Focus Features | Release Date: December 9, 2011
6.6
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 491 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
315
Mixed:
99
Negative:
77
Watch Now
Stream On
Buy on
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Stream On
Expand
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
5
judahjsnJan 8, 2012
Tinker, Taylor makes no effort to help you understand the story and I think this is a technique some movies use to fool you into thinking the story you're seeing is more interesting than it actually is -- as you struggle to follow what'sTinker, Taylor makes no effort to help you understand the story and I think this is a technique some movies use to fool you into thinking the story you're seeing is more interesting than it actually is -- as you struggle to follow what's happening you are engaged, which is not the same as stimulated. There are things to like about this movie and most of them are aesthetic but the energy is constantly drab and Oldman's performance, in particular, is so understated it seems showy. This is a good flick but the pre-release buzz was overblown. Tinker, Taylor, Over, Hype. Expand
1 of 4 users found this helpful13
All this user's reviews
2
BikerjamesJan 7, 2012
The two points I'm giving this film are for the acting. Unfortunately the great actors are a complete waste in this convoluted mess. I was tortured throughout this film, constantly looking at my watch wondering when it would end. I amThe two points I'm giving this film are for the acting. Unfortunately the great actors are a complete waste in this convoluted mess. I was tortured throughout this film, constantly looking at my watch wondering when it would end. I am stunned the critics are giving this film good reviews. jfa weiu a;fj pqeijua ak;ajf [ a;kdfj a j. If you understood that previous sentence then you will enjoy this film. As people left the theater all you could hear was "wow that was hard to follow", or "I didn't understand any of that movie". What is the point of making a movie so incredibly difficult to follow? It certainly isn't entertainment. I know the point of the film is they are trying to find out who the mole is, but how they found out I couldn't tell you, nor did I care. If I wasn't there with a friend I may have walked out on the film at the halfway point. I had some difficulty with the English accents at times as well which added to the confusion. Expand
4 of 10 users found this helpful46
All this user's reviews
0
ParkersBackJan 7, 2012
What's that saying about smelling the monkey poop? The critics are living in their own little world. This movie is a mess...perhaps a technical marvel on many levels, but a bore to anyone with half a brain. Do not waste a dime on thisWhat's that saying about smelling the monkey poop? The critics are living in their own little world. This movie is a mess...perhaps a technical marvel on many levels, but a bore to anyone with half a brain. Do not waste a dime on this terrible movie. Expand
3 of 8 users found this helpful35
All this user's reviews
0
RobLewJan 7, 2012
This movie is impossible to follow. Half the theater erupted in boos at the end of the movie and i believe the other half just didn't want to waste another split second of their time thinking about this horrible movie. I will never trust aThis movie is impossible to follow. Half the theater erupted in boos at the end of the movie and i believe the other half just didn't want to waste another split second of their time thinking about this horrible movie. I will never trust a critically acclaimed film again. Perhaps if you've read this book and know everything about it prior to going to the movie it might be good but as a stand alone film it doesn't make sense. Expand
4 of 8 users found this helpful44
All this user's reviews
0
FinnaticJan 7, 2012
I have to chuckle sometimes at professional critics and their rave reviews. For the average moviegoer who is plunking down $10 for a ticket and another $13 or so for popcorn and a soda, it's all about the entertainment value. To this end,I have to chuckle sometimes at professional critics and their rave reviews. For the average moviegoer who is plunking down $10 for a ticket and another $13 or so for popcorn and a soda, it's all about the entertainment value. To this end, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy rates a solid zero with an exclamation point. It's much akin to having a book on tape acted out on screen. The words simply drone on. The characters are unsympathetic and the story is meandering. Honestly, towards the end, you're not even really sure if you are at the end of the movie or not. If you like spy thrillers, this isn't for you. The only thrills here are seeing the closing credits and grabbing a refill on your popcorn. Make sure you go to a theater with comfy high-back seats so you will be able to easily recline your weary head as this movie plods along. Yes, there's lots of words in the script and lots and lots of "acting moments" for Gary Oldman and Mr. Awards Bait, Colin Firth. But, for those of us looking for good old-fashioned movie magic, it's best to move along. There isn't anything to see here, folks. Nothing at all. I was impressed that there were lots of British folks in this film. They have impeccable enunciation. I stared at the ceiling of the theater a few times, too, that's how engrossing this bore-fest was. The couple beside me summed it up best when they said, 'What the heck did we just pay for?" as they left the theater. Ditto. Expand
8 of 15 users found this helpful87
All this user's reviews
2
JM23Jan 7, 2012
While I wanted to like Tinker Tailor, this is a movie I just couldn't get into. For starters, the pace is astonishingly slow. There are scenes that are shown that seem to have no connection to the plot of the movie. The plot is moreWhile I wanted to like Tinker Tailor, this is a movie I just couldn't get into. For starters, the pace is astonishingly slow. There are scenes that are shown that seem to have no connection to the plot of the movie. The plot is more complex than it needed to be. My biggest problem with the movie though is the lack of anything memorable. The acting is good, the direction is great, and the music suits the movie, but nothing stands out that you will remember in 6 months. Not one scene will stick with you. The characters are not interesting or unique from each other. There may not have been one joke in the movie and there was not one scene that had emotion in it. The mystery through the movie doesn't deliver the payoff and I personally thought Dragon Tattoo had a much more interesting "whodunit" mystery in it's story. After 20 minutes, I started counting how many Harry Potter actors I could spot. I started thinking "There's Tom Hardy, he will do an awesome job in Dark Knight Rises", and "Oh ok so thats the new villain in Star Trek 2, he seems like he will do a good job". I guess the point I am making is that I simply didn't get it and I am saying that because there's a good chance you may not get it either. There may be a target audience for this film, and clearly the critics ate this movie up, but it disappointed for me and the four people I went with. Also, judging by the awkward and silent reaction of other people in the theater we weren't the only ones, despite the great actors and potential. Expand
4 of 11 users found this helpful47
All this user's reviews
4
NoneOfYourBeesJan 7, 2012
I really wanted to love this film, since I heard it might be nominated for best picture. The film's story is too jumbled and either assumes or does a poor job of explaining important elements or themes such as Control, Circus, and Wichcraft.I really wanted to love this film, since I heard it might be nominated for best picture. The film's story is too jumbled and either assumes or does a poor job of explaining important elements or themes such as Control, Circus, and Wichcraft. I had to query wikipedia to read the summary of the film to understand what I had just viewed and said elements. I never read the book; I came in with a blank slate to this film. And I feel, perhaps, this film was best catered to those who are of British citizenry or read the book, or those who enjoy watching a film multiple times to understand the plot. It felt like it was the archetypical art film, something like you'd see at a museum or art gallery, where you don't quite understand it but you must appreciate it because it's highly well-regarded by others with higher IQ's than your own. To steal a British term, I think that's pure rubbish. I enjoy watching ballet, Opera, international travel, and thought-provoking films as much as the next person. I reside in New York and consider myself a New Yorker, but I am a European, as well. I say that because the reaction from those who immensely enjoyed this film shouldn't be "it's because you're not intelligent" or "it's because you're an ignorant American". Having said all that, I don't think the film was poor. I feel the acting, seriousness, and realism of the movie played well and I do feel I was watching something special. But I feel the film would have benefited from some much-needed explanations. Most of the audience was baffled. I got a top-down understanding of the film, but I wanted an deep intimate experience. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
7
lahaineJan 7, 2012
Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy is a very slow burning spy thriller. Its slow pace may bore some, but I think it was an effective way of composing this elaborate plot and allotting the broad cast a fair amount of screen time. With that said, goodTinker Tailor Soldier Spy is a very slow burning spy thriller. Its slow pace may bore some, but I think it was an effective way of composing this elaborate plot and allotting the broad cast a fair amount of screen time. With that said, good job to the writers and editors. Its lack of kinetic thrills was a disappointment, but its labyrinth of a plot is enough to keep most people intrigued. Gary Oldman leads the cast with an understated and complete performance, and the textured cinematography and art direction also deserve a mention. I felt certain plot-lines were ultimately unnecessary, but Le Carre should be pleased with the adaptation. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
4
TVJerryJan 7, 2012
This big-screen adaptation of the le Carre novel is not like most modern spy flicks: There are no chases, fights or shocking twists. It revolves around an English spy organization in the 70s and the search for a Russian mole in the higherThis big-screen adaptation of the le Carre novel is not like most modern spy flicks: There are no chases, fights or shocking twists. It revolves around an English spy organization in the 70s and the search for a Russian mole in the higher ranks. Gary Oldman heads the impressive cast as the man hired to find the culprit. The complex machinations are carried out methodically, which means very slowly. Much of what happens, suspicious glances, swiping folders and other dull dealings, is simply confusing (guess it helps to read the novel). When the truth is revealed, it's really no big surprise, making the movie even more of a letdown. Expand
3 of 6 users found this helpful33
All this user's reviews
2
Rhino79Jan 7, 2012
I just finished watching Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, and I am stunned at how highly this film was rated by critics. I went into the film with no prior knowledge of its plot; I haven't read the book, nor have I seen any of its previous filmedI just finished watching Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, and I am stunned at how highly this film was rated by critics. I went into the film with no prior knowledge of its plot; I haven't read the book, nor have I seen any of its previous filmed versions. And after watching it, I still barely know what happens. It is almost laughably confusing. The editing of the film is disastrous. The fact that much of the film consists of flashbacks adds to the confusion. The film gives no visual clues to differentiate the past and the present. There are way too many characters to keep track of, and half of them are of no consequence to the plot. I also think the film should be subtitled for American viewers since most of the dialogue is spoken in such a thick British accent it is incomprehensible. And on top of all this, the film is incredibly dull and boring. The thinking for this film was "Let's take a whole bunch of big-name British actors... Colin Firth, Gary Oldman... write a confusing and boring screenplay and shoot the film in dull, greenish colors. The critics will eat it up." Well, the critics have apparently been duped into thinking Tinker Tailor is praiseworthy, but I found it about as entertaining and visually interesting as a bowl of split pea soup. Expand
6 of 11 users found this helpful65
All this user's reviews
9
Tazmania32Jan 6, 2012
Although it does start off slow, it begins to pick up the pace as the plot moves along. A great looking film with great acting, as good as I thought it would be. I recommend paying close attention otherwise you might miss something important.
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
10
GOUGHJan 6, 2012
Everyone is right and wrong about this film. Geez. I don't remember the 'original' being so bloody violent. Well done stuff. I just had a difficult job hearing some words from time to time. My bad hearing. But, that damn broken up PBS seriesEveryone is right and wrong about this film. Geez. I don't remember the 'original' being so bloody violent. Well done stuff. I just had a difficult job hearing some words from time to time. My bad hearing. But, that damn broken up PBS series just killed it. I went and read the book later on and got into how David Cornwell writes and he's a genious in his own way. This film of the story was a smackin' great visit, even though I had to guess and wonder and follow along, all over again. [Great bit that, right?] Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
7
jeremypJan 6, 2012
It starts slowly and never builds beyond a simmer. It's well crafted but passionless, as is most of Le Carre's stuff, but the plotting is superb as it slowly reveals it's ending. Unfortunately it's a good guess who the villain is. Just askIt starts slowly and never builds beyond a simmer. It's well crafted but passionless, as is most of Le Carre's stuff, but the plotting is superb as it slowly reveals it's ending. Unfortunately it's a good guess who the villain is. Just ask the perennial give away question: "why is he in this movie?"

The problem is that so far from the cold war and so far from MI-6's dusty halls the movie comes across as a period piece, a nice slice of memorabilia.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
0
kingbickelJan 6, 2012
Worst movie ever! I agree the other intelligent people who reviewed it with a 0 or 1, I was bored to death and refuse to believe that the reviewers found this movie excellent. I too wonder if we saw the same movie
3 of 8 users found this helpful35
All this user's reviews
9
CriticalFanJan 6, 2012
I am brand new to Metacritic, having joined this site in order to submit my review of the movie, which I saw last night and is still in my head.

Although this movie is slow to pull you in, once it does, you're hooked. For me, I didn't
I am brand new to Metacritic, having joined this site in order to submit my review of the movie, which I saw last night and is still in my head.

Although this movie is slow to pull you in, once it does, you're hooked. For me, I didn't realize how much I really enjoyed the film until the very end, when things finally came together and the "can you get ON with it" feeling I had during the first 15-20 minutes of the movie had passed. Now, I keep thinking about how much I want to see it again. Usually I see a film once and that is it. This film is subtle, and I know that seeing it again will reveal more to me than I realized the first time around.

The performances were excellent all around. Everyone is crowing about Gary Oldman, with good reason, but for me, Mark Strong had the best performance of the film, followed closely by Benedict Cumberbatch. Not a weak link in the chain, though. I don't know if this movie will do well in the U.S. at the box office. Frankly, you have to be intelligent and really pay attention to the movie. As I left the theater last night, I heard some people saying how much they loved it, and then I heard a few ladies saying that it was too long and convoluted. These were the same ladies before the movie started that were asking me what a mole was, and if people in the movie were going to speak with British accents. The sets were superb--drab, draber, and drabest. Flawlessly realistic. I hope that there's an Oscar nomination for the movie here, as well as the one anticipated for Gary Oldman.

I knew absolutely nothing about the book or the Alec Guinness version, but intelligence, patience and attention here are all anyone needs. I wouldn't recommend taking someone to see this movie who thinks that Michael Bay films are their gold standard.
Expand
3 of 6 users found this helpful33
All this user's reviews
10
RevealaJan 3, 2012
Yes, it's an intricate and challenging movie to follow. However, "Tinker" rewards your patience and intelligence, and ultimately, you'll "get it."
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
6
morgansageJan 1, 2012
Amazing shots, acting and cinematography... but the story moves way way to slow i think for anyone. I would like to see the BBC adaption now - but they could have cut this better to make the pace more interesting - I don't think this was aAmazing shots, acting and cinematography... but the story moves way way to slow i think for anyone. I would like to see the BBC adaption now - but they could have cut this better to make the pace more interesting - I don't think this was a miss on acting it was a missing on the editing floor. Expand
5 of 8 users found this helpful53
All this user's reviews
0
iTheViewerDec 31, 2011
Incomprehensible, that says it all. Some reviewers commented about the jumbled timeline. Here's how bad it was: I couldn't tell when it was jumbled or not! And I'm someone who drank in Memento. My partner and I consider ourselves fairlyIncomprehensible, that says it all. Some reviewers commented about the jumbled timeline. Here's how bad it was: I couldn't tell when it was jumbled or not! And I'm someone who drank in Memento. My partner and I consider ourselves fairly intellectual and sophisticated movie-goers, we do not require cheap thrills, the straw-man that some of this movie's defenders put up. In the end, the mole is revealed, but WHO CARES?!?!?! The acting is good? Heck, I think lots of people can look grim grim grim. There seems to be a subset of fans out there who genuinely like this movie, but chances are very high that you are not in that teeny tiny group. I think it's probably a group of people who love any sort of cold war spy movie. If that's you, by all means, feed this turducken. Expand
7 of 13 users found this helpful76
All this user's reviews
10
halokiruDec 31, 2011
Forty-six year old Swedish director Tomas Alfredson came to prominence three years ago when he directed the film adaptation of John Ajvide Lindqvist's novel 'Let The Right One In'. After the initial success of the vampiric romantic drama,Forty-six year old Swedish director Tomas Alfredson came to prominence three years ago when he directed the film adaptation of John Ajvide Lindqvist's novel 'Let The Right One In'. After the initial success of the vampiric romantic drama, Alfredson became attached to an international adaptation of John le Carre's espionage-novel 'Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy'. Based on aspects of le Carre's (also known as David Cornwell) experiences during his time as a member of the British Intelligence service sectors MI5 and MI6 during the 1950s and 1960s, Alfredson creates a fine, absorbing picture which engrosses from beginning to end.

Control (John Hurt), the leader of an unknown sector of the British Intelligence service, is ousted along with his long-standing companion George Smiley (Gary Oldman) due to a botched operation in Budapest, Hungary which saw the officer Jim Prideaux (Mark Strong) murdered in public. Control was under the impression that there was a mole among the top ranking members of the service, referred to as the Circus by the other top ranking members due to its location in Cambridge Circus, London, and Smiley is drawn out of retirement to pinpoint the culprit after Control passes away. Alongside the young Intelligence officer Peter Guillam (Benedict Cumberbatch), Smiley has four primary candidates to focus his investigation upon; they are the last remaining members of the Circus, Bill Haydon (Colin Firth), Percy Alleline (Toby Jones), Roy Bland (Ciaran Hinds) and Toby Esterhase (David Dencik).

Utilizing an all-star, established cast, Alfredson allows the film to unfold at an almost flawless pace. Every sequence contains a small snippet of information which allows the viewer to conduct their own investigation alongside that of Smiley's. While the narrative is also driven along by strong performances from the primarily male cast, Gary Oldman, Colin Firth, Toby Jones, Ciaran Hinds, David Dencik, Stephen Graham and Kathy Burke all give strong, commanding performances. While the true artists of the piece are Benedict Cumberbatch, who plays the young, and somewhat naive intelligent officer assigned to assist Smiley. John Hurt as the aging, instinct-driven leader of the British service, and Tom Hardy, who is Ricki Tarr the dirty cleaner for British intelligence's most fowl operations. Their performances go above and beyond in their supporting roles, and at times eclipse Gary Oldman's subdued portrayal of a man drawn back into the murky world of corruption, betrayal and treasure.

Alongside the narrative and its cast, one of the more surprising aspects of the film, is Alfredson, Cinematographer Hoyte van Hoytema and Editor Dino Jonsater's use of stylistic nuances that further enhance the viewing experience. Lingering close-up shots of seemingly insignificant objects and shallow focus shots constantly evoke the nature of mystery and intrigue which surrounds such clandestine organisations. Alfredson never rushes any moment, instead he allows for the audience to become accustomed to their surroundings and appreciate their beauty. Wide angle shots and long lenses are used for interior and exterior locations, showcasing the breakdowns of their interiors, while close-up shots are used to examine objects and characters in their most frail states. During the opening sequence involving Prideaux's botched secret mission, a simple concoction of jump cuts and lingering static shots concentrating upon various characters within the vicinity creates a sense of the tension, suspense and vulnerability of the situation and this is how Alfredson constantly keeps the audience engrossed. By providing those observing the action on screen with just enough information that they themselves become entwined within Smiley's investigation as he moves forward.

Once the credits and a dedication to the films screenwriter Bridget O'Connor who passed away last year finish, the viewer is left with an overriding sense of satisfaction. Smiley's world is a far cry away from the glitz and glamour that the espionage genre has become accustomed to. There are no martinis in sight, but only reel upon reel of bureaucratic wrangling, childish bickering and greed-induced deal-making, where it seems everybody is working for themselves and their reputation rather than the nation's government that is employing them. Since its premiere at the 68th Venice International Film Festival 'Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy' has been touted as an Oscar contender and it is easy to understand why, Tomas Alfredson has taken a solid source novel, utilized an established cast and infused the final concoction with elements from his own visual repertoire to create a wonderfully crafted film that does the original BBC televised series justice.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
evilgeniusDec 31, 2011
This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Sadly, the movie feels more like looking out the window during a boring bus ride than as a mental roller-coaster. Which is a shame, as the cast plays wonderfully well and the cinematography and atmosphere are fantastic.

I'm a big fan of movies like The Usual Suspects, thus I was expecting a whole lot from Tinker Tailor. I came out disappointed. The cinematography is superb, acting is very, very good and the atmosphere of bleek, tense spy-life is wonderful. But the pacing is incredibly slow and it's near impossible for (even for the mos intelligent of us) to really engage with the story: it feels like watching people you don't know do things you don't care about. I was also disappointed by the 'thriller' aspect: there really is almost no suspense apart from a few moments. Even as the story unravels, really big things 'click', I felt distant. It's possible to connect the dots and subtle (often visual) clues after you've seen the movie, but it never feels cool. In some of the great psychological thrillers, it's awesome to wacht it the second time knowing someone is lying, pretending to be something, that the protagonists are lead onto a wrong track. Nothing of that kind here. It's more of the type - "Ahh, those two shared a look then because they collaborated together".

It's all very surprising to me, especially as more or less the entire cast acts very, very well. Oldman is sublime, again transformed into a totally different person, with suble facial expressions, gestures - you can often see him think. Same goes for Firth, Cumberbatch, the whole lot - the only trouble is that there are so many important characters, it's hard for the movie to create much of a depth for them. Most are just set there, without much explanation. You sense there is a story behind all of them (after all, it's a huge book), you just don't get it.

In the end, there feeling is eerily similar to Harry Potter 8 part 1: Characters just going from place to place, off to find this or that which will then allow them to go off and find this or that. The goal of the movie is to find the mole, Mr.Smiley is quickly identified as the hero of the story and it's more or less inevitable that he will find him. One leaves the cinema wondering whether it was all worth watching at all.
Expand
2 of 3 users found this helpful21
All this user's reviews
10
JudgeHoldenDec 28, 2011
The best spy movie I've seen in the last 15 years and probably one of the best in its genre. If you like thinking about what you see and not just see some images pass by, that's the movie for you. Period.
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
9
FIlmsareawesomeDec 25, 2011
Excellent movie, espionage kind of film at his best. Great written, the whole time I was trying to figure it out who was the mole, and it keep me so excited throw out the film, so the whole theme of the movie was amazing and interesting. GaryExcellent movie, espionage kind of film at his best. Great written, the whole time I was trying to figure it out who was the mole, and it keep me so excited throw out the film, so the whole theme of the movie was amazing and interesting. Gary Oldman deserves an Oscar nomination, and the technical achievements good lord, they were fantastic. It may have been a little bit slow at beginning, but they were just explaining the way that turns would turn out to be.So for me this is on the top 10 movies of 2011. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
9
cabritaDec 21, 2011
This film is one of the best of the year! It is not for the common viewer who just wants cheep thrills. The film builds suspense not with senseless action but with an engaging story that you are attempting to figure out what is going on. TheThis film is one of the best of the year! It is not for the common viewer who just wants cheep thrills. The film builds suspense not with senseless action but with an engaging story that you are attempting to figure out what is going on. The viewer like the protagonist is left to figure out these random events that are happening. Tomas Alfredson's direction is flawless evoking a feeling of mystery and really setting a tone that keeps you engaged throught the whole movie. For the users that did not enjoy this movie they probably to dumb to figure out what was even going on in the movie. The dialogue in this film is very subtle so many viewers will find this film hard to understand. Expand
1 of 5 users found this helpful14
All this user's reviews
1
jhepDec 20, 2011
It
2 of 11 users found this helpful29
All this user's reviews
2
dave89791Dec 18, 2011
I finally registered for an account to leave this review - I think that says something

I consider myself and my significant other to be relatively intelligent, we read the new yorker regularly, been published in the new york times,
I finally registered for an account to leave this review - I think that says something

I consider myself and my significant other to be relatively intelligent, we read the new yorker regularly, been published in the new york times, graduated in the top 2% of my class...

--> This movie is borderline incomprehensible to those who have not read the book.

I appreciate the quality of the direction, production, etc. but my general view is that movies which are both based on an involved book and try to compress the story into 2 hours tend to come across as unintelligible to those who have not read the book. The Lord of the Rings trilogy is another example (I've never met anyone who hasn't read the book and enjoyed the film except for those individuals who were there solely to enjoy the CGI and would never have the patience to a read a book >200 pages).
Expand
6 of 16 users found this helpful610
All this user's reviews
8
wheretomaDec 17, 2011
Terrific acting by the entire cast. The period was captured incredibly well and the story was engaging, if sometimes too fast / subtle. Recommended highly.
3 of 9 users found this helpful36
All this user's reviews
10
BHBarryDec 14, 2011
â
1 of 6 users found this helpful15
All this user's reviews
0
MikeRGDec 13, 2011
The movie is totally incomprehensible, dull and uninvolving. It jumps forward and backward in time at random, and Gary Oldman does an Alec Guiness impression. I don't know what movie the critics saw, but this is a total snooze.
12 of 24 users found this helpful1212
All this user's reviews
5
ziff70Dec 13, 2011
It's crazy, it's like the critics saw a different movie. While the film is technically done well, you don't care about any of the characters, just following the plot requires a degree in "covert operations," and it is beyond slow. If you'reIt's crazy, it's like the critics saw a different movie. While the film is technically done well, you don't care about any of the characters, just following the plot requires a degree in "covert operations," and it is beyond slow. If you're going to the movies to be engaged emotionally, this film is not for you. Expand
9 of 16 users found this helpful97
All this user's reviews
1
RealScorzDec 12, 2011
Just saw a screening of Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy. Stunned to read that reviews are good. Wait until real people see this, and not reviewers who are afraid to call this like it is, one of the most confusing and convoluted movies I have everJust saw a screening of Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy. Stunned to read that reviews are good. Wait until real people see this, and not reviewers who are afraid to call this like it is, one of the most confusing and convoluted movies I have ever seen. I was in a theater of industry members and the reaction could not have been more tepid. There was a Q&A afterwards and when asked if this was better than the Alec Guiness version the answer over and over was, NO! The direction and the editing is a jumbled mess. Timelines, story lines, characters, all muddled. Gary Oldman plays his part well, I lay this mess at the feet of the director and his editor. A final note, I absolutely adore spy movies, I devoured every book every written about the Cold War, this should have been right up my alley. VERDICT: Gutter Ball Expand
12 of 23 users found this helpful1211
All this user's reviews
5
InsomniackerDec 12, 2011
How can you compress a fascinating five hour story--I'm referring to the original BBC adaptation--into two plus hours and come up with a film that feels turgid? It may not be fair to compare this version to the superior BBC mini-series, butHow can you compress a fascinating five hour story--I'm referring to the original BBC adaptation--into two plus hours and come up with a film that feels turgid? It may not be fair to compare this version to the superior BBC mini-series, but they seem to have gone out of their way to take the urgency out of their mole hunt. By only allowing us to see the mole candidates in brief cameos, we never feel grounded in the search. And that makes the ultimate revelation a "so-what." It became an elegantly photographed film comprised of a bunch of obtusely connected sequences with little to hold it together. As a Le Carre fan, I looked forward to seeing this, and I'm not saying it's terrible' but I went home feeling disappointed. Expand
8 of 14 users found this helpful86
All this user's reviews
10
XTrapnelDec 12, 2011
It is rare that two contrasting masterpieces are made from the same source. That has, however, happened with Tinker, Tailor. This insidious, ugly-beautiful picture can stand proudly beside the classic BBC TV series. The plotting is layered.It is rare that two contrasting masterpieces are made from the same source. That has, however, happened with Tinker, Tailor. This insidious, ugly-beautiful picture can stand proudly beside the classic BBC TV series. The plotting is layered. The photography is cunning. And it has one of the great last scenes. Superb. Expand
0 of 2 users found this helpful02
All this user's reviews
10
colorblindyoshiDec 9, 2011
this came out in the uk around 5 months ago and is about as good a film you can get these days. great cast, great direction and exuding britishness. fantastic. the film is quite confusing however, but all the loose ends are wrapped up nicely.this came out in the uk around 5 months ago and is about as good a film you can get these days. great cast, great direction and exuding britishness. fantastic. the film is quite confusing however, but all the loose ends are wrapped up nicely. the cast are in some of their staring roles, maybe not benedict cumberbatch (sherlock) or gary oldman (the dark knight) buy certaintly other minor characters. very good, and quite shocking at times. may not suit an american audience however, so take heed. Expand
3 of 7 users found this helpful34
All this user's reviews
10
hoops2448Dec 9, 2011
Tinker Tailor is one of the most planned out films I have seen in all my years. It is filled with subtle hints and images. It's a film that doesn't point things out, it crams the screen full of imagery and lets the viewer decide whatsTinker Tailor is one of the most planned out films I have seen in all my years. It is filled with subtle hints and images. It's a film that doesn't point things out, it crams the screen full of imagery and lets the viewer decide whats relevant just like Gary Oldman's George Smiley is. Its a film that marvels in the enigma that is Smiley and works best when you have no idea what he is thinking. It is one of the greatest thinking mans films. The performances are flawless with Oldman giving one of the best of his career and Colin Firth following up his Kings Speech role with something more in your face and exuberant that makes him stand out in a crowd of people known for secrets and lies. The cast is rounded out by some of the best British Thesps around from Toby Jones to Kathy Burke. The direction is so clever in the way it toys with the viewer. Its outstanding in every possible way, well worth a watch. Expand
7 of 13 users found this helpful76
All this user's reviews