What Am I Missing?

For discussion of Tomas Alfredson's Film Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy
Post Reply
User avatar
Wolfchild
Posts: 2938
Joined: Sat Apr 25, 2009 8:26 pm
Contact:

What Am I Missing?

Post by Wolfchild » Wed May 23, 2012 1:14 am

Not surprisingly, I feel like I'm missing something. There are a few scenes that to me seem to have Tomas' fingerprints all over them, (if I can claim such after only having seen two films that he has directed). Many people talk about the scene in the car with the bee. The occupants of the car swat ineffectually at the bee, while Smiley just watches calmly and when the time comes, rolls down the window and lets the bee out. This scene encapsulates Smiley in a six second vignette. Such efficiency with screen time is, for me, a hallmark of Tomas' style.

Another instance of this is a short scene involving Peter Guillam. Smiley warns Guillam that they might come after him and if he has anything that needs cleaning up, now is the time. Then comes a scene where Guillam painfully breaks it off with his male lover. I have seen some people carping someplace on the internet about how it was unnecessarily politically correct to make Guillam gay. His sexuality was not mentioned in the novel. I admired this scene as another bit of Tomas' efficiency in storytelling. After Guillam received Smiley's warning, Tomas needed a way to demonstrate Guillam's commitment and loyalty to Smiley. This 15 second vignette demonstrated it perfectly in a way that fit the period (a homosexual would have been seen as a security risk - subject to blackmail), didn't take up much screen time, and didn't affect any of the character's other motivations in the story.

Yet another scene was the one where Irina gets shot in front of Prideaux. The violence is sudden, not glorified or dwelt upon, but also not down played. Something I very much associate with Tomas. Also, you can hear the sound of spent shell casing bouncing on the floor right after the shot. More Alfredson attention to subtle, non-visual detail. However, while this scene in itself typifies a lot of the things that make Tomas a great director, I'm not sure that in the context of the entire story the scene makes sense.

In the logic of the story, what is Karla's motivation for having Irina shot in front of Prideaux? I can understand how Irina's death furthers the storytelling - it leads to that wonderful scene where Smiley lies to Rikki Tarr about Irina without blinking an eye. It was an excellent way of demonstrating the ruthlessness that Smiley is capable of. I just can't figure out what Karla's motivation for doing it would have been. Prideaux had no idea who she was. I suppose Karla would have known that word of it would get back to Smiley, but how would it further what must have been his main goal at the time: protecting Haydon?

Did he perhaps think making it known that Irina was dead would remove any leverage that Smiley had on Rikki? In this case, how would Karla know that Irina was important to Rikki Tarr? Also, what would make him think that Smiley would be willing to give up an advantage by telling Rikki about her death (indeed, he was not). This one I can't figure out. :think:
...the story derives a lot of its appeal from its sense of despair and a darkness in which the love of Eli and Oskar seems to shine with a strange and disturbing light.
-Lacenaire

Visit My LTROI fan page.

User avatar
danielma
Posts: 1057
Joined: Mon Dec 07, 2009 10:38 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia
Contact:

Re: Whatr Am I Missing?

Post by danielma » Wed May 23, 2012 1:44 am

it leads to that wonderful scene where Smiley lies to Rikki Tarr about Irina without blinking an eye. It was an excellent way of demonstrating the ruthlessness that Smiley is capable of. I just can't figure out what Karla's motivation for doing it would have been. Prideaux had no idea who she was. I suppose Karla would have known that word of it would get back to Smiley, but how would it further what must have been his main goal at the time: protecting Haydon?
The motivation behind capturing Prideaux to begin with was to protect the mole. After all Prideaux did visit Haydon before he left for Budapest. Of course it is assumed that Haydon would have instantly told Karla this and thus the process to capture. They never set out to kill him rather capture him and interogate him as to what he knew, and more importantly what Control knew.

What they did not expect however was Irinia divulging the info to Tarr..so my take on this is that they hit a speed bump with their goal when Tarr telegraphed his information back to the Circus regarding Irinia and the deal she was willing to make.

Isn't it explained by Prideaux that it was a method of fishing out just how much Control knew about the mole??? They knew Irinia had divulged info to Ricky who in turn passed it along to the Circus...but how far did he send that info??? Did Control know Ricky Tarr's info??? So I put the motivation down to simple paranoia for Karla...after all the whole film is soaked in Paranoia with people looking over their shoulders and not knowing who to trust.

Maybe by presenting Prideaux with Irinia, they thought they could fish out a reaction of some sorts...maybe find out just how much was known. Personally I took it to be another moment of paranoia.

At the time, I guess Karla could only assume that Control and Smiley were gone from the Circus...I mean there is no doubt that Haydon would have told Karla this info...hell after they kill Irinia, the guards mention to Prideaux "tell Alleline what happened here"...But I guess there are two factors behind Irinia's death and the way it happens. The first is punishment for her willingness to defect from the Soviet. The second was to potentially fish out any reaction...maybe cover their tracks a little...maybe try to satsify their own sense of paranoia. Which ironically enough led to the downfall of the mole anyways.

I don't really think it serves a greater purpose of motivation towards Smiley, I don't think it was Karla outright trying to play games with Smiley, I took it as being just another moment of Paranoia...trying to fish out exactly what the oppesite side knows.
My Blog: Toxic Culture
Neon Maniacs: Link

User avatar
Nightrider
Moderator
Posts: 3546
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2011 6:02 am
Location: San Antonio, Texas
Contact:

Re: What Am I Missing?

Post by Nightrider » Wed May 23, 2012 4:33 am

TTSS is a textbook exercise in economical filmmaking. It's a subtle storytelling without an ounce of waste.
The two above mentioned scenes are perfect examples of that.
Peter's heartbreaking split from his lover is cinematic restraint at it's best. However, it's the scene with the bee that gives us the glimpse into the mind of George Smiley.
When the bee is trapped in the car, what we get is three different reactions from vehicle's passengers. Mendel waives the insect away, Guillam tries to scare it off, but only Smiley does the most logical thing rolling down the window to provide an escape route for the bee. The problem is solved with
the most minimal effort. The bee does all the work and it's a bit of foreshadowing of the upcoming capture of Bill Haydon. Just perfect.
Can't wait to see what TA will do next.
http://www.aspca.org/

Visit our Facebook page at http://www.facebook.com/WeTheInfected

Nobody understands...and of course...how could they?

Post Reply

Return to “Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy”