Le miroir aux espions

Although undeniably the weakest of the three John Le Carre novels to be filmed during the 1960's this is not quite as bad some would have us believe. It proved to be one of only two features to be directed by Frank R. Pierson, the other being the third version of 'A Star is Born'. The latter film at least made money despite a critical drubbing whereas this one failed on both counts.

There are some redeeming features here, notably the cinematography of Austin Dempster and first class performances from Ralph Richardson, Paul Rogers, Robert Urquart and Anthony Hopkins who is slowly moving up the ranks. Hopkins freely admitted that his ambition was to be an international film star and in time would certainly be granted his wish!

The weak link is Christopher Jones whose rather quirky personality at first appeals but then becomes rather tiresome. He is working through his James Dean complex here and in the role of a Pole is not very well dubbed. He was to be even more miscast in 'Ryan's Daughter' which proved to be another nail in his coffin. Also disappointing is Pia Degermark as the love interest. Having shone in 'Elvira Madigan' she is rather bland here and despite her off-screen relationship with Jones there is precious little chemistry.

Even by the author's standards the material is pretty bleak and Mister Pierson alas is not in the same league as Messrs. Ritt and Lumet.

Where it does succeed admirably is in depicting the soul-destroying and morally ambiguous nature of the Espionage business where human beings are nothing if not expendable.

"War is hell, Mr. Thornhill. Even when it's a Cold one"!

26/04/2021: Congrats to Mr. Hopkins on his well-deserved Academy Award.

Made in 1969 this adaptation of a Le Carré novel isn't faithful to every element of the original book, and is heavily influenced by other contemporary films.

This means it isn't quite as uniformly bleak as many other Le Carré adaptations but depending on how you take it, it is perhaps hard to really believe in or sympathise with any of the characters. This is despite some pretty good performances by some of the lead actors.

What is perhaps missing is the clever editing, taut direction and sheer screen presence that (say) Michael Caine brings to the Harry Palmer movies (even though the plots of those are not exactly uniformly brilliant) or Richard Burton brings to "the spy who came in from the cold". Those movies stand head and shoulders above this.

Technically this film is well-photographed and the dubbing is well done too; however it is perhaps understandable if the pace of the film wanders, given that it looks a lot like they decided to shoehorn various sequences into the plot purely for stylistic reasons.

Some of the criticisms in the other reviews here are spot on and others are (IMHO) thoroughly misplaced; no spoilers here so you will have to work out which for yourself. I guess it is a bit of a curate's egg, this; "good in parts". Therefore if you approach it with suitable expectations you will probably find enough things about this movie to like to make it worth watching.

Overall this film probably isn't as bad as the knockers would lead you to suppose and nor is it as good as the 'ten' folk make out either. It is certainly an interesting period piece but it is also a little more than that too, so it gets 6/10 from me.

A uniformed boarder guard actually says "Your papers please!" in this drab adaptation of John Le Carre's novel (with Bergmanesque visuals from cameraman Austin Dempster).

First-time director Frank R. Pierson had recently received two Oscar nominations as a scriptwriter when Columbia gambled upon his ability to direct a feature film. Columbia lost, it went out on the graveyard shift in February and Pierson went back to TV for several more years.

Both leads were blessed with sullen good looks but not the ability to speak English and soon disappeared. Fortunately they're backed by a fine line-up of British acting talent who are the ones who make the film worth watching. (As in the earlier Le Carre adaptation 'The Deadly Affair' time is devoted to the unhappy home lives of the minders; and again it's not a pretty sight.)

Christoper Jones does a great job. And with Ralph Richardson and Sir Tony Hopkins in support you have to have a real experience. Maybe some people weren't happy that Jones wasn't James Bond. I don't think he was ever meant to be. This is an entirely different protagonist...much more realistic and human. Even with the "correct papers" you were guilty until proven innocent once you entered the Soviet Bloc. The danger he faces was as great as any 007. And he does so without the weapons that J. Bond was provided with. Like Bond, a seemingly impossible mission. But with none of the "Tier One" hardware that Bond ever had. Just a man...no super powers...not even a pistol. This "unfair" powers of force provides a deeper and more subtle level of suspense and tension. He can't survive can he? Can he complete his mission? So I don't spoil it for you I won't go on. Let me say this is one of the best Cold War spy movies I've seen and Jones deserves a great deal of credit. Enjoy.

He was an inexperienced man clutched out of crises and thrown into an impossible situation. I think he pulls this off quite well. Very few remember;e the danger and suspense of penetrating East Germany. The constant striving to be free against the murderous boot of the Stasi.

Since this seems to have just popped up on Amazon Prime 10/2022 I thought I'd save you an 1:48. How you can screw up a LeCarre story is beyond me. This appears to be nothing much more than a showcase to promote the meteor career of Jones. Actually a pretty great cast with some 70s uber babes but ultimately you get filler shots, time sucking montages, weird 70s camera work, and no real spy story. Plenty of footage of Jones with his shirt off, Jones looking into the camera, Jones walking in tight jeans. In the end you feel like it was all a wasted effort and a missed opportunity. Skip it and rewatch the original Tinker Tailor BBC series instead.