thriller.
How incredibly boring
Well acted but slow, slow, slow.. had to watch in two segments due to falling asleep.