« That Diablo Cody, she's really got something | Home | The Artist vs. Hugo »

December 14, 2011


Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy and the cool, ugly 70's

Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy

I watch a lot of movies, but every time I watch a spy movie, it's like I forget every convention used in filmmaking. I'm utterly confused by story twists, can't keep track of which character is on which side and who's double-crossing who, fail to catch 100% of subtly drawn hints about the central mystery, and often completely miss major plot points. All those shadowy whispers and code names and messy political alliances are completely lost on me.

So I was majorly relieved when my moviegoing partner came out of the theater after watching Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy and was just as clueless as I was about pretty much everything that happened in the entire movie. That's not to say I didn't like it: when I decided to forget about trying to understand anything and just enjoy one of the best casts I've ever seen in my life and some truly phenomenal stylish/ugly set design, everything was great.

Apart from the central story about uncovering a mole in Britain's MI6 in the mid-70's, which I only faintly grasp even now, there are some wonderful subplots that I found much more compelling. Benedict Cumberbatch, whose name sounds like it's made of tweed and leather elbow patches, as Peter Guillam was my favorite part of the movie. He has the movie's most exciting scene, and its closest thing to an action sequence, involving a file room, a luggage tag, and a phone call from a mechanic. My other favorite automotive part of the movie is Guillam's car, a gorgeous 1966 Citroën DS 21 that looks like this (though as commenter Maddy points out, the photo is a 1970 model):

Citroen DS 21

Other than that cool, sleek car, the movie revels in cluttered dinginess. As the revealed mole says at the end of the movie, "I had to pick a side, and it was an aesthetic choice as much as a moral one. The West has become so very ugly, don't you think?" The movie's design is amazing--it's as dedicated to drab 70's bureaucratic mustiness as "Mad Men" is to early 60's tidy modernity. The office scenes are like catalogs of outdated technology. In his review, Ignatiy Vishnevetsky notes that they must have had one hell of a typewriter budget.

My other favorite performance is by Tom Hardy as Ricky Tarr, the conflicted AWOL spy in love. The role was originally given to Michael Fassbender, who I guess was unable to squeeze it in around the 7,000 other movies he's done this year. Fassbender would have been good, sure, but Tom Hardy is probably a better rogue agent with that voice and those lips and all that handsomeness.

Director Tomas Alfredson, who also made the wonderful Let the Right One In, really knows what he's doing with casting, mood, and set design. Maybe if he'd been directing in his native language he might have illuminated the opaque script a little better. Or maybe I should have just read the book first.

categories: Celebrities, Movies
posted by amy at 2:03 PM | #

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:


Just saw it, and while I wasn't quite so confused, I surely missed a lot. But I thought that was kinda the point. Like the end of 2001, it's a movie about a human intelligence confronting a system too complex to be grasped by humans, so the movie aims to recreate the rhythms of spycraft: Murk-Murk-Murk-VIOLENCE-Murk-Murk-Murk-VIOLENCE.

Posted by: That Fuzzy Bastard at December 19, 2011 11:17 AM

I agree that stylistically it was a total success. The murk was exceptionally good, and in my case, almost totally impenetrable. Outstanding style, but as for the substance, I still don't know quite what I was watching. I like your idea that maybe the murkiness is actually part of the substance.

For example, during the the big reveal, I wasn't even sure that's what was happening. I suppose that's what the rhythms of spycraft are really like: an agent has unspoken, vague suspicions that gradually accumulate, you only half-comprehend the clues, then at the end, you're still not quite sure what happened. But at least you're wearing a really sharp turquoise tie with an impeccable Windsor knot, and your word processor is magnificently byzantine.

Posted by: amy at December 19, 2011 2:37 PM

I hear a lot of the murk gets clarified in the sequel, "The Iron Lady"

Posted by: ooghe at December 19, 2011 3:18 PM

Operation The Pearls Are Absolutely Non-Negotiable.

Posted by: amy at December 19, 2011 6:04 PM

Yeah, I do think that, as you say, the murk is the substance. In a way, it reminded me of Zodiac---a movie about cases that never get satisfying resolution.

@ Ooghe; HAR!

Posted by: That Fuzzy Bastard at December 21, 2011 11:22 AM

The Car is a Citroen 1970 DS21 Pallas with a BVH gearbox. Colour SABLE METALLISE.

I have one that is exactly the same in Australia.

It is French built - not Slough in the UK.

I double checked my facts from an officianado in the Citroen world - to quote his reply he said:-

Hi Maddy,
you can tell 'em from me it is in fact a 1970 model.
It has the three dial dash, same as yours, this can be seen in one of the other images you provided.
Sable metalise was not used in the earlier Pallas.
As for it being a Slough built Pallas, what a load of waffle and misinformation.
If it was a 1966 model it woul have a single headlamp front, which would be bloody obvious.

cheers R.....


Here's an article about an identical car.

Please if people are going to write something on the net - be accurate. There are plenty of people out there who just love these cars and want to know all they can.

good wishes


Cheers Maddy

Posted by: Madeleine Keil at February 15, 2012 2:01 AM

Post a comment

Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)