Tribeca Film via Everett Collection
For a film that involves a love triangle, mental illness, a Bohemian colony of free-spirits, an impending war and several important historical figures, the most exciting elements of Summer in February are the stunning shots of the English country and Cornish seaside. The rest of the film never quite lives up to the crashing waves and sun-dappled meadows that are used to bookend the scenes, as the entertaining opening never manages to coalesce into a story that lives up the the cinematography, let alone the lives of the people that inspired it.
Set in an Edwardian artist’s colony in Cornwall, Summer in February tells the story of A.J. Munnings (Dominic Cooper), who went on to become one of the most famous painters of his day and head of the Royal Academy of Art, his best friend, estate agent and part-time soldier Gilbert Evans (Dan Stevens), and the woman whom they both loved, aspiring artist Florence Carter-Wood (Emily Browning). Her marriage to Munnings was an extremely unhappy one, and she attempted suicide on their honeymoon, before killing herself in 1914. According to his journals, Gilbert and Florence were madly in love, although her marriage and his service in the army kept them apart.
When the film begins, Munnings is the center of attention in the Lamorna Artist's Colony, dramatically reciting poetry at parties and charming his way out of his bar tab while everyone around him proclaims him to be a genius. When he’s not drinking or painting, he’s riding horses with Gilbert, who has the relatively thankless task of keeping this group of Bohemians in line. Their idyllic existence is disrupted by the arrival of Florence, who has run away from her overbearing father and the fiancé he had picked out for her in order to become a painter.
Stevens and Browning both start the film solidly, with enough chemistry between them to make their infatuation interesting. He manages to give Gilbert enough dependable charm to win over both Florence and the audience, and she presents Florence as someone with enough spunk and self-possession to go after what she wants. Browning’s scenes with Munnings are equally entertaining in the first third of the film, as she can clearly see straight through all of his bravado and he is intrigued by her and how difficult she is to impress. Unfortunately, while the basis of the love triangle is well-established and entertaining, it takes a sudden turn into nothing with a surprise proposal from Munnings.
Neither the film nor Browning ever make it clear why Florence accepts his proposal, especially when they have both taken great pains to establish that she doesn’t care much for him. But once she does, the films stalls, and both Stevens and Browning spend the rest of the film doing little more than staring moodily and longingly at the people around them. The real-life Florence was plagued by depression and mental instability, but neither the film nor Browning’s performance ever manage to do more than give the subtlest hint at that darkness. On a few occasions, Browning does manage to portray a genuine anguish, but rather than producing any sympathy from the audience, it simply conjures up images of a different film, one that focused more on Florence, and the difficulties of being a woman with a mental illness at a time when both were ignored or misunderstood.
Stevens is fine, and Gilbert starts out with the same kind of good-guy appeal the won the heart of Mary Crawley and Downton Abbey fans the world over. However, once the film stalls, so does his performance, and he quickly drops everything that made the character attractive or interesting in favor of longing looks and long stretches of inactivity. He does portray a convincing amount of adoration for Florence, although that's about the only real emotion that Gilbert expresses for the vast majority of the film, and even during his love scene, he never manages to give him any amount of passion.
Cooper does his best with what he’s given, and tries his hardest to imbue the film with some substance and drama. His Munnings is by turns charming, brash, and brooding, the kind of person who has been told all of their life that they are special, and believes it. He even manages to give the character some depth, and even though he and Browning have very little chemistry, he manages to convey a genuine affection for her. It’s a shame that Munnings becomes such a deeply unlikable character, because Cooper is the only thing giving Summer in February a jolt of life – even if it comes via bursts of thinly-explained hostility. It's hard to watch just how hard he's working to connect with his co-stars and add some excitement to a lifeless script and not wish that he had a better film to show off his talents in.
Unfortunately, by the time Florence and Gilbert are finally spurred into activity, the film has dragged on for so long that you’re no longer invested in the characters, their pain, or their love story, even if you want to be. Which is the real disappointment of Summer in February; underneath the stalled plot and the relatively one-note acting, there are glimmers of a fascinating and compelling story that’s never allowed to come to the forefront.
Lions Gate via Everett Collection
When we last left our heroes, they had conquered all opponents in the 74th Annual Hunger Games, returned home to their newly refurbished living quarters in District 12, and fallen haplessly to the cannibalism of PTSD. And now we're back! Hitching our wagons once again to laconic Katniss Everdeen and her sweet-natured, just-for-the-camera boyfriend Peeta Mellark as they gear up for a second go at the Capitol's killing fields.
But hold your horses — there's a good hour and a half before we step back into the arena. However, the time spent with Katniss and Peeta before the announcement that they'll be competing again for the ceremonial Quarter Quell does not drag. In fact, it's got some of the film franchise's most interesting commentary about celebrity, reality television, and the media so far, well outweighing the merit of The Hunger Games' satire on the subject matter by having Katniss struggle with her responsibilities as Panem's idol. Does she abide by the command of status quo, delighting in the public's applause for her and keeping them complacently saturated with her smiles and curtsies? Or does Katniss hold three fingers high in opposition to the machine into which she has been thrown? It's a quarrel that the real Jennifer Lawrence would handle with a castigation of the media and a joke about sandwiches, or something... but her stakes are, admittedly, much lower. Harvey Weinstein isn't threatening to kill her secret boyfriend.
Through this chapter, Katniss also grapples with a more personal warfare: her devotion to Gale (despite her inability to commit to the idea of love) and her family, her complicated, moralistic affection for Peeta, her remorse over losing Rue, and her agonizing desire to flee the eye of the public and the Capitol. Oftentimes, Katniss' depression and guilty conscience transcends the bounds of sappy. Her soap opera scenes with a soot-covered Gale really push the limits, saved if only by the undeniable grace and charisma of star Lawrence at every step along the way of this film. So it's sappy, but never too sappy.
In fact, Catching Fire is a masterpiece of pushing limits as far as they'll extend before the point of diminishing returns. Director Francis Lawrence maintains an ambiance that lends to emotional investment but never imposes too much realism as to drip into territories of grit. All of Catching Fire lives in a dreamlike state, a stark contrast to Hunger Games' guttural, grimacing quality that robbed it of the life force Suzanne Collins pumped into her first novel.
Once we get to the thunderdome, our engines are effectively revved for the "fun part." Katniss, Peeta, and their array of allies and enemies traverse a nightmare course that seems perfectly suited for a videogame spin-off. At this point, we've spent just enough time with the secondary characters to grow a bit fond of them — deliberately obnoxious Finnick, jarringly provocative Johanna, offbeat geeks Beedee and Wiress — but not quite enough to dissolve the mystery surrounding any of them or their true intentions (which become more and more enigmatic as the film progresses). We only need adhere to Katniss and Peeta once tossed in the pit of doom that is the 75th Hunger Games arena, but finding real characters in the other tributes makes for a far more fun round of extreme manhunt.
But Catching Fire doesn't vie for anything particularly grand. It entertains and engages, having fun with and anchoring weight to its characters and circumstances, but stays within the expected confines of what a Hunger Games movie can be. It's a good one, but without shooting for succinctly interesting or surprising work with Katniss and her relationships or taking a stab at anything but the obvious in terms of sending up the militant tyrannical autocracy, it never even closes in on the possibility of being a great one.
Follow @Michael Arbeiter
| Follow @Hollywood_com
For years, March was a month that fared little better than the box office wastelands of January and February. After the endless rom-coms and schmaltzy dramas would come the awful horror flicks, cheesy kids movies, and thrown-together comedies, a slowly rising slope up to the big box office successes of May and the following summer months.
Enter the year 2012, when The Hunger Games (over $408 million total and over $150 million on opening weekend), Dr. Suess' The Lorax with an opening of $70 million, and even the hilarious, clever comedy 21 Jump Street (just over $138 million total) swooped in and made all the March numbers that came before them look bad. Now, with Disney's James Franco-starrer Oz the Great and Powerful raking in the highest weekend box office numbers of 2013 with $80, 278,000 (for context, that's not far from November 2012's mammoth Skyfall box office numbers which came in at just over $88 million), a question starts to arise: is March the next big movie month?
RELATED: 'Oz' Proves to Be 'Great and Powerful' at the Box Office
The answer isn’t exactly cut and dry for many reasons, the most important of which is that Oz is just the first of many opportunities for big box office bucks this month. Still, its earnings do make it the third-highest March opening weekend in history and when the box office totals from March 2011 to March 2012 have increased by a whopping 73.9 percent, according to numbers from Hollywood.com's own Paul Dergarabedian, in addition to 2012 seeing the biggest single March box office success in The Hunger Games, it’s worth taking a look at the month's potential for further greatness.
In the past, March has proved a fertile spot for films that might have had trouble standing out in great expectations periods during summer and late fall. A quick look at the two films standing between Oz and the top spot as March's biggest ever release, are The Hunger Games at number one and the Disney 3D adventure Alice in Wonderland at number two, with a record $116 million and change during its 2010 debut.
The easiest comparison is that of Alice to Oz. Both visually stunning Disney flicks debuted in March, a sort of safe place for films whose premises may not be able to compete with the action and superhero power of a May or July movie. But the safety of a March release also provides fertile ground for potential expansion upon each fantasy flick. After seeing a billion dollars worth of international success, Alice was slated for a sequel almost immediately, and though Disney's potential dollars bonanza has yet to secure returns from director Tim Burton or star Johnny Depp, the film is still on its way. And after a strong opening weekend like Oz's, a sequel isn't far behind (after all, the continuation of this tale makes just about as much sense as the sequelization of Alice's journey). In fact, the Mouse House was already on track to develop a sequel before audiences flocked to the theaters this past weekend.
RELATED: 'Oz The Great and Powerful' and The Possibilities For the Sequel
The Hunger Games enjoyed a similar, but far more fruitful debut. Suzanne Collins' Young Adult fiction series had already sold 26 million copies when the film adaption was released to a mass audience, so its success was fairly expected. For the violent story of young people killing each other in a heartless national gameshow, March served as the perfect place for a trial offering to a wider audience. The film, whose plot wasn't exactly accessible, may have been swallowed up in a more saturated month, but in March, it served as the event for the first half of 2012. It's this financial success that allowed its sequel The Hunger Games: Catching Fire to shift to the covetted Thanksgiving weekend release slot formerly enjoyed by big-time adaptations like many films from the Harry Potter series and The Twilight Saga: New Moon in 2009.
And while the Alice in Wonderland slot has already been filled by this year's Oz, the potential for a high-grossing Young Adult adaptation and flashy, 3D kids cartoon are still up for grabs.
March has been a fertile month for fantastical computer-animated cartoons with big-name stars for years, going back to Ice Age in 2002, its sequel Ice Age: The Meltdown in 2006, and even the soon-to-be-sequelized How to Train Your Dragon in 2010, all of which have been splintered off into cartoon series and one-off DVD movies as well. With the exception of 2012’s Hunger Games sensation, the last five years have been won by kid stuff (with the exception of Alice in Wonderland, though it was arguably a bit of a hybrid of a goofy kids cartoon and a stylized action movie — don’t blame me, blame the Futterwacken). And since 2009, those big flicks are always presented in 3D, adding even more money to their sizable incomes. Even last year, The Lorax presented an opportunity for a little quick 3D cash (over $214 million in total). In 2013, The Croods, a visually stunning cro magnon-man tale featuring top of the line 3D animation and the voices of Emma Stone and Ryan Reynolds steps up to try to take up the mantle of its Dreamworks Animation predecessors. And while its premise doesn't have the nostalgic draw of The Lorax, it could be creative enough to pull in Dragon-level numbers (the Dreamworks flick raked in a total of $217,581,231 in 2010).
And on the Young Adult front comes an adaptation of Twilight mogul Stephenie Meyer's followup to her vampire saga, the alien romance The Host. While The Host doesn't include an audience as robust as Twilight or Collins' Hunger Games series, which was out in completion before the films even started rolling, it does bear Meyer's name which is inextricably tied to the concept of consuming romantic drama. Plus, the book did spend 26 weeks on the New York Times Best Seller list. It has an audience — though the rabidness of that audience is less certain.
Where the Hunger Games' March release was taking advantage of the March market, taking the chance to be the big fish in the small pond, The Host is a little more of a gamble, banking on the hope that Meyer's name can help get viewers past the complicated alien plot and into the turbulent romantic world of the author's latest heroine. The placement of The Host in this month further solidifies March as an exciting moment in the carousel of new releases each year.
RELATED: 'Oz' Earns $24.1 Million On Its First Friday
March has become the place for the potential next big thing. In 2010, Alice in Wonderland was bested in overall box office only by Toy Story 3. Despite critical opinions, the film out-grossed Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 1, Inception, The Twilight Saga: Eclipse, and Iron Man 2 that year. Likewise, in 2012 The Hunger Games enjoyed a bigger opening weekend than Twilight's saga-ending Breaking Dawn Part 1, and the Jennifer-Lawrence-starrer was bested only by the trilogy-ending The Dark Knight Rises ($158,411,483 in its first weekend) and Marvel's The Avengers (a staggering $207 million in its first few days).
If the past few years have taught us anything, the year's biggest movies don't just hit during the summertime and during holidays anymore. March has gotten in on that game and in a big way. From now on, it appears we can look to March as the breeding ground for potential hits and phenomena, and while it doesn't hold the guaranteed income of a Thanksgiving weekend, it's proved that it can yield something just a great and, in some cases, even greater.
Follow Kelsea on Twitter @KelseaStahler
[Photo Credit: Walt Disney Pictures (2); Open Road Films]
You Might Also Like:Topanga's Revealing Lingerie Shoot: Hello '90s! 15 Stars Share Secrets of their Sex Lives (Celebuzz)
The 1950s and 60s afforded Hollywood a golden era of musical cinema, cranking out pristine classics like The Music Man and Carousel. Sadly, a veteran of this period of the movie industry has reportedly passed away: Susan Luckey, former film, stage, and television actress from this age of genre benchmarks. TMZ states that the 74-year-old Luckey, born Suzanne Douglas, died on Wednesday, Nov. 29, of "old age." The news was revealed to TMZ by Luckey's daughter, Shayna Reynolds.
Luckey began her film career in 1954 with an uncredited role in Deep in My Heart (a comedic biography of composer Sigmund Romberg). Following this, Luckey earned supporting parts in the likes of Carousel, Teenage Rebel, The Music Man, and Step Out of Your Mind, which marked her final big screen performance in '66. She is pictured above (center) as Zaneeta Shinn, daughter of Paul Ford's mayor character in The Music Man. Luckey also took roles in the TV movie Annie Get Your Gun and a televised Broadway production of Peter Pan. Additionally, she contributed guest appearances to series like The George Burns and Gracie Allen Show and Telephone Time.
The former actress married actor Larry Douglas (Girls Are For Loving) in 1964. He passed away in 1996.
[Photo Credit: Everett Collection]
Hugh Hefner Re-Engaged to 'Runaway Bride' Crystal Harris
Jenelle Evans, 'Teen Mom 2' Star, Gets Married
'Bachelorette' Couple Ashley Hebert and J.P. Rosenbaum: Married!
From Our Partners:
Harry Styles Spotted Outside Taylor Swift’s Hotel Room The Morning After Their Date Night (PHOTOS)
Fall Bikini Bodies: The Good, The Great, The OMG (GALLERY)
A decade-long gap between sequels could leave a franchise stale but in the case of Men in Black 3 it's the launch pad for an unexpectedly great blockbuster. The kooky antics of Agent J (Will Smith) and Agent K (Tommy Lee Jones) don't stray far from their 1997 and 2002 adventures but without a bombardment of follow-ups to keep the series in mind the wonderfully weird sensibilities of Men in Black feel fresh Smith's natural charisma once again on full display. Barry Sonnenfeld returns for the threequel another space alien romp with a time travel twist — which turns out to be Pandora's Box for the director's deranged imagination.
As time passed in the real world so did it for the timeline in the world of Men in Black. Picking up ten years after MIB 2 J and K are continuing to protect the Earth from alien threats and enforce the law on those who live incognito. While dealing with their own personal issues — K is at his all-time crabbiest for seemingly no reason — the suited duo encounter an old enemy Boris the Animal (Jemaine Clement) a prickly assassin seeking revenge on K who blew his arm off back in the '60s. Their street fight is more of a warning; Boris' real plan is to head back in time to save his arm and kill off K. He's successful prompting J to take his own leap through the time-space continuum — and team up with a younger K (Josh Brolin) to put an end to Boris plans for world domination.
Men in Black 3 is the Will Smith show. Splitting his time between the brick personalities of Jones and Brolin's K Smith struts his stuff with all the fast-talking comedic style that made him a star in yesteryears. In present day he's still the laid back normal guy in a world of oddities — J raises an eyebrow as new head honcho O (Emma Thompson) delivers a eulogy in a screeching alien tongue but coming up with real world explanations for flying saucer crashes comes a little easier. But back in 1969 he's an even bigger fish out water. Surprisingly director Barry Sonnenfeld and writer Etan Cohen dabble in the inherent issues that would spring up if a black gentlemen decked out in a slick suit paraded around New York in the late '60s. A star of Smith's caliber may stray away from that type of racy humor but the hook of Men in Black 3 is the actor's readiness for anything. He turns J's jokey anachronisms into genuine laughs and doesn't mind letting the special effect artists stretch him into an unrecognizable Twizzler for the movie's epic time jump sequence.
Unlike other summer blockbusters Men in Black 3 is light on the action Sonnenfeld utilizing his effects budget and dazzling creature work (by the legendary Rick Baker) to push the comedy forward. J's fight with an oversized extraterrestrial fish won't keep you on the edge of your seat but his slapstick escape and the marine animal's eventual demise are genuinely amusing. Sonnenfeld carries over the twisted sensibilities he displayed in small screen work like Pushing Daisies favoring bizarre banter and elaborating on the kookiness of the alien underworld than battle scenes. MIB3's chase scene is passable but the movie in its prime when Smith is sparring with Brolin and newcomer Michael Stuhlbarg who steals the show as a being capable of seeing the future. His twitchy character keeps Smith and the audience on their toes.
Men in Black 3 digs up nostalgia I wasn't aware I had. Smith's the golden boy of summer and even with modern ingenuity keeping it fresh — Sonnenfeld uses the mandatory 3D to full and fun effect — there's an element to the film that feels plucked from another era. The movie is economical and slight with plenty of lapses in logic that will provoke head scratching on the walk out of the theater but it's also perfectly executed. After ten years of cinematic neutralizing the folks behind Men in Black haven't forgotten what made the first movie work so well. After al these years Smith continues to make the goofy plot wild spectacle and crazed alien antics look good.
In a post-Harry Potter Avatar and Lord of the Rings world the descriptors "sci-fi" and "fantasy" conjure up particular imagery and ideas. The Hunger Games abolishes those expectations rooting its alternate universe in a familiar reality filled with human characters tangible environments and terrifying consequences. Computer graphics are a rarity in writer/director Gary Ross' slow-burn thriller wisely setting aside effects and big action to focus on star Jennifer Lawrence's character's emotional struggle as she embarks on the unthinkable: a 24-person death match on display for the entire nation's viewing pleasure. The final product is a gut-wrenching mature young adult fiction adaptation diffused by occasional meandering but with enough unexpected choices to keep audiences on their toes.
Panem a reconfigured post-apocalyptic America is sectioned off into 12 unique districts and ruled under an iron thumb by the oppressive leaders of The Capitol. To keep the districts producing their specific resources and prevent them from rebelling The Capitol created The Hunger Games an annual competition pitting two 18-or-under "tributes" from each district in a battle to the death. During the ritual tribute "Reaping " teenage Katniss (Lawrence) watches as her 12-year-old sister Primrose is chosen for battle—and quickly jumps to her aid becoming the first District 12 citizen to volunteer for the games. Joined by Peeta (Josh Hutcherson) a meek baker's son and the second tribute Effie the resident designer and Haymitch a former Hunger Games winner-turned-alcoholic-turned-mentor Katniss rides off to The Capitol to train and compete in the 74th Annual Hunger Games.
The greatest triumph of The Hunger Games is Ross' rich realization of the book's many worlds: District 12 is painted as a reminiscent Southern mining town haunting and vibrant; The Capitol is a utopian metropolis obsessed with design and flair; and The Hunger Games battleground is a sprawling forest peppered with Truman Show-esque additions that remind you it's all being controlled by overseers. The small-scale production value adds to the character-first approach and even when the story segues to larger arenas like a tickertape parade in The Capitol's grand Avenue of Tributes hall it's all about Katniss.
For fans the script hits every beat a nearly note-for-note interpretation of author Suzanne Collins' original novel—but those unfamiliar shouldn't worry about missing anything. Ross knows his way around a sharp screenplay (he's the writer of Big Pleasantville and Seabiscuit) and he's comfortable dropping us right into the action. His characters are equally as colorful as Panem Harrelson sticking out as the former tribute enlivened by the chance to coach winners. He's funny he's discreet he's shaded—a quality all the cast members share. As a director Ross employs a distinct often-grating perspective. His shaky cam style emphasizes the reality of the story but in fight scenarios—and even simple establishing shots of District 12's goings-on—the details are lost in motion blur.
But the dread of the scenario is enough to make Hunger Games an engrossing blockbuster. The lead-up to the actual competition is an uncomfortable and biting satire of reality television sports and everything that commands an audience in modern society. Katniss' brooding friend Gale tells her before she departs "What if nobody watched?" speculating that carnage might end if people could turn away. Unfortunately they can't—forcing Katniss and Peeta to become "stars" of the Hunger Games. The duo are pushed to gussy themselves up put on a show and play up their romance for better ratings. Lawrence channels her reserved Academy Award-nominated Winter's Bone character to inhabit Katniss' frustration with the system. She's great at hunting but she doesn't want to kill. She's compassionate and considerate but has no interest in bowing down to the system. She's a leader but she knows full well she's playing The Capitol's game. Even with 23 other contestants vying for the top spot—like American Idol with machetes complete with Ryan Seacrest stand-in Caesar Flickerman (the dazzling Stanley Tucci)—Katniss' greatest hurdle is internal. A brave move for a movie aimed at a young audience.
By the time the actual Games roll around (the movie clocks in at two and a half hours) there's a need to amp up the pace that never comes and The Hunger Games loses footing. Katniss' goal is to avoid the action hiding in trees and caves waiting patiently for the other tributes to off themselves—but the tactic isn't all that thrilling for those watching. Luckily Lawrence Hutcherson and the ensemble of young actors still deliver when they cross paths and particular beats pack all the punch an all-out deathwatch should. PG-13 be damned the film doesn't skimp on the bloodshed even when it comes to killing off children. The Hunger Games bites off a lot for the first film of a franchise and does so bravely and boldly. It may not make it to the end alive but it doesn't go down without a fight.
Enigmatic and deliberate Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy makes no reservations while unraveling its heady spy story for better or worse. The film based on the bestselling novel by John Le Carre is purposefully perplexing effectively mirroring the central character George Smiley's (Gary Oldman) own mind-bending investigation of the British MI6's mole problem. But the slow burn pacing clinical shooting style and air of intrigue only go so far—Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy sports an incredible cast that can't dramatically translate the movie's impenetrable narrative. Almost from the get go the movie collapses under its own weight.
After a botched mission in Hungary that saw his colleague Jim (Mark Strong) gunned down in the streets Smiley and his boss Control (John Hurt) are released from the "Circus" (codename for England's Secret Intelligence Service). But soon after Smiley is brought back on board as an impartial observer tasked to uncover the possible infiltration of the organization. The former agent already dealing with the crippling of his own marriage attempts to sift through the history and current goings on of the Circus narrowing his hunt down to four colleagues: Percy aka "Tinker" (Toby Jones) Bill aka "Tailor" (Colin Firth) Roy aka "Soldier" (Ciaran Hinds) and Toy aka "Poor Man" (David Dencik). Working with Peter (Benedict Cumberbatch) a conflicted younger member of the service and Ricki (Tom Hardy) a rogue agent who has information of his own Smiley slowly uncovers the muddled truth—occasionally breaking in to his own work place and crossing his own friends to do so.
Describing Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy as dense doesn't seem complicated enough. The first hour of the monster mystery moves at a sloth's pace trickling out information like the tedious drips of a leaky faucet. The talent on display is undeniable but the characters Smiley included are so cold that a connection can never be made. TTSS sporadically jumps around from past to present timelines without any indication: a tactic that proves especially confusing when scenes play out in reoccurring locations. It's not until halfway through that the movie decides to kick into high gear Smiley's search for a culprit finally becoming clear enough to thrill. A film that takes its time is one thing but Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy does so without any edge or hook.
What the movie lacks in coherency it makes up for in style and thespian gravitas. Director Tomas Alfredson has assembled some of the finest British performers working today and they turn the script's inaccessible spy jargon into poetry. Firth stands out as the group's suave slimeball a departure from his usual nice guy roles. Hardy assures us he's the next big thing once again as the agency's resident moppet a lover who breaks down after a romantic fling uncovers horrifying truth. Oldman is given the most difficult task of the bunch turning the reserved contemplative Smiley into a real human. He half succeeds—his observational slant in the beginning feels like an extension of the movie's bigger problems but once gets going in the second half of the film he's quite a bit of fun.
Alfredson constructs Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy like a cinematic architect each frame dripping with perfectly kitschy '70s production design and camera angles that make the spine tingle. He creates paranoia through framing similar to the Coppola's terrifying The Conversation but unlike that film TTSS doesn't have the characters or story to match. The movie strives to withhold information and succeeds—too much so. Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy wants us to solve a mystery with George Smiley but it never clues us in to exactly why we should want to.