Nonureva Really Surprised!

Hadrina The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

Tayloriona Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

Stephanie There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

Lumiere-5 SO I just watched the film version of Jean LaCarre's *A Murder of Quality*. I liked the way the book ended better. However, it did prove something I had been saying for a long time: that Gary Oldman made a TERRIBLE George Smiley. He does not look right and he does not act right. You see, I'm a HUGE Smioley fan and, like most, I'm a fan from the books. Smiley is described as a funny little man and a disheveled Oxford Don. He has great humor about him that masks a great rage, and his rage is righteous, almost zealous. He is a champion in a battle between good and evil, and he hates the fact that he is constantly doing evil in the name of good. Oldman was wrong physically and was wrong in temperament. Eliot, a great if often overlooked British Actor, plays that switch between humor and rage perfectly, and he looks like a funny little Oxford Don. When I read that Elliot played smiley in this version I knew it would be great, because his turn as Marcus Brody in the Indiana Jones movies had all of Smiley's humor and the Oxford don clichés without his cunning or his rage.In addition to Elliot, the movie has a terrific cast, including Joss Ackland at his sonorous best, Glenda Jackson, and a very young Christian Bale in a pivotal role (this was right before Newsies and a couple years after Henry V). It has that typical made for TV British mystery plodding, and one or two incredibly poor digital mats, but I really liked it.

whist A disappointing film – neither fish nor fowl. Although it's a Le Carre story with George Smiley in the leading role, it's not a spy story. Instead, it's a conventional detective story set in a stuffy English public school. The characters and their motivations are not complex or shadowy. Nor is there anything original about the plot. If you extracted Smiley and inserted Poirot you'd hardly notice the difference, except maybe for the vagueness of the period – is MoQ set in the 1940s, 50s, 60s? If you're expecting a film on par with Spy who Came in from the Cold or Looking Glass War, you'll likely be disappointed. I was.

petsteph1 I saw this recently and remembered how good English TV drama can be. Denholm Elliot's Smiley is so good that I didn't even feel urged to compare it with Alec Guinness'. They both took the character on so well that in each case it was a very complete performance. They both captured the deceptively calm and inoffensive persona - and the sharp biting anger that seems to come from nowhere. The story is good, the mood and supporting cast are all tops. Some of the answers to the mystery can be picked up early on but who cares? The entire production is so well crafted that it's a pleasure just watching it all roll out scene by scene.

bonney A murder of an instructors' wife (at a seemingly second rate public school in England) brings out George Smiley. The plot gives the director the chance to bring out the best and the worst of the British class system. All delivered in quick, almost incomprehensible-to-American-ears, English. Very intellectual - very elegant. And Denholm Elliott (as Smiley) was such a superb actor, you wonder how he could live with himself!