Showing posts with label spy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label spy. Show all posts

Monday, July 16, 2012

The Mole


George Smiley is a quiet man. He says little, and in his large glasses and grey suits, he looks like a typical British government employee. Sometimes he looks slightly taken aback by something; most often, his face betrays almost no outward emotion. Smiley, underplayed by Gary Oldman, is the hero in Tomas Alfredson’s adaptation of John Le Carre’s eponymous novel Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy. Previously and famously adapted as a television series starring Alec Guinness in the 1970s, Tinker tells the story of Smiley’s search for a mole in the British intelligence community, all working together at what is aptly and only somewhat ironically referred to as the Circus. The aim of this establishment is to protect Britian’s interests against the Russians during the Cold War. Top management is aware of the presence of the mole, and Smiley is either their hero or their fall guy in his attempts to figure out the identity of the mole.

He has a few options. There’s Allerline (Toby Jones), an ambitious man who took over when their original commander, simply referred to as Control (John Hurt), stepped down from the position; Haydon (Colin Firth), a posh and amiable fellow; the rather dark Roy Bland (Cirian Hinds), who is somewhat of an oblique character; and Esterhause (David Dencik), whose allegiance to the United Kingdom may not be above suspicion. Indeed, any one of these men could be spying for the Russians. Tom Hardy and Mark Strong co-star; both are nearly unrecognisable.

I have here provided only the most basic idea of the plot of the film. It is more complicated than is suggested here, and much of the strength of the film lies in its structure and how it fleshes out its characters, even the socially elusive Smiley, and introduces other characters and elements to the plot in a way so unobtrusive it’s barely noticeable. I’m not surprised that David Bordwell has referred to the film as an anti-Bourne. Tinker is sophisticated, intelligent and unconcerned with spectacle. Here no-one leaps across rooftops; the film is understated and develops the characters instead of serving them up as plot fodder. In terms of character and aesthetics, it reminded me of Munich and Carlos. Indeed, Alfredson is an assured director, working with superb cinematography by Hoyte van Hoytema to construct some impressive, thoughtful cinematic compositions.

This is why I find it odd that Tinker has been described as clinical and detached. There is so much investment in the visuals and the characters that no-one can mistake the film’s central humanity for anything else. There’s a scene where Smiley confronts a specific character about his role in recent events. While they talk, the reason for them being there becomes clear – it hadn’t been established earlier. Their dialogue has as much to do with the disclosure as the space around them, until finally Alfredson introduces something major in the background that heightens the emotional power of the scene. Not only do we come to further understand what is at stake for the character in the scene, we also realise that there is a very clear time limit (or deadline) involved.

The film has also been called confusing and complicated; it is certainly complicated, but definitely not confusing. As one Twitter fan put it, “it’s called attention – pay it”. The film gives you everything you need to know exactly what happened by the time the film ends (and what a perfect ending it is). It happens only on rare occasions that a genre film leaves me breathless, speechless and stunned, such is the case when material transcends the limitations associated with its form so majestically. Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy is a sophisticated, meticulous work, a film of astonishing political and thematic clarity anchored by some of the best actors currently working in the British film industry.

Thursday, December 22, 2011

Of course they accept.

 
The fourth Mission: Impossible film opens with franchise hero Ethan Hunt (Tom Cruise) imprisoned in Russia. Aided in his escape by IMF members Jane (Paula Patton), tech wiz Benji (Simon Pegg) and newly added analyst Brandt (Jeremy Renner), the team soon finds itself disavowed by the American government under the so-called 'ghost protocol'. Framed for a bombing they had no part in, they are hunted by authorities while trying to keep the world a safer, terrorism-free place.

Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol is lightning paced and action driven entertainment. Ethan Hunt’s travails feature a different director for each entry; the franchise opened with De Palma, before moving on to the sheer spectacle of John Woo and the more restrained, personalised story in JJ Abrams’ third entry. Now Pixar stalwart Brad Bird makes Ghost Protocol into a clever, often humourous affair featuring some of the best action sequences of the series. Much has already been said about the Burj Khalifa scenes, where Cruise scales incredible heights to prevent a considerable crisis (the Burj tower is the world’s tallest building). I must admit, these scenes are jaw dropping, though I prefer the spy-based trickery that follows in the scenes immediately after. In the end, Bird also manages some sensible continuity linking the previous film with the fourth.

Clearly, Ghost Protocol is a tense, exciting affair. It is all the more unfortunate, then, that the film lacks a central, crucial element that any action movie worth its sweat cannot do without: a strong villain. Even the weakest Brosnan Bond (The World is Not Enough) had one. Agreed, there is a character in the film, Hendricks (Michael Nyqvist), who is out to start a nuclear war. He is supposed to be the bad guy, but Hendricks is so thinly drawn, so Cold War cliché that the film might as well have been about the IMF battling pre-programmed war drones intent on starting a nuclear war. Hendricks becomes a weightless afterthought, which unfortunately reinforces the idea that the film exists to showcase a series of impressive stunts and effects. Consider Philip Seymour Hoffman’s villainous Owen Davian in the third Mission: Impossible: convincingly threatening, malevolent and cruel, at least when compared to the presence-less Hendricks.

All in all, Ghost Protocol is another steadfast franchise entry, but it’s not quite the hyperbole framed action event some have claimed it to be. And in no way is it a threat to Craig-era Bond. When’s the last time you watched Casino Royale?