Günther Bachmann – A 21st-century Smiley?

It is difficult to compare a film of just over two hours with a TV series luxuriating in a five and a half hours viewing experience, but more than ever we come back to the primary question of why people want to make books into films.

Film-poster-A-Most-Wanted-Man

One of the Sunday newspaper film critics compared the latest John le Carré to be translated to the big screen, ‘A Most Wanted Man’, to the 2011 film version of le Carré’s famous ‘Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy’ noting that both films were very ‘brown’. As I have just finished watching the 1979 TV version of ‘Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy’ made late 1970s about a story set in the 1970s, I guess you could forgive the 21st-century film makers their shorthand ‘brownness’ to signify the murky world of spies. However, a captivating film, especially an espionage thriller needs more than just atmosphere and beautiful shots, it also needs a gripping plot and compelling characters too.

Tinker-Tailor-Smiley

The central role of ‘A Most Wanted Man’ is Günther Bachmann played superbly by the late Philip Seymour Hoffman. The film needed somebody of Hoffman’s ability to have any chance of holding your attention, but with little back story or personal relationships it is hard to engage with Günther despite Hoffman’s undoubted talent. The generally remote, detached feel of this film doesn’t help either and so whereas you really care about Smiley, played by Alec Guinness in the TV series, it’s all a bit ‘ho hum’ for Günther. I haven’t yet read ‘A Most Wanted Man’, so this ‘nobody really cares about Günther’ feel could be the quality that le Carré wanted, an almost invisible, background grand master type. Trouble is what can work on the page doesn’t always transfer to film. And, don’t even get me started on the bizarre need for German characters to speak English with a German accent when they are supposed to be talking in German to one another. Or, is the spying world nowadays like the world of civil aviation where English is the lingua franca?

A film is not a book. A film of a book is a film, a stand alone work. If you really love any book chances are you won’t like the film, TV or even theatrical version of the original text, perhaps best not to bother with them then. However, good plots and great characters can have another life away from their original incarnation and it is the business of the film people, script writers, directors, actors . . . to make it work. Hoffman’s performance and the excellent casting of Willem Dafoe and Rachel McAdams fail to overcome the fact you just couldn’t careless about any of them in this lightly plotted, passionless affair.

Advertisements

About agnesashe

Artisan, blogger and passionate East Anglian working from home.
This entry was posted in Film and tagged , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Günther Bachmann – A 21st-century Smiley?

  1. You are such a great review writer! I agree about the difficulty of watching a film that comes from a book you liked although I found the Swedish film version of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo series a great interpretation of the books.

    • agnesashe says:

      That’s interesting, I have deliberately not seen either the Swedish or the David Fincher film versions yet as I want to read the books first. I’ve been saving them for the winter evenings!!!

  2. Adam Isler says:

    The corollary of this is that the rare films that are extremely faithful to the original book do nothing for me. I remember having this reaction to both the first Peter Jackson Lord of the Rings film and the first Harry Potter film. They were so accurate that they added nothing for me. Of course, had they taken any creative liberties with the originals I would, no doubt, have been disappointed with that as well. You are so right about the difficulties of translating from one medium to another. As has been famously said, it’s like “dancing about architecture.”

    • agnesashe says:

      Love that last quote, new to me, but well worth remembering! You’re so right too faithful to the book is not the answer either. Perhaps we are hoping for the essence in a new medium?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

w

Connecting to %s