116 user reviews
6.6
/10
| Average votes grouped by age and by sex: | |||||||
| Age: | 1-12 | 13-17 | 18-25 | 26-35 | 36-49 | 50+ | Total |
| Men: Votes: |
- 0 |
4 1 |
5 2 |
6.9 12 |
7.1 19 |
6.2 33 |
6.5 67 |
| Women: Votes: |
- 0 |
10 1 |
7 3 |
6.2 9 |
7 7 |
7.1 21 |
7 42 |
| Total: Votes: |
- 0 |
7 2 |
6.2 5 |
6.7 23 |
6.8 28 |
6.6 55 |
6.6 116 |
| Total includes those who didn't specify sex. | |||||||
Reviews from 1 to 50 (total: 116)
Will def not see it again. Pace was terrible, not worth paying to see it on the big screen. A DVD rental or just wait till it comes out on cable!!!
| 5/10 | shazjoao@ - 1723 reviews 9.4.2012 |
Amazing spy film. Gary Oldman is one of the best actors alive, no one could have done a better job as George Smiley. He is exceptionally transformed in this movie. The photography is so clear and brilliant. It's very nice to watch and I couldn't have asked for a better Gary Oldman or spy movie.
| 10/10 | zoe@ - first review 25.3.2012 - age: 13-17 |
Gary Oldman has replaced Sir Alec Guinness as the ideal actor to play George Smiley. Colin Firth is superb as Bill Haydon. This movie deserves more attention in North America - Le Carre is a superb writer and the complexity of the novel has been perfectly adapted to the big screen. I highly recommend this movie.
| 10/10 | mllewis52@ - 8 reviews 10.3.2012 - age: 50+ |
I like Gary Oldman and Colin Firth, they are two most talented actors in Britain, I like the story, and I like all the puzzle well putting together, overall I quite enjoy it, the only problem is for people who want the movie explain everything to you and instead of thinking and understand it, don't bother of watching it. This movie leave many rooms for audience, you have to let your brain awake all the time, or you will fall asleep.
| 7/10 | shortytimmy@ - 34 reviews 4.3.2012 - age: 26-35 |
Too many characters - too hard to follow the line of the story - boring!
| 3/10 | genny3@ - first review 4.3.2012 - age: 50+ |
This is the first time I say the following in one of my ratings: "I have absolutely no idea what went on".. lol. Oh well, I suspect there was a movie in there somewhere... perhaps you needed to read the book first. I liked the 'old school' look of the film.
| 3/10 | rubix_world@ - 73 reviews 4.3.2012 - age: 36-49 |
[ATTENTION: This review reveals content of the movie.]
I went with my husband (a PhD in engineering), my son (2nd year CEGEP in literature) - I have a PhD in psychology. None of us had read the book, and we were lost from start to finish. By the end of the movie none of us could explain exactly what had happened, where it happened, why it happened... it's not because we werent paying attention! The editing was poor (oops! Who was that dead in the bed - it went by too fast! Who was the guy who hit the girl? Why are we watching this guy's hand as he plays with his package of mints?) There were even continuity problems where the girl gets the bruise, then doesn't have the bruise, then has the bruise again. H.A.T.E.D. I.T!!
| 5/10 | jmu_was_long_ago@ - first review 26.2.2012 - age: 50+ |
Reminded me of the 70s thrillers that had no cgi but a lot of thoughtful and intense dialogue, a deliberate plot that you had to give all your attention to, and actors who instantly fell into roles so well you instantly forgot anything else they had done before. Not for anyone looking for a shoot em up, dopey Ang lee film.
| 8/10 | stewgm@ - first review 24.2.2012 - age: 50+ |
Definitely in the "non Hollywood" film category, TTSS is complex drama well set in the retro 70's with set scenes from London, Budapest, Paris and Istanbul. Well worth seeing - probably better to read the book first!
| 8/10 | mwlacey@ - 2 reviews 20.2.2012 - age: 50+ |
I found it hard to follow and really not that entertaining. Listed as a "dramatic thriller" is not what I would call it. I would say it's a "Drama" but not near a "Thriller".
| 6/10 | peterm55@ - 46 reviews 19.2.2012 - age: 50+ |
Worst movie I've seen in 10 years! Slow, boring, dreadful. Half the theatre walked out... wish I had done the same. I did get a good nap.
| 2/10 | wolfie1010@ - first review 18.2.2012 - age: 26-35 |
As a VERY knowledgeable Le Carre fan who loves the 1979 mini series based on this book, I went to see the movie with high expectations. I left feeling totally deflated and dissatisfied. The most upsetting aspects were unnecessary additions & changes; as well as deletions. The casting was pitiful with the exception of Oldman & Strong. Don't waste your money.
| 3/10 | bride.jarvis@ - 2 reviews 17.2.2012 - age: 50+ |
Looking for something a bit different, but really good here it is. You will not be disappointed.
| 8/10 | hammer@ - 4 reviews 17.2.2012 - age: 36-49 |
Hated it! How I stayed awake is still a mystery to me. Sorry I didn't see it sooner so I could warn everyone. The photography and editing are appauling, bloody dreadful. The acting, however, is superb. Except for a few good kill scenes this movie sucked big time. Don't go and expect to be entertained, except for the head shots and the disembowelment and who doesn't enjoy a good gutting?
| 4/10 | elmontsparks@ - 105 reviews 16.2.2012 - age: 50+ |
Outstanding... Quality cinema and photography, not to mention talented acting... not Paris Hilton or MTV disposable mindless garbage.
| 10/10 | lightshow@ - first review 13.2.2012 - age: 26-35 |
If you're into movies that doesn't require you to think then it's not for you. For the real movie lovers, '70's spy and cleaver dialogues then it's a must see!
| 9/10 | stephanebarrette@ - first review 11.2.2012 - age: 36-49 |
This movie reminded me of cheese. It started out smelly, but then I got sick of it quite quickly. Soon I threw up and wish I'd never started the whole thing. Unfortunately, anti-nausea pills did not help and I remained in a state of uneasiness for the remainder of the weekend, wondering contemplatively, what I had gotten myself into. I hope I am better tomorrow. My boyfriend loved it, but he is a dumb head.
| 6/10 | eman8448@ - first review 11.2.2012 - age: 26-35 |
Boring and to slow had to be a history major to follow it. I go to movies to escape not to be confused but I will say the acting was great I just found it hard to follow.
| 6/10 | djgeno@ - first review 10.2.2012 - age: 26-35 |
Excellent film! Pay attention and enjoy. This film is for the knowledgeable le Carré fan.
| 9/10 | link@ - first review 10.2.2012 - age: 36-49 - One reply |
AS a dedicated film devotee, I found this was a very confounding miasma. Perhaps, better editing, less artistic cinematography and more concise delimitation of the characters would have been warranted AND less bouncing backward and forward in time. The acting was superb, the period well represented and the casting impeccable. It was just a shame that it all had to be so confusing.
| 7/10 | gimshaw38@ - first review 10.2.2012 - age: 50+ |
Great movie, but just like LeCarres' books you must pay attention. Superb acting!!
| 8/10 | cdnsmokey@ - 3 reviews 8.2.2012 - age: 50+ |
TINKER TAILOR SOLDIER SPY is much ado about nothing. This so called John-le-Carré-novel-based movie is boredom and sleepfulness at its best.
| 3/10 | ravi_jay_gunnoo@ - 76 reviews 8.2.2012 - age: 36-49 |
One of the best spies movies I watch in the last years, please don't miss it, is excellent, you will be intrigue until the end...
| 8/10 | oliviasegoviav@ - 11 reviews 7.2.2012 - age: 50+ |
A great spy thriller in the English tradition. No great shoot'em ups just lots of intrigue. Warning... there are no vampires or ghosts.
| 9/10 | ron@ - 7 reviews 5.2.2012 - age: 50+ |
You definitely won't know the ending until you get there. A little difficult to follow with flashbacks that soon become reality, but it certainly provides a different look at the world of espionage. Kept me involved from start to finish.
| 7/10 | driver@ - first review 5.2.2012 - age: 50+ |
Gary Oldman is, besides maybe Daniel Day Lewis, the most accomplished and brilliantly chameleon like actor alive today. He can completely lose himself in a role and I'm glad the Academy finally gave him a long overdue nomination this year. Unfortunately, as painful as this is to say, he really didn't deserve it for this film. He says almost nothing for the entire film which would be ok if the story and its execution were interesting, but they really aren't. Not only is the pacing frustratingly slow, even by Le Carre standards, but I knew who the mole was from the start and if you think about it so will any discerning viewer. As such, the end result is basically boredom, a shame considering the sheer acting talent on display. This may be closer to what being a spy actually is then the Bond or Bourne films, but that doesn't make it interesting.
| 5/10 | jfichaud@ - 97 reviews 5.2.2012 - age: 26-35 |
Slow moving, garbage movie plot impossible to follow, do not waste you money.
| 2/10 | aopinion@ - first review 5.2.2012 - age: 50+ |
Having read the novel and saw Alec Guinness's excellent portrayal of George... I also quite liked this version. Oldman had a great take on the character. Worthy successor to Sir Alec. It did one thing I appreciated which was move the story along a bit quicker than either the book or tv series. I think that helped my husband for who this was his first encounter with this story. My one complaint however is what's up with the darn sound systems these days. Or are actors now trained to mumble their dialogue. I have a pretty good ear for accents and even I found it hard to catch everything that was said. Hubby missed bits of dialogue entirely. Since I've seen Gary Oldman, Tom Hardy and Colin Firth in other things and had no trouble understanding them... I'm going with these bigger sound systems that work well for blasting the audience with sound but maybe not so well for straight quiet dialogue.
| 7/10 | lmclaug@ - 16 reviews 5.2.2012 - age: 50+ |
Truly a masterpiece. I loved everything about it. Anyone who found it tedious or hard to follow must have been in the wrong theatre [...]
| 10/10 | jiphero@ - first review 4.2.2012 - age: 50+ |
Tinker, Tailor shows like a Le Carre novel reads. Although a bit ponderous and seemingly disjointed at the beginning, it picks up the pace and ultimately stitches all the vignettes together into a very entertaining film. It's not an action film by any means. But it is a well-written and superbly-acted spy thriller. It will appeal an older audience looking for intrigue... to a younger audience looking for computer-generated special effects, not so much.
| 9/10 | camerabug@ - 3 reviews 4.2.2012 - age: 50+ |
Several changes to the characters in the book have been made to make them more politically correct: notably turning one character gay (not that there is anything wrong with that... but there are already homosexual/bisexual characters so it seems like gratuitous political correctness) and a number of rather pretentious "war is hell" type scenes. Also, the sound was rather poor, which could have been the cinema but I doubt it. Not "horrible" but could have been so much better with the fantastic cast and material they had to work with.
| 6/10 | timothyreid@ - first review 3.2.2012 - age: 36-49 - One reply |
This is the best movie of 2011, and should've been listed for awards in every category at the Oscars, any of which it should easily have won, especially in so bleak a year in films as this last one - "The Artist"? , I ask you - the production values are no less masterful throughout than the previous year's "The King's Speech", another British gem, which perhaps was less intellectually demanding for many, it would appear, to follow.
| 9/10 | richibi@ - 9 reviews 3.2.2012 - age: 50+ |
Very boring plot, to obvious. Almost left the theatre it was so boring, man british spies are boring. Director had no plot to work with. Can't believe this got and oscar nomination. For what most lame movie this year.
| 3/10 | stephen.lyon@ - first review 2.2.2012 - age: 36-49 |
I read the comments from day 1 and figured I would wait until the DVD. That would have been a mistake. This movie is for adults who have at least a marginal knowledge of some of the cold war spy stories that have come to light over the last few decades, or a decent understanding of the cold war. If you think that 1. Real spies are like James Bond, do not watch this, you will hate it. 2. If you won't read a LeCarre novel because you can 'see' one on screen, you will hate it 3. If you have no idea who LeCarre is, you will hate it So, for all you grown ups out there who would appreciate being mentally stimulated at a movie, with Hollywood's finest, enjoy!
| 8/10 | mike@ - first review 2.2.2012 - age: 36-49 |
Quite possibly the worst movie I have ever seen in my entire life. It was so slow paced that at times I wanted to scream out. Don't be fooled by its high rating on Rotten Tomatoes; the critics were likely too pretentious to admit that they had no idea what was going on in the movie (whether it was because of the overcomplicated plot or because they fell asleep during the movie)
| 1/10 | minuk_89@ - first review 1.2.2012 - age: 18-25 |
I thought the acting was excellent - definitely a group of very fine actors. The best Gary Oldman's been in a long time. However, the story telling fell short. The film seemed to focus on all the small, mundane details that didn't move the story forward. Instead of picking critical details/highlights from the book - the movie tried to shove it all down the viewer's throat. It could have been edited to be 30 minutes shorter without losing anything. If it wasn't for the tedious pacing - I would have given the movie 8 out of 10.
| 6/10 | quillsinc@ - 140 reviews 30.1.2012 - age: 26-35 |
Superb acting, great story that held my attention throughout. Recommended for a mature, educated audience willing to let a story reveal itself.
| 8/10 | mariahobden@ - 4 reviews 30.1.2012 - age: 36-49 |
WARNING: If you're expecting your typical "thriller" movie, DON'T see this one! This is much more an art film than thriller. The beginning is very slow, almost no dialogue. This is also a very quiet film. I received complaints from my "neighbours" about rustling my popcorn bag so loudly, it "broke their concentration." In my opinion, if you need to concentrate that hard on a movie, it most certainly does not capture your attention... enough said.
| 4/10 | werpets@ - 23 reviews 30.1.2012 - age: 36-49 |
Look, for what it was, it was well shot. The acting was good from everyone especially John Hurt who's awesome as Control... But even if you find a good story here, you'll probably won't care after sitting through this nightmare. This is the most dragged out movie I've ever seen and I sat through some stinkers in the past. But they're even more better edited than this. I would assume the director and editor(s) wanted to make a more detailed adaptation than what we usually get and that's fine. But come on, you could cut an hour off the film's running time by slicing all the walking scenes in half! Also by, you know, getting your characters to do something. Having a little cohesion, a proper pace maybe. Oh, and Oldman doesn't deserve anything for his performance. He played it well with what he had but really anybody could've played that role and get the same results. Also all of those blaise, sterotypical crap lines to speak, dear god. Biggest disappointment yet this year.
| 4/10 | darienbeer@ - 5 reviews 30.1.2012 - age: 13-17 |
It was confusing and hard to follow. Poor sound and picture quality. I was very disappointed.
| 1/10 | orange@ - first review 29.1.2012 - age: 50+ |
Overall a rating of 6.9!! Are you nuts? This was the worst movie I've seen since "Pulp Fiction" and that rates up (down?) with "Citizen Kane" as the most over-rated movie of all time. I hated the book, but thought that with an overall rating close to 7, maybe the movie had to be much better than the book. No such luck!
| 1/10 | p-emccormick@ - first review 29.1.2012 - age: 50+ |
Clever, a bit slow to start but still a good movie worths watching.
| 7/10 | peggy_vandeplassche@ - 14 reviews 28.1.2012 - age: 26-35 |
This movie gives you a good idea of how spying actually worked in Britain and Russia during the Cold War. Don't look for James Bond, car crashes and evil henchmen. That is Hollywood and not the way it really was. The Cold War was slow and intense, just like this movie. And for those who complain that the movie is dark and dirty, then you don't know much about Britain in the sixties and seventies. If you want reality, go see this movie. If you want flashy pyrotechnics, then go watch the next Bourne or Bond flick.
| 8/10 | ghostframe@ - 5 reviews 28.1.2012 - age: 50+ |
Boring, I fell asleep 3 times because I couldn't figure out what was going on. The 6 rating was from my wife, I would have rated it much lower.
| 6/10 | smeeton@ - first review 27.1.2012 - age: 50+ |
Like to watch paint dry? If yes then this is you movie. Must admit my wife thought it was wonderful.
| 3/10 | carlrathburn@ - 23 reviews 27.1.2012 - age: 50+ |
Tedious, slow, boring, I had to pinch myself so I wouldn't fall asleep.
| 2/10 | tibor.szakall@ - first review 26.1.2012 - age: 50+ |
Not the best conspiracy film I've ever seen, but still good. Pay attention though, or you'll be lost in the story's subtle intrigue.
| 7/10 | cml@ - 6 reviews 26.1.2012 |
Note: User reviews posted on this page are personal opinions of our readers. We are not responsible for their content.
Did you see ''Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy''?
Terms and Privacy Policy under which this service is provided to you.
© 1996-2013 CinemaClock Canada Inc.
