Avis des utilisateurs

The Russia House is a superior spy romance movie which falls short of being great. Additionally a couple of factors have been unkind to it over time.

Connery and Pfeiffer are excellant; the large cast are almost uniformly outstanding (except perhaps Roy Scheider, who I usually like, but who seems a bit over the top in his role here); the Moscow scenery and end of the Cold War feel are great, and the main characters are easy to like, if difficult to outright love. On the down side the writing assumes too much in expecting the audience to stay on top of the espionage jargon and intrigue, added to the non-linear plot. Let your attention wander and you'll lose your way. If it had been a little easier to follow, it would have left more room for dramatic tension, which was adequate but seldom riveting.

When I said that time has been unkind to The Russia House, I meant two things: firstly that the unfortunate timing of the movie's release, a year before the collapse of the Soviet Union, ensured that it would be dated almost immediately. More significantly, a growing portion of the film's potential audience didn't live through the late Soviet Era, and the nuances of concepts like Glasnost, and why Perestroika makes it hard for Pfeiffer to do her shoe-shopping aren't going to mean a thing to anyone much under 30.

But that's not the movie's fault. Russia House is still a quality, enjoyable drama with a great cast, even if it's somewhat ponderous and slow-moving, and complex. And oh yes - it has James Fox. A film like this without James Fox would have been like a table with three legs.

7 out of 10

An American spy drama and romance; A story about a British publisher persuaded to go undercover to investigate the motive of an author who is exposing Soviet secrets. Adapted from John le Carré's novel, a compelling glossy drama with a theme about the resurrection of buried hopes by betrayal. It is notable for capturing a plausibility of the realities of the time-Perestroika and post-glasnost Russia. The direction is subtle for a story that is reserved, though it occasionally gets sluggish in the plot with its standard-fare espionage. What carries the film, though, is the character-driven intrigue, witty dialogue, and strong emotional core. Connery's performance is complex, as the flawed publisher is attracted to Pfeiffer's charming go-between, a performance that is also persuasive and credible. There is fine support from Klaus Maria Brandauer as the mysterious scientist and Roy Scheider and James Fox as the bickering spy chiefs under pressure. Aside from the escapism and beautiful locales, easily the most exquisite filmic element is the critically acclaimed musical score by Jerry Goldsmith, which sweeps the audience along through the mood of places, national characteristics, and the main character's relationship.

As a great admirer of John Le Carre, I watched this film with high expectations & although the story wasn't the usual Le Carre (such as 'The Spy Who Came In From The Cold'), I enjoyed it immensely. It is a combination of a good old-fashioned romance & a look at what happens when an ordinary man is brought into the world of espionage. Connery is very good as the boozy, world-weary publisher who considers personal relationships more important than Cold War one-upmanship. Michelle Pfeiffer, apart from being very pleasing to the eye as usual, was also pretty believable as the Russian trying to do the right thing. What's more, Klaus Maria Brandauer deserves an honourable mention as well. OK, the plot is complicated & sometimes hard to follow, as are most of Le Carre's works (& also, doubtless, the real world of espionage), but it is worth the effort. If you are seeking a simple good guy beats bad guy film, then don't watch this or any other realistic spy film. If, however, you want a story that manages to combine cynicism & romance, I recommend this one.

Films that require you to pay close attention to every little detail and have a complex plot from the outset can generally be thrust into one of two categories: Stimulating and intellectual, or potential insomnia cures. The Russia House is the former... so keep taking the Nytol. There's much languid talk about politics, international trade, the Cold War, espionage... and for those expecting Sean Connery to slap on a tux and start blowing people away, and going to be sorely disappointed. If on the other hand, you LISTEN to what is being said and are open to the idea of getting small rewards along the way rather than shallow exhibitionism, than this may be right up your street.

Make sure all the windows are closed, the children are in bed, your bladder is empty... because you don't want any meaningless distractions while the story is being told. Not that it moves at a fast pace, but inconsequential moments have repercussions for later on, and simple snatches of dialogue could hold invaluable clues. Russia's never looked better, and the chief photographer captures Moscow in all it's architectural splendour. The much missed Connery (He's retired from acting now, believe it or not) does a sterling job as the amateur spy who doesn't know what side he's on, and sex-on-legs Pfeiffer has a dead-on Russian accent. At least to this untrained ear.

Maybe not for action junkies, but anyone else who appreciates much subtler qualities in film... Please step this way. 7/10

Maybe I was just in the right mood, but I found this an effective romance. Michelle Pfieffer was even better than her usual terrific self, and the rest of the excellent cast was, well, excellent. It is pretty slow, but I think that this is essential to the conclusion, which I found quite moving. You have to give this movie a chance to grow on you, but if you are patient it is quite accessible. Not bleak at all, as you'd expect from Le Carre.

Lights Up the Screen. Much better after a 2nd or 5th time viewing ! Volume On High First Saw 30 years ago. Aging well The Movie Stars Shine

"The Russia House" makes one valid point: the "James Bond" movies do not provide an accurate description of the life of a spy. Having said that, if "The Russia House" does provide such an accurate description, one wonders why anyone would make this movie.

Simply put, this is very dull stuff. Sean Connery is Barley Blair, a British publisher who has a love for Russia and visits the old Soviet Union regularly. Set at the end of the Cold War, just as Gorbachev is beginning to open the Soviet Union to the West, Blair is conscripted against his will to work with Katya (Michelle Pfeiffer), a Russian publisher who has sent him a manuscript which actually contains Soviet military secrets. The major problem with this movie for me was that it just didn't seem that anything particularly important was at stake. As a result, the movie lacked tension; there was nothing in it that particularly held my interest.

It does - quite deliberately I think - address the question of just who the "bad guys" really are in this. A couple of scenes address this in particular. As Blair reluctantly meets with British Intelligence officials who are trying to convince him to take on this assignment, he's told by one "this is a free country. You have no choice." Then, as Blair is given a polygraph by CIA officials, this exchange: CIA - "Are you being coerced?" Blair - "Yes." CIA (somewhat excitedly) - "By the Soviets?" Blair (very deliberately) - "NO!"

It has a few moments, but overall I was quite disappointed. 3/10.

Based on John le Carré's novel of the same name, 'The Russia House' offers Fine Performances, but as a film, its plain ordinary. It does have some captivating moments, but overall, the slow pace & a half-baked Adapted Screenplay, act as a disadvantage.

'The Russia House' Synopsis: An expatriate British publisher unexpectedly finds himself working for British intelligence to investigate people in Russia.

'The Russia House' begins nicely, but loses momentum after 45-minutes into the film. Sure, the second-hour has some interesting moments, but the Writing isn't striking. The Climax, however, works. Tom Stoppard's Adapted Screenplay isn't without merit, but is flawed as well. Also, the slow-pace left me restless at times. Fred Schepisi's Direction is skilled & well-done. Cinematography is excellent. Editing is fair.

Performance-Wise: Sir Sean Connery, with a flawless Russian accent, is in good form. Michelle Pfeiffer, also with a superbly picked-up Russian accent, is natural to the core. Roy Scheider is flawless. He stands out. James Fox is effective. Klaus Maria Brandauer is terrific in a small, but significant role.

On the whole, 'The Russia House' could've been so much more.

"The Russia House" is a film that surprised me. After all, it's an espionage story and stars Sean Connery and a stellar supporting cast. But it's surprising because the film manages to be incredibly dull.

The story begins in Russia. Katya (Michelle Pfeiffer) is looking for Barley (Connery) as she has some books to give this publisher. However, these aren't ordinary books...they contain Russian state secrets about their defense systems! Naturally, MI-6 (the British equivalent of the CIA) is excited and enlists Barley's help to track down the author of these books as well as determine what other secrets they can glean from their Russian 'friend'.

The film has a romance...but it's not all that believable. It also has a wide variety of intrigues...not of which include action of any kind! In other words, the film is quite static...and despite good acting the story just never interested me.

The Russia House is an amazing movie. It captures the majesty of Russia in visits to Moscow and St. Petersburg (Leningrad) as well as the crumbling Soviet state. The first western movie filmed in the Soviet Union, The Russia House is better defined as a love story than as a spy thriller. Do not be concerned however, spy fans. There is plenty of intrigue to be had in this beautiful movie. The interplay between Sean Connery, Roy Scheider and J.T. Walsh in a scene from Vancouver, British Columbia alone is worth the price of admission. However, the true star of this understated romance is James Fox, who plays the British contact for Connery's Scott Blair and the foil for the CIA's Scheider character in such gentlemanly fashion as to make the audience believe the true Bond-style gentleman-spy really does exist in this world. From the beautiful scenery to perhaps the best and most haunting soundtrack of any movie--ever (reviews abound--just look them up, friends--easily the great Jerry Goldsmith's finest work), the Russia House is a truly mysterious and romantic movie.

I have read a few John Le Carre books (although not The Russia House) and was not as impressed as most other people seemed to be. People say that the movie is slow and cerebral (and it is) but really that is how Le Carre's books read. Sean Connery never puts in a bad performance, and neither does Michelle Pfeiffer. And it never hurts that she is sooooo beautiful. Klaus Maria Brandauer is also always good and still is here. The problem is the script, which relates back to the source material. It is a little bit of a bore. Not badly, just a bit. It looks like the filmmakers were so proud to be filming in the USSR, that they went a little overboard. Not every place in Russia is St. Basil's and the Winter Palace. Overall the film is OK.

Katya Orlova (Michelle Pfeiffer) passes along a manuscript intended for minor publisher boozy Barley Blair (Sean Connery). It contains three notebooks from Dante (Klaus Maria Brandauer) showing Russian military secrets and their inferiority. Dante had meet Barley earlier during a party where they connected. British agent Ned (James Fox) and CIA Russell (Roy Scheider) lead the effort to make contact with Dante and determine the validity of the information.

This movie does get a good sense of a period of time in Russia. What is truly missing is a sense of tension. There isn't enough danger for Barley. He's not getting killed. At most, the Americans put a little pressure on him but the problem is that he doesn't care. Like he says, he's not selling them the Picasso. He's really just the delivery boy transporting the Picasso. I struggle to figure out what the danger is for Barley. Obviously, the danger is higher for Katya. I love Michelle Pfeiffer but her Russian accent annoyed me. Also there is little chemistry between her and Sean Connery. Her motives are questionable and he's just an old dude after a hot young thing.

The most interesting relationship in this movie is between Ned and Russell. They have to decide whether this is real or not. Also they have to run the plan. Their positions are on the line which elevates the danger level for them. It seems to me that there is an easy solution to the questions falling into the wrong hands. They could add other questions to the list. While there are interesting aspects to this movie, there is a dangerous lack of tension.

The Russia House

I must confess, this is easily my favourite film. I have watched only a handful of films more than once. This film I have watched at least twenty times but by the time you read this it will be many more since I watch it at least every 6 weeks or so. I sit down with a bottle of genuine Russian vodka, a small tin of red caviar and some hard white bread, I turn up the dolby 5.1 and soak up the experience. Why is this film so good? Well for a start it is from a book by John LeCarre who must be our best living author. Who else researches a book so thoroughly? Every location has been checked, every character totally believable, with an intelligent plot.

Secondly the screenplay by Tom Stoppard is faultless. Having read the book first, I could not believe how faithfully Stoppard made his screenplay- chunks of LeCarre dialogue are faithfully copied. Then there is the acting. There are memorable performances from Sean Connery (Barley) and Michel Pfeiffer(Katya), the beautiful Russian heroine. Klaus Maria Brandauer wins my "best supporting actor" award as the totally believable Russian scientist. There are so many memorable lines of dialogue in this film. Brandauers line "If I will be a hero, will you act like a merely decent human being" always brings a lump to my throat. Barley's tongue in cheek replies to his CIA interrogators are wonderful. What gives this film such a feeling of authenticity are the locations which are all genuine Moscow and St Petersburg. Already Moscow has changed a lot since this film was made. The lovely old National hotel shown in the film has been demolished and replaced with a modern nonentity, so this film is rapidly becoming a piece of history. The buildings are changing but the same faceless KGB operators are still there. How can one flawed man fight the power of the spymasters. Barley shows how to do it. What a hero! Does it have any faults?If only Ken Russell had stuck to directing and left acting to actors.

Interesting adaptation of John Le Carre's spy novel. As with Mr. Le Carre's writing the movie is slow and deliberately paced, letting the plot slowly sink in, and not explode in your face. The casting is dead-on with a frumpy Connery playing a middle-aged British book publisher whose love of Russia draws him in to a very high-stakes espionage caper at the end of the Cold War. Michelle Pfeiffer is also well cast as Katya, his Russian counterpart, i.e., a non-professional also drawn into the spy game. The movie does have a problem in moving the plot along through the all-to-frequent scenes of guys sitting around talking about espionage stuff. But if you like this kind of slow-paced, heavily romantic, thinking man's thriller then give this movie a try.

While on an extended vacation in Soviet Russia, a publishing company manager by the name of "Bartholomew 'Barley' Scott-Blair" (Sean Connery) is approached by a mysterious person named "Dante" (Klaus Maria Brandauer) who seems unusually interested in his anti-nationalist philosophies. Although both flattered and intrigued, he gives it no mind and eventually returns to home in Portugal to continue his work. Not long after that, however, a Russian woman by the name of "Katya Orlova" (Michelle Pfeiffer) approaches a colleague of Bartholomew's named "Nicky Landau" (Nicholas Woodeson) in Moscow and gives him a manuscript to pass on to him. Not knowing how to get in contact with Bartholomew, Nicky hands it over to the British government who suddenly realize that they have in their possession a portion of the entire Soviet nuclear capabilities. Needless to say, this suddenly becomes a matter of great importance and Bartholomew is soon coerced into tracking down Katya in order to find Dante at all costs. Now rather than reveal any more I will just say that this film had an extremely complex plot which was difficult to follow at times. There were also some rather slow scenes here and there along with a noticeable lack of suspense and action as well. Even so, Sean Connery performed in an excellent manner and all things considered I thought that this was a reasonably enjoyable spy movie and have rated it accordingly. Slightly above average.

This has Got to Be one of the Most Subtle Dialog-Driven Spy Movies Ever.

The Production is Superb with Russia On-Location Cinematography.

Celebrating "Glasnost" by way of Cold Grey Skies behind the Extensive Monuments,

with the Liberated Citizenry "Feeling-Out" the Freedom.

Sean Connery and Michelle Pfeiffer Show Chemistry Amongst the Secrets and "Lies" They Deal with in an Overcast World.

The Jazzy Score is Used Throughout as Mood Music as the John Le Carre Novel Unfolds with Very Little Action and even Less "Trade-Craft".

Overall, for Patient Viewers and the Not Easily Distracted, this Can Be a Rewarding, but Very Off-Beat "Spy Movie".

Roy Scheider as a CIA Operative and the Other Spys do just that...

Spy from Sound-Proof Rooms with Plenty of Booze and Easy-Chairs.

"Field Operatives" Don't have Much to Do in this Wordy, and Sometimes Witty Film.

That Could be a Way to Describe this "Cold-War-End" Outing...

Boozy and Easy

In the End the Professionalism from All Involved,

Brings a Rather Unique Viewing Experience in a Genre that Does Not Usually Embrace this Kind of Espionage-Romance.

Worth a Watch.

In years of listening to soundtracks, I have never been disappointed in a Jerry Goldsmith composition. It's almost frightening to realize his credits number over 250, he's *still* putting out 2-4 compositions a year, and they're *still* of a calibre so many composers shoot for...and miss. This gentleman has a never-ending supply, for which I am eternally grateful.

I literally wore out my first cassette tape from this film, and was on the way to wearing out the replacement when it was nicked. The third is on its last legs, too.

Beautiful music? Beyond that. I once described this heart-melting, soul-stirring, I-think-I'll-swoon music as "better than ---"

Ah, well, in case the editors are watching, I'm sure you can figure it out. (There's a chocolate cake recipe by the same name, if you need a hint.)

If the plot of the movie is too much to follow, as some people have noted (hey, after work, the complexities of a Mighty Mouse cartoon are often beyond me), my advice is to pop the soundtrack into the CD/cassette player and decompress. It's my absolute favourite wine and cheese music.

Then, when you're conscious the next day, tackle the plotline. It's worth a watch.

Russia House should have been a great film. Certainly with spirit of glasnost prevailing at the time, the western crews who came to the soon to be extinct Soviet Union to make this film got some great location cinematography of Leningrad, Moscow and other points of interest on the European continent. Sean Connery's name heading the cast should have guaranteed box office and I'm sure a few people paid for movie tickets for Russia House.

Unfortunately what they got was one two hour long boring story. Connery is a book publisher who gets a manuscript from a Russian scientist telling the truth about their defense capabilities. Of course the spy agencies from the UK and the USA find out about it and enlist Connery in some dangerous games to prove the authenticity of the manuscript.

This is a spy story with no guns, no gadgets, but unfortunately no real story. Totally unlike other John LeCarre stories done for the screen like The Spy Who Came In From the Cold or Smiley's People. Try as I might I just could not get into this film, not even for Sean Connery.

Michelle Pheiffer is the go between for the Russian scientist and Connery the publisher. A little May/December romance evolves between Connery and Pheiffer, but it doesn't save the story.

If you're expecting James Bond from Russia House, don't bother. But I can't say see it if you expect something like The Spy Who Came In From the Cold.

Despite certain divergences in character and plot, this movie version of "The Russia House" does do justice to John Le Carre's twisted tale. Perhaps this is because so much of Hollywood shares Le Carre's own moral obtuseness -- wishing bureaucratic tyranny upon the rest of the world, while insulating itself with money.

Le Carre cannot tell the difference between West and East, between the bumbling mediocrity of western bureaucracies, and the unremitting evil of the Soviet bureaus, which owned everything in the evil empire, right down to peoples' souls. "The Russia House" was the first of his many post Cold War novels to make it clear that he could not, or would not.

Yet the man does write brilliantly. Le Carre is one of the great masters of English prose. Therefore one can almost forgive his blockheadedness, while one enjoys his rich descriptions, his twisted characters, and his sharp storytelling. It's only the morning after finishing one of his novels, or the hour after watching a movie adaptation such as this, that one's head begins to throb with the bitter, pointless, imbecility of his world view.

The cast of "The Russia House," headlined by Sean Connery and Michelle Pfeiffer, is superb, with one glaring exception -- Roy Scheider in pancake makeup is simply not plausible as a CIA manager, even mid level. By contrast James Woods does an excellent job as his opposite number in British Intelligence (with support from a young Michael Kitchen, now the graying star of "Foyle's War"). But this movie is mainly worth watching for the engaging lead performances by Connery and Pfeiffer, even though (or perhaps because) they play their characters quite differently than they were drawn in the book.

The location photography is excellent, with nice views of Lisbon, and many long sequences shot in Moscow and Leningrad. Moscow looks nearly deserted, a graphic reminder that the official Soviet population figure, 5 million, was overstated by at least a factor of seven (according to Robert Heinlein).

There are interludes of wistful jazz woven seamlessly into the story, but much of the rest of the musical score is loud and distracting, especially toward the end. I suppose it was intended to induce anxiety in viewers who could not follow what was happening in the complicated plot. The director should have stuck with the jazz.

*

By far the best screen adaptation of a Le Carre novel is "The Little Drummer Girl" directed by George Roy Hill. It is one of the best movies ever made.

A very good movie that shows an intimate slice of life in the Soviet Union is the French film "East-West" (Est-Ouest).

I read John LeCarre's book and I never thought a movie version could be as boring, but somehow, it was.

Sean Connery is expectedly appealing, but one can tell he only did this movie so he could get a free trip to Russia. Michelle Pfeiffer is cute, though she appears to have bitten off more than she can chew here. Nice Russian cityscapes, but the musical soundtrack drones on endlessly in the background. It would be difficult to recommend this film over LeCarre's novel - both are convoluted.

One of those flicks where you can fall asleep for 10 minutes and then wake up with the feeling that you haven't missed anything. Snooze City.

Admittedly, The Russia House may not be for all tastes, but I saw this when I was 15 when it came out in the theaters and I loved it then and I love it now.

If you go in expecting this to be a James Bond/Simon Templar/North By Northwest type movie, you'll be GRAVELY disappointed. Needless to say, the movie is dialogue driven and the performances are great. Sean Connery (my all-time favorite) gives a nice performance in a role that isn't typical Connery. Michelle Pfeiffer (my favorite actress) is equally excellent. I kept looking for her to flub her Russian accent, but she's on target from start to finish.

The supporting players: Roy Scheider, who I also love, is awesome. There's a lot of witty dialogue in this film, but Scheider has some of the film's most memorable ones. Ken Russell, the controversial director, has an equally memorable, witty role as "Walter". I own this movie, but between the time I saw it in the theaters and the time I bought it a year and half ago, Russell was one of the things about the movie that really stood out in my memory of the film. And of course, James Fox who's always great.

Not really a supporting player but it might as well be is the LOCATIONS. Wow, really breathtaking stuff. Fred Schepsi did a wondrous job with the locations, and the CAMERA. The cinematography and locations were first-rate. And if that wasn't enough, I was equally enthralled with the jazzy musical score. If it isn't already apparent, I love this movie, and I absolutely recommend it.

It has a nice blend of dialogue, plot, romance and humor. I reiterate: Not for all tastes given that many may find it slow, but definitely worth a look. Hope you all enjoy it as much as I did.

I didn't expect much from this movie but still it was surprisingly bad. I mean it doesn't do anything for you. It doesn't make you laugh, cry, excited, afraid or anything. The romance between Pfeiffer and Connery isn't very convincing. There are good actors in this movie and they are all wasting their time. Even Connery, he's starting only to annoy with his ssshhh. There are no great feelings in this movie, it's not comedy, thriller, drama, it is just a movie. And too long, nothing happens in two hours. Only funny thing in the film is that there is Martin Clunes from Men Behaving Badly in a role with no lines. But as I said The Russia House is a pointless movie.

I gave it 3/10, perhaps even that's too much.