Oldman For Sure

Tomas Alfredson's Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy (Focus Features, 12.9) is one dense opaque stew. And so crisply realized. Wait...what does that mean, "crisply realized"? Crisp like a Saltine or Heinz cracker? I'd better start over and just call it simultaneously ambiguous and clean and masterful in the manner of a slowed-down pulse. It's a film that you need to see at least twice -- once to sit in your seat and go "aaahh, yes...so adult and complex and underemphasized" and a second time to pay even closer attention and tie up the loose ends.


It's a furrowed-brow spy film, cautious and probing and undashing, submerged in a world of half-clues and telling looks and indications...London fog and brain matter and '70s technology...it's just atmospherically dead-on. And that's certainly pleasurable in itself.

I don't want to get into this too deeply because the film doesn't open for another nine or ten weeks but I can at least say that Gary Oldman's performance as George Smiley has to be considered...no, trumpeted as Best Actor-worthy. I've read a couple of reviews that claim he's not aping Alec Guinness's performance as Smiley in the 1979 British miniseries version. Well, he does seem to be doing that. To me, at least. Oldman barely moves in this thing, but oh, how he delivers! The man is an absolute pleasure just to watch...to simply regard. The stillness of him is sublime.

Oldman is doing the old minimalist two-step, of course, but in a more expressive way than, say, Glenn Close in Albert Nobbs. Her character is extremely cautious and guarded in order to hide her true identity. Oldman's Smiley isn't hiding himself in the slightest, but his manner is naturally circumspect and cerebral and analytical. As a matter of professional purpose and demeanor he's chosen to be this way, and there's something gassy about this from an audience perspective.

Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy is cut from the same cloth as Martin Ritt's The Spy Who Came In From The Cold. The story is about treachery and betrayal and misdirection, but more profoundly about the political murk and tedium of British civil-service submission. A hunt for a traitor, for traces of memory. A movie about staffers and freelancers and gray hair, gray faces, Burberry overcoats, endless cigarettes and glasses of whiskey. I've read the John LeCarre book and seen the Guinness version so I was able to stay with the plot particulars and keep it more or less together in my head, but others....aah, let's wait until December.

So it's a fine Le Carre immersion but....how to put this? It feels hermetic. I somehow never got the sense that the boys of MI6 and MI5 are all that heavily connected to the government or to great power, or that they really are "on the front lines against the Soviets," as Ciaran Hinds proclaims early on. It's like their world is entirely cut off from everything else. Like the action is all taking place in a large asylum.

And yet it didn't lose me for a second. LeCarre stories have always been my cup of tea. I love spook stuff. And I can't stop humming over Oldman's underplaying & immaculate restraint. What a jewel of a performance. And Tom Hardy as Ricky Tarr! I have to say that the finale felt a bit anticlimactic on some level. I have three or four other gripes, actually, but there's plenty of time. This is such a fine and subtle film -- a kind of pleasure cruise for adults who eat this shit up. It's amazing that it was made for theatrical, but glad it was made. Have I said "Hail Oldman!"?

Thanks to Focus Features for allowing me to see Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy yesterday evening, and thus sparing me the cost and trouble of flying to London and all that. I was apparently the only one seeing it in Manhattan. The spy drama was also shown to others on the West Coast so yesterday was obviously the day. Thanks very much.

Rundown<< previous | next >>Windy, Brooding...No Music

Posted by Jeffrey Wells on September 20, 2011 at 11:02 AM

comment #1

Jack South P.I. Author Profile Page says ...

In anticipation, I just finished reading "Smiley's People," the third book in Le Carre's Karla trilogy. While not as good and "Tinker," the character of Smiley is a true gem. "People" has an extended interrogation scene about 2/3s of the way through it where Smiley gets a Russian to turn by saying very little and feigning indifference to just about everything. It's brilliant. And so different to how Jack Bauer and his ilk would handled it today. Le Carre put you inside Smiley's head so you know how and why each piece is being moved. Just plain great.

This looks like a keeper. And it's nice to see that we have a rare thinking man's director in Tomas Alfredson. They are few and far between these days.

Posted by Jack South P.I. Author Profile Page at September 20, 2011 1:02 PM

comment #2

corey3rd Author Profile Page says ...

Christopher Plummer Vs. Gary Oldman.

Posted by corey3rd Author Profile Page at September 20, 2011 1:44 PM

comment #3

Luis Author Profile Page says ...

If he gets the nomination, I want to know who won't vote for him. The Oscar is his (as surefire as Forest Whitaker and Philip Seymour Hoffman in previous years) If he gets snubbed, I think it's for Pitt. Leo is the third option in my book.

Posted by Luis Author Profile Page at September 20, 2011 2:03 PM

comment #4

Colin Author Profile Page says ...

The wait for this will certainly seem the longest out of this winter season. I don't mind waiting for the 'Dragon Tattoo' adaptation, but this - and a solid Oldman performance - are what I'm looking forward to most.

Posted by Colin Author Profile Page at September 20, 2011 2:27 PM

comment #5

Tristan Eldritch2 Author Profile Page says ...

I liked this a lot, but I felt it had one major problem. The book is a pretty long read, and the original tv series was seven episodes long. Now, on the one hand, they've done a very good job of condensing that narrative down to the 2 hours mark, but I think the film loses a lot through the material that had to be filleted out. You don't get to learn enough about the different suspects to be the Russian mole, and their relationships with one another, so that by the end, the final revelation comes off pretty flat. It somehow hasn't quite been developed enough so you're fully invested in it.

Nevertheless, definitely a pleasure to luxuriate in the fine work of the cast, and Alfedson's poised, patient craftsmanship.

Posted by Tristan Eldritch2 Author Profile Page at September 20, 2011 2:27 PM

comment #6

lazarus Author Profile Page says ...

Jack South: Just finished Smiley's People myself, and agree with the section you singled out.

It doesn't surprise me that the BBC (or whoever made the British miniseries) skipped The Honorable Schoolboy, as that book takes place almost entirely outside England (and in an exotic location), but doesn't seem as focused on Smiley as the first and third books.

But I'd still love to see it done at some point.

Posted by lazarus Author Profile Page at September 20, 2011 4:20 PM

comment #7

DuluozGray Author Profile Page says ...

Oldman is a conservative in Hollywood. He has NO chance of winning an Oscar.

Posted by DuluozGray Author Profile Page at September 20, 2011 5:59 PM

comment #8

Ray Author Profile Page says ...

"So it's a fine Le Carre immersion but....how to put this? It feels hermetic. I somehow never got the sense that the boys of MI6 and MI5 are all that heavily connected to the government or to great power, or that they really are "on the front lines against the Soviets," as Ciaran Hinds proclaims early on. It's like their world is entirely cut off from everything else. Like the action is all taking place in a large asylum."

You say you read Le Carre.... and yet you missed that this is how he's ALWAYS portrayed British intelligence--- as dysfunctional and insular as any bureaucracy consumed by itself and class consciousness?

Unreal.

Posted by Ray Author Profile Page at September 20, 2011 7:29 PM

comment #9

Gaydos Author Profile Page says ...

"I'd better start over and just call it simultaneously ambiguous and clean and masterful in the manner of a slowed-down pulse. It's a film that you need to see at least twice -- once to sit in your seat and go "aaahh, yes...so adult and complex and underemphasized" and a second time to pay even closer attention and tie up the loose ends."

Good to see there are least TWO movies this year that fit this description!

Posted by Gaydos Author Profile Page at September 20, 2011 10:41 PM

comment #10

Tom Logan Author Profile Page says ...

Saw it last night and agree with what you have to say Jeff. The ending montage did leave some questions regarding the Ricky Tarr character and I didn't like the shot of Smiley's wife. Felt too neat. Can't really explain more due to spoiling the story.

Brilliant performances across the board.

Posted by Tom Logan Author Profile Page at September 20, 2011 11:32 PM

comment #11

Marty Melville Author Profile Page says ...

Those grousing about DlCaprio's Hoover make-up should take a look at Oldman here... the man is in his early fifites but he looks to be in his late sixties.

That's either great make-up or the signs of a very hard life on Oldman's part.

Guinness was 65 in the original mini-series.

Posted by Marty Melville Author Profile Page at September 21, 2011 12:38 AM

comment #12

Dan Revill Author Profile Page says ...

This is all good news. Can't it be December already?

Posted by Dan Revill Author Profile Page at September 21, 2011 1:44 AM

comment #13

TheGK Author Profile Page says ...

I'm seeing this tonight.
I'm building up actionman levels of anticipation for this.

Posted by TheGK Author Profile Page at September 21, 2011 1:57 AM

comment #14

moorish Author Profile Page says ...

Saw this at the BFI last week, followed by a Q&A with Oldman, Hurt, Alfredson and Straughan (all of whom came across very well indeed). It's a superb film but I don't quite think it ever lifts off into a "masterpiece" as some have trumpeted it.

Oldman is fantastic but I can't see him winning the Oscar - Smiley by nature is so remote and closed off, it's not really an Academy-magnet type character. The scene where he talks with Benedict Cumberbatch (also excellent in this) about his one meeting with his arch nemesis is absolutely brilliant.

I'm with Jeff on the finale - well, not so much the finale but the big *reveal* of the traitor. It fits well with the whole underplayed nature of the piece and of Smiley's personality but I really felt that the reveal scene could've been handled in a more suspenseful, shocking fashion.

Very, very good film.

Posted by moorish Author Profile Page at September 21, 2011 2:35 AM

comment #15

Divya Author Profile Page says ...

Gary Oldman has been ignored for an Oscar nomination so many times in the past (and even people have started complaining about it too), that I think the Academy, out of sheer frustration and desperation, will nominate him for an Oscar this time. But it will be more of an 'okay-we-finally-nominated-him-so-shut-up' nomination, and not because the Academy really WANTED to nominate him. He has no chance of winning, to be honest. His character is not complex enough (how complicated is to play a spy? You just have to be subtle and discreet, that's all. For an actor, how difficult can that be?) Take Michael Fassbender in 'Shame'. That's such a complex role, and he performed it with such aplomb, and duly deserved his Best Actor Award in Venice.

The other potential nominee is George Clooney (The Descendants), but he has already won his Oscar. Therefore, the ONE person who I am completely putting my money on is Leonardo DiCaprio, who will be portraying J.Edgar in Clint Eastwood's 'J.Edgar'. Come on, which Eastwood film has not been nominated so far? Besides, in the film, Leo is also portraying J.Edgar, BOTH young AND old. Also, his character possesses a hint of homosexuality (for which the Academy will certainly give him some brownie points, ever since the 'Brokeback Mountain' debacle). Most importantly, Leo has been nominated for an Oscar THREE times previously (What's Eating Gilbert Grape, The Aviator, Blood Diamond). And, in order to win an Oscar, previous nominations count for tremendously with the Academy (Oldman's Oscar record - zero nominations). Leo was also snubbed last year for 'Shutter Island' and 'Inception'. So, taking into account all these factors, the Oscar for Best Lead Actor in Feb 2012 deservedly goes to Leonardo DiCaprio for J.Edgar.

Posted by Divya Author Profile Page at September 21, 2011 11:50 AM

comment #16

BobbyLupo Author Profile Page says ...

Leo looks so terrible in 'J. Edgar'. If I had to bet right now, I'd put my money on Woody Harrelson. I don't think Fassbender will even be nominated. Oldman, I could go either way on.

Posted by BobbyLupo Author Profile Page at September 22, 2011 12:09 AM

Leave a comment