A Guerra no Espelho

The film is part allegory on the WWII betrayal of Poland by the United States (under FDR) and Britain, which like the main character (now obscure cult icon) Christopher Jones is used and then abandoned. Not to spoil, I will just mention there is a nice one-liner quote from one of the character that touches on both main themes in one shot. (Have to now read the John le Carré novel to see if it's in there or from the screenwriting). The location migrates from Great Britain in the half to East Germany in the second. The main character Leiser (Christopher Jones) is a Pole who is recruited and exploited for the UK government/military war-related mission (locating rockets) and who is sent to East Germany (hostile) in return for promise of citizenship.

The other major theme is a straightforward counterculture anti-war mongering theme, but certainly not presented in a cliche manner - quite the opposite and film must be viewed to its full conclusion to witness. Very simple and digestable theme for any viewer to get, regardless if they are educated in deeper history or not. So the film is effective thematically without knowing the deeper obscure 'classified' references.

It's a straightforward thriller with a very clear mission, easy to follow in plot, and that develops into an especially interesting artistic form in its second half. The ending is effective and somewhat poignant final scene, where the main impact and revelation is experienced.

There is a good amount of symbolism buried within the film as well, which makes for a film worthwhile of subsequent viewing for film students. Film also has two large act with a shorter final conclusion, which swap locations and style. Lots of film technique, very subtlely presented and well-structured.

The cast is fantastic starring Christopher Jones, but also a younger prime Anthony Hopkins, Pia Degermark and even Susan George in an important scene.

A pleasant surprise representing buried and hidden historical allegory, but also for its equally noble anti-war theme --- both symbiotic and written with perfect synthesis.

I cannot speak for the book as far as adaptation, but knowing the history and war references as well as being literate and a fan of counterculture era film, this hit the mark. And it even makes me want to read the book as well.

Very interesting film. Obscure, subdued. Significant.

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.)

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.

No, the movie didn't suck me in. I got sucked into watching it by some highly favorable comments. I should have paid more attention to the ratings.

If you want to watch LeCarre, there are much better examples than this. The pacing is completely off in this movie; as soon as something interesting starts, it is truncated for irrelevant meanderings. Apparently the director wanted to make this a "mood piece" rather than an action movie, and as a result, it never develops any momentum or suspense.

On balance, this is just a somewhat disappointing period piece. Watchable, but nothing more.