Titreenp SERIOUSLY. This is what the crap Hollywood still puts out?

Actuakers One of my all time favorites.

Dynamixor The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

Seraherrera The movie is wonderful and true, an act of love in all its contradictions and complexity

pawebster It's boring. The plot is unconvincing and doesn't really make sense. The characters are either clichés or lacklustre (or both). Charlie Cox is amiable, but is that enough? Andrew Scott has an accent like none you've ever heard before. It's Russian as generated by Stephen Hawking's voice simulator. At one point Cox's character visits a golf course and finds a suitcase full of nuclear blueprints buried (at most) three inches down in the sand of a bunker. (It had been too difficult for Andrew Scott's character to find.) Right there he takes out the secret plans and starts reading them. It's supposed to be 1974 - but which season(s)? The power cuts were all in the early, wintry parts of the year, yet here several months go by and quite early on there is a scene in a summer corn field. Nevertheless the power cuts go on. No one seems at all bothered by them, perhaps partly because hardly any one is there. The film takes place in a depopulated England where there are also only about four cars. The production budget must have been minuscule. (Note to producers: If you have a tiny budget, please restrict any Cold War thrillers to those taking place entirely in interrogation rooms and nuclear bunkers.) On a minor note: why show clear establishing shots of Deal in Kent and then pretend it's located next door to Sizewell in Suffolk?

simonrosenbaum After reading the one poor review and seeing the very low score this had I nearly didn't bother watching it but I decided to give it a go anyway. I really wish I hadn't checked up on it beforehand though as it did prejudice my feelings about it certainly to begin with. The story was an intriguing one and was told in a low key but atmospheric way which kept you interested to it's conclusion. I agree Andrew Scott and his strangulated accent wasn't quite as good as you would expect him to be but I thought Simon Russell Beale was particularly good playing a more forceful and less charming Smiley like character. After recently seeing the two excellent home grown TV movie's of The Great Train Robbery and Lucan this falls short of their quality but I would still say it was worth watching.

l_rawjalaurence With a screenplay by TV heavyweight Paula Milne, and a cast including Simon Russell Beale (of radio Smiley fame) and Andrew Scott (from SHERLOCK), this thriller should have had all the ingredients of being a first-class piece of work, with its Cold War theme intertwined with personal relationships. However Pete Travis' production turns out to be tremendously derivative; the gray settings, rain-washed sidewalks and drab city views recall the TV version of TINKER TAILOR SOLDIER SPY (1979), Russell Beale simply rehearses his performance as Smiley, with the added spice of a London accent, while Scott adopts an implausible Russian accent. In the leading role Charlie Cox is colorless; he glances mournfully at the camera in several close-ups, but seems to do little else. Structurally speaking, the thriller is well-constructed, with an apparently innocuous beginning leading to an unexpected denouement, but I still got the feeling that the BBC has done this type of work many times before - and much better.