Dumb. Stupid. Requires short attention span. I'm not talking about the movie, but rather the people who have critically lambasted this intelligent, stylish adaptation of John Le Carre's novel. Kudos to John Boorman, Pierce Bronsnan, Geoffrey Rush and a stellar cast. If you looking for an alternative to braindead blockbusters and regurgitated teenage comedies, then you've stumbled upon the right film. Imagine the complete antithesis of James Bond, a man who puts self before king and country, and loves them and leaves them with relish - enter Brosnan's Andy Osnard. Sit back and <more>
watch with sheer delight as this corrupt British spook pulls the strings that sets the U.S. on course for a second invasion of Panama. Misinformation is the game, and Osnard is planning to get rich on it. His pawn is the tailor of the title, Harry Pendel brilliantly played by Geoffrey Rush . The film moves a snappy pace, the dialogue is witty and often times hilarious, and the cinematography, music and editing are all first rate. Who cares if two shots of a jet in the air scream bad CGI? That's not what this film is about. We're talking intelligent plotting, great writing, excellent acting, and another sexy, devilish turn for Brosnan that is slightly reminiscent of his Thomas Crown character. Brosnan, in my opinion, always fares best when he's playing against Bond type -- and here he excels. DO NOT listen to the naysayers on this one -- unless GODZILLA or ARMAGGEDON are your favorite movies. If you appreciate the dense, textured films of the late 60's-early 70's, then this one is for you. They sure don't make them like this anymore and you wouldn't know that they had with regard to Tailor, since Columbia's flying this one way under the radar. As always, they must be figuring that it'll play to the over 35 demo, so why even bother promoting it. Sad times these are, folks, when a first rate entertainment like this is ignored at the box office, and ignored by its own distributors. But there's always another Scream, American Pie and Halloween around the corner, so viva la cinema. Highest rating.
A nice, tight, old-fashioned spy mystery without a lot of hoopla. (by DCOOK1)
I found this film to be very enjoyable. I don't require car chases, explosions, super-villains, or MTV editing to enjoy any film. The casting was excellent. You can't go wrong with author LeCarre or director Boorman a nice combination . Pierce Brosnan is a pure rascal and Geoffrey Rush the perfect foil. Lots of perfect atmosphere and gorgeous cinematography. Kick back and take the ride. A real treat.
best of the year (by worldwidelie)
saw this last night, and what a treat. i felt a little sad liking it so much. what appealed was the political honesty: the satirisation of corrupt politics, diplomatic farce, emotive militarism ! . left-wing politics really. it was simply refreshing to see them in a reasonably mainstream hollywood movie no wonder so many of the people commenting disliked it - the wrong audience, misadvertised in the spirit of the rampant commercialism it satirizes. it'll find a following eventually . but as i said, i felt a little sad, because there were days when radical politics lit up the canvas in <more>
films from zabriski point to the battle of algiers albeit never in america .the film has many strings; double entendres that are actually funny 'it's tight, from lack of use' , that wonderful sanctimonious speech 'the american flag is missing a star' , conceptual play tale-or of panama, casablanca parody , harold pinter who is a very nice man . brosnan is a revelation. there's a real sense of the bored gentleman about town. and from the fizzpop of the script, one suspects harold pinter may have had a quick look through the script. although as has been said, le carre is excellent at dialogue. the material is certainly strong, and for those who complain about a lack of pyrotechnics, it's better than simply substituting fresh ethnicities for russian communists. air force one, the siege, and on, and on... this is an intelligent movie, unafraid to say a few truths - even if not as many as the original novel. i read an interview with boorman recently where he said he hoped to just make one more film, if he could get the money. he's obviously ruffled a few feathers with this one. which is again, back to the sadness - imagine what he could have, should have pop goes the budget said. it would have been less polite than this delicious drama, which i hope everyone involved in is proud of.'it's a dark, dirty job... but someone has to do it...'
If you understand irony, this film should be a real riotous laugh straight through. It is possibly one of the most brilliant movies so far this millennium, outright disrespectful of the "spy" theme: Brosnan's degenerated, decadent b*****d spy Osnard is just the way one would picture James Bond in real life, had the latter not been so awfully loyal. Actually, Osnard is James Bond minus loyalty and with his self-confidence, decadence and sexism turned up a couple of notches. A brilliant character, brilliantly acted. Another fantastic actor is the amazing Geoffrey Rush in the role <more>
as the Tailor of Panama, Harry Pendel.The story is absolutely fascinating, one of the most clever and witty stories to emerge in a long while - the Tailor of Panama reluctantly becomes a spy and conjures up non-existent government plots to sell the Panama Canal to the Chinese, which makes the English and the Americans portrayed as a bunch of idiots with delusions of grandeur and as militaristic blow-hards with victory as the only goal react aggressively.It is important that one understands that this film is serious in one respect only: its comedy. Don't see this expecting to see a thrilling spy-movie. It isn't, though I find the scope of the film thrilling. It's more of a comedy, and if you can't see that when the American general with tears in his eyes blurts: "There is a star missing from the American flag!", then you're not really equipped for this kind of film. The reason I'm writing this is that some reviewers have found the movie to be silly... which is just what one would think if one didn't get it.Brilliant. Just brilliant.
In the present Fahrenheit 9/11 atmosphere on re-watching this film I find much to admire not due to its incendiary political comment but from the skill of its making and its continued relevance which is the sign of a film which, I hope, will endure.Ignoring the politics, for a moment, there is a lot to appreciate in Boorman's quick editing, interplay of farce and tragedy and ability to sum up a very complex story with telling detail. He draws stunning performances out of his actors apart from the ever annoying Jamie Lee Curtis . Brosnan shifts character bewilderingly but by the end his <more>
roguish charm has been fully shed to reveal the horror of the man beneath, making Geoffrey Rush's exploitation believable and pathetic. This ranks, along with the Killing Fields and Salvador I'm sure I've forgotten many other worthy examples , as one of my favourite angry anti-war, anti-interventionism films arguing that where the justifying intelligence isn't good enough the rich and powerful states do not have the right to interfere, at least unless their motivations are purer than self interest. On the other hand, it is a great human drama with the country which serves as its backdrop used to great effect to emphasise the human tragedies played out within. Watch and enjoy, but you may find the first 10-15 minutes difficult until you have settled with the style - definitely worth a second watching.
LeCarre pedigree really shows through (by Kiers77)
I just saw this again after SO many years.Man it's entertaining! Rogue spy goes in search of adventure and CREATES it...whilst enriching himself. Analogy: What Jerome Kerviel did to his bank, a rogue spy does to geopolitics. Gives new meaning to term "mucking around" in your "backyard" if you are a prominent superpower u know which one! .The character motivation and plausible scene-play are just top notch. It all starts with Brosnan's character throwing money at a new "recruit" and then using carrot stick routine to get something useful information . <more>
Well, as in waterboarding, if you pressure someone to "come up with info" THEY WILL! How many careers have been made at MI 5/6 this way? How many countries have been "played with"? I can't think of any other movie which dealt with such heavy subjects so delightfully. everyone can be made to harbor secret feelings of being a spy. how seductive. how profitable. I must read the book because I'm sure it is richer than the movie.
Exciting and Cynical, LeCarre at His Best (by gws-2)
There are no heroes or villains in "The Tailor of Panama," only exploiters and victims. Some may be turned off by the cynical tone of the film. For example, Andy Osnard, the British secret agent, played by Pierce Brosnan who else? is a scheming sociopath, not a patriotic hero. The title character, Harry Pendel, played by Geoffrey Rush, is a liar and an ex-convict. Don't be put off by these flawed characters, though. In the great tradition of John LeCarre's characters, these devious, selfish people are endlessly interesting -- and believable. I suspect that those who did <more>
not like this film reacted as they did because of a lack of heroes and because the outcome of the machinations it depicts are sadly grotesque. Nevertheless, this is the thinking person's spy movie. Highly recommended, 8 out of 10.
Pierce Brosnan, Gregory Rush, and Jamie Lee Curtis star in "The Tailor of Panama," a 2001 film based on the novel by John LeCarre.Brosnan plays Andrew Osnard, a British secret agent who had an affair with an ambassador's mistress and is exiled to Panama. He's supposed to locate some of the few Brits who live in Panama who may have information through their contacts on anything going on that the British should be concerned about.Osnard finds a tailor, Harold Pendel, an ex-con who works as a tailor in the tradition of a Saville Row older tailor who was his mentor and teacher. <more>
He says. Harry knows a lot of people - in fact, he makes suits for the President. Harry has a family, a wife Curtis and two children and a massive debt. Since Osnard will pay for information, Harry makes it up as he goes along, telling him that Panama's infrastructure and the poor are in desperate need, so the President is selling the Panama Canal to the Chinese.Between the two of them, Osnard and Harry end up with a story about former mercenaries out to get rid of the current government. They will work with the U.S. and British for $20 million.The film is reminiscent of "Our Man in Havana" not only in story but in the new Alec Guinness, Geoffrey Rush, who is beyond fantastic as Harry, a man who gets caught up in lies that started so innocently, just so he could pay his debt.For the people who didn't like this film, I really think you have to be a fan of classic movies to truly appreciate its satire and comic bent. And, like a true comedy or satire, it has moments of drama and truth.Brosnan plays the absolute scoundrel and womanizing Osnard to perfection. He's James Bond with none of the gadgets or class, and he is totally unlikeable.Beautifully done, this is an intelligent script, very well acted and directed, about what people will believe, and why. I loved what "Uncle Benny" Harold Pinter tells Harry: "Harry boy...a man who tells the truth is bound to be found out sooner or later. Try sincerity, that's a virtue. But truth, it's an affliction!"
The Tailor of Panama — A bad element in international espionage (by AvidClimber)
The Tailor of Panama is, in term of international spying, the antithesis of the James Bond movies. The only similarities are the high stakes and the involvement of MI-6. Ironically the main role is played by a former Bond actor, Pierce Brosnan.In this flick, Brosnan is in a role quite different from his usual cast. Here, he's not likable, not even a little, and he plays it well. You might say he's still a scoundrel, but this time, bearing the full negative connotation. Geoffrey Rush is very good as the deluded tailor. Jamie Lee Curtis, in the minor role of his wife, is not shining at <more>
her best, but her performance is good.The premise of the movie is excellent, the story that supports almost as good, as is the scenario. You'll be swept in by the intrigue and the machinations, wondering how it will all end. The final unraveling is quite surprising.I recommend it, but do not expect a feel good film. It is not for everybody. It has no action, and you'll will face the unlikable and underhanded range of human endeavors. It is all deceit.