MovieChat Forums > Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy (1980) Discussion > Who do you prefer ( Mini-series actors v...

Who do you prefer ( Mini-series actors vs Movie actors ) ?

posted 13 years ago by MrEdnablackadder
15 replies | jump to latest

Comparing the actors in the mini-series "TTSS" and "Smiley's People" and the ones in the 2011 movie, who would you say was better in the respective roles? For the most par , I prefer the original cast, but there are a few exceptions.

So, who gets your vote between :

Smiley: Alec Guinness VS Gary Oldman

Guillam: Michael Jayston VS Michael Byrne VS Benedict Cumberbatch

Haydon: Ian Richardson VS Colin Firth

Alleline: Michael Aldridge VS Toby Jones

Esterhase: Bernard Hepton VS David Dencik

Bland: Terence Rigby VS Ciaran Hinds

Control: Alexander Knox VS John Hurt

Prideaux: Ian Bannen VS Mark Strong

Lacon: Anthony Bate VS Simon McBurney

Tarr: Hywel Bennett VS Tom Hardy

Connie: Beryl Reid VS Kathy Burke

My choices are :

Smiley : Alec Guinness - He just killed the role for me. His unique gift of looking almost non-human with his coldness and calculating intelligence made him the one true Smiley in my eyes. Gary's portrayal was less effective for me because he didn't feel enough bitter and disenchanted with everything. But I appreciated the fact that he made the character a bit more approachable than Alec's version.

Guillam: Michael Jayston: Both he and Cumberbatch are wonderful performers and Ben's youth made for a nice mentor-pupil relationship between George and Peter. But there wasn't enough focus on the movie on Guillam's relation with the other characters, his past life and his role in the circus. Also, Michael felt closer to the almost Bond-like Guillam of the books (he actually auditioned for the 007 role early in his career).

Haydon: Ian Richardson: At the top of his game, Firth is a great actor. Richardson was in a league of his own just like Guinness. If you ask me, he was also more believable than Colin as one who could have been a fatherly figure to his Circus colleagues.

Alleline: Toby Jones: He's really hardly matchable at playing unpleasant characters with his unique appearance. Thanks to his performance, I think that the sense of antagonism between Percy and Control could be felt much more in the movie compared to the mini-series.

Esterhase: Bernard Hepton: This is very easy to call. The scene where Esterhase bursts into tears is really a great display of crappy acting on Dencik's part.

Bland: Ciarán Hinds: As Bland , Rigby was .. bland indeed . Hinds added a lot of charisma and personality to the part.

Control: John Hurt Knox was great, but Hurt added that special "quid" to the character that proves what a standout actor he really is. He injected more humour to the character and made it more memorable than he's actually ever been. As a matter of fact, I think John could have made a great George Smiley, too.

Prideaux: Ian Bannen He better captured the most twisted sides of Prideaux's mind if you ask me. He had enormous talent at playing this kind of characters. Strong is a fine actor, but not remotely as subtle.

Lacon: Anthony Bate Unlike in the Aldridge-Jones case, I think McBurney's disturbing appearance was a bit distracting. Bate perfectly embodied the frozen, humourless politician.

Tarr: Hywel Bennett: Easiest one! Hardy almost ruined the movie for me. He seemed more like an East End bully rather than a spy , all his gestural expressiveness was wrong and his acting style completely clashed with that of the other actors and with LeCarre's universe in general: seriously , how could you believe that a guy with that idiotic look on his face could be taken in the British Secret Service? The idea that this is the ubiquitous leading man of tomorrow chills my blood.

Connie: Beryl Reid: Kathy Burke is a very good actress, but Beryl was a genius.

Have a go.

[–] sculpturecsm2012 13 years ago

Nice post.

Slightly disagree on some issues:

Peter Guillam. Cumberbatch to me simply didn't seem capable, tough enough to scout for people like Ricky Tarr, and contributed to confusion at times in the film plot. Jayston's cold and crisp delivery was brilliant throughout, one of the stars of the TV series. Interesting Guillam in the film was 'outed' but no mention made in the TV series

Ian Bannen made Mark Strong look completely miscast. Again, stand out performance in the TV series from one of Britain's greatest ever actors in my view. This time in the TV series, his early homosexual relationship with Haydon was highlighted, not so at all in the film.

Tarr. Thought they were both pretty bad actually. Agree with how miscast Hardy was — the 'yaw team ave gotta lot to facking arnser faw' when he was sending messages from Paris should have been edited out.

Smiley. They were both brilliant. Interesting to me though that Guinness seemed much older (was he in his 70's?). The triumphal end to the film seemed appropriate because Oldman was younger and still really on the top of his game with years ahead, but Guinness seemed as though he could only be a caretaker and should be retiring to the Cotswolds. The TV series even ended with his wife further taunting him, whereas in the film, she's there waiting for him.

And the invisible characters themselves—
I preferred not seeing either Karla or Ann in the film (apart from legs and hands in film for Karla, and back and longshot for Ann). They acted in the film as the absent drivers for the shift in the two treatments — in the TV series, we are actually told that the affair was planned by Karla and that ultimately he respected Smiley the most. In the film, we only guess this, which I felt made it more subtle and powerful in a way. I think this shift in the emphasis is why in the film, they went for the cafe scene for Budapest rather than the much more convincing (and cinematic?) border in the forest...because the later flashback in the film points to Karla being there, with the symbol of his opponents' weakness next to him all the time. They needed such a scene. The affair was a running sore for Smiley throughout in the TV series, in the film, its one of the mechanisms by which we realise that Haydon is the spy.

[–] MrEdnablackadder 13 years ago

Peter Guillam. Cumberbatch to me simply didn't seem capable, tough enough to scout for people like Ricky Tarr, and contributed to confusion at times in the film plot. Jayston's cold and crisp delivery was brilliant throughout, one of the stars of the TV series. Interesting Guillam in the film was 'outed' but no mention made in the TV series

Yeah , I suppose the older and frostier Jayston probably looks more believable as one of the Circus' top agents . Normally , I think I would have been more difficult to me to buy a very young man like the new Peter being already in charge of other agents like Tarr and a sort of teacher figure to them . But I think Cumberbatch's interpretative intelligence goes far beyond his actual age and with his inborn authority and deep voice , I could easily see him as someone able to pull rank on other agents and get their respect . But at the same time he gave the impression he had a lot to learn from Smiley and that's what their relationship should also be about .

Ian Bannen made Mark Strong look completely miscast. Again, stand out performance in the TV series from one of Britain's greatest ever actors in my view. This time in the TV series, his early homosexual relationship with Haydon was highlighted, not so at all in the film.

Yes , Bannen was truly a great , underrated actor . Glad you agree with me on that .

Smiley. They were both brilliant. Interesting to me though that Guinness seemed much older (was he in his 70's?). The triumphal end to the film seemed appropriate because Oldman was younger and still really on the top of his game with years ahead, but Guinness seemed as though he could only be a caretaker and should be retiring to the Cotswolds.

Guinness was 65 at the time of the first mini-series and 67 at the time of the second one , so he was definitely older than Oldman . Talking about the triumphal end of the film , I must say that scene had a strange effect on me .. I thought the popular french song they used felt a bit inappropriate and that the thunder of applause was something that clashed with the spirit of the story , which really isn't about winning or losing . Smiley doesn't consider himself a victor. Just think to the final scene of "Smiley's People" when he finally takes down Karla and he's left wondering if he really achieved anything . For the same reason , I like George's final confrontation with Ann in the mini-series . It also helps understanding the sense of unfulfillment that is an important component of the character .

But I totally agree with you that the unseen Karla works better : if they are going to do a film trilogy , it will be even more thrilling to finally see the character's face . Speaking of which , I think they could easily recast Patrick Stewart in the role . He doesn't look much different now than he did 30 years ago !

In the film, we only guess this, which I felt made it more subtle and powerful in a way. I think this shift in the emphasis is why in the film, they went for the cafe scene for Budapest rather than the much more convincing (and cinematic?) border in the forest...because the later flashback in the film points to Karla being there, with the symbol of his opponents' weakness next to him all the time.

Great point .

[–] q_leo_rahman 13 years ago

Smiley: Alec Guinness VS Gary Oldman
A tie, because they were different strains of Smiley. Guinness played Smiley as a colder and more restrained (generally quiet, but feelings are still showing once you figure him right), a master sleuth on an assignment. Oldman played Smiley as repressed (keeping feelings inside) and ruthless, an agent accomplishing a mission at any cost.

Guillam: Michael Jayston VS Michael Byrne VS Benedict Cumberbatch
Jayston. He showed better in my mind the effects of the Circus on his life: not much of a life beyond his workplace. Note that Jayston had a better backstory: his North African agents were caught and executed, damaging him. Thus the scene where he catches the mole is more gripping IMO. In the film he was made gay (didn’t make much difference to my mind), and got one scene where he broke off a relationship, but I still didn’t think it was as sincere an outbreak as where Jayston threw himself on the mole.

Haydon: Ian Richardson VS Colin Firth
Firth. Richardson was great, but Firth seemed more dashing and charming; that IMO fit Haydon as a brother-figure better and came as more of a shock, as well as a tragedy and demeaning, on his outing.

Alleline: Michael Aldridge VS Toby Jones
Aldridge. Both of them played Alleline as ladder-climbers, but I thought Aldridge with his big bluff manner gave a better portrayal of incompetence and puppetry than Jones with his putdown weasel-like manner.

Esterhase: Bernard Hepton VS David Dencik
Dencik. He had a greater setup, I actually thought he was the mole with his sneaky behavior, his concern about Smiley, his Slav heritage (he even spoke in Hungarian in the Circus), and the scenes where he went to meet Polyakov. Also his hysterical breakdown and coercion was more desperate and seemed better than the by-the-book case Smiley puts to Hepton, making him only nauseated.

Bland: Terence Rigby VS Ciarán Hinds
Rigby. Hinds was bland, pun intended; he didn’t have much to work with, apart from a couple of scenes. Rigby at least explained Bland’s motives for siding with Alleline.

Control: Alexander Knox VS John Hurt
A tie. Knox made Control a professional, who is taking a great gamble that could win or lose everything (capable, but very worried). Hurt was more emotional, portraying Control as edgier, more snide, and riddled with illness, paranoia and despair.

Prideaux: Ian Bannen VS Mark Strong
Bannen. Strong didn’t seem too injured, and gave Prideaux a shell-shocked portrayal: moody, edgy, lashing out at others. Bannen at least made Prideaux something like a convalescent, on a definite road to recovery.

Lacon: Anthony Bate VS Simon McBurney
Bate. Lacon was the minister’s man and his voice - I think Bate was more effective in conveying the lack of publicity/scandal/embarrassment the Minister demanded above all else as well as the coercion into making a retired Smiley take up the case. McBurney didn’t have much to do since the Minister was beside him and his performance was, ah, laconic.

Tarr: Hywel Bennett VS Tom Hardy
Hardy. Hywel was a little too relaxed and witty for my taste. I mean that’s what Tarr was, but I felt Tarr was better suited as someone tenser and more emotional (towards Irina), which I think Hardy got across pretty well.

Connie: Beryl Reid VS Kathy Burke
Reid. She suited the jolly-yet-melancholic persona of Sachs much better; her mood swings from cheerful to tearful made more sense for someone who’d been forced away from her life’s work.

BTW You forgot a few:
Irina: Susan Kodicek VS Svetlana Khodchenkova
A tie. Both of them gave decent performances as the hunted love interest Irina.

Ann Smiley: Sian Philips VS Katrina Vasilieva
Sian definitely. Not only does she give a magnetic enigmatic performance (we never know if she really does love George, or whether she really HAS any loyalty anywhere). We don’t really seen Vasilieva, but that’s the point. She’s a concept, a blind spot that Smiley would overlook no matter what.

Karla: Patrick Stewart VS Michael Sarne.
Stewart. This is a no-brainer; the man held his own against Guinness without saying one word whatsoever. Sarne was okay in his one scene (where he executes Irina), but like Ann he is a concept, an unknown near-mystical adversary to Smiley.

07/08/06... 786... the sentinel of Allah has arrived.

[–] elisedfr 13 years ago

Great topic ! Here is my personal view:

Smiley: Alec Guinness.
I think Gary Oldman was very good in the part, and probably the best choice we've got today, but to me Guinness IS Smiley. He makes the character look more human, more close to us. In the first TV series, he appears quite warmthful and joking at times, even though one is always reminded of the cold cleverness behind. Oldman seems to force the inhumanity a bit too hard- almost as if he had no life before the movie begins.

Guillam: Michael Jayston
A tough choice. I think Jayston embodies better the Guillam characteristics of the book. He's one of the performers that just seemed to BE the novel character. He has the same juvenile, yet on the verge of middle age look. Still, I think Benedict Cumberbatch made a very likeable Peter Guillam. A bit more naive, yet effective and dynamic. So it's really hard to pick just one.

Haydon: Ian Richarson
Hmmm...I adore Colin Firth, since a long time before he had made The King's Speech, and he's very good in the part, although he does not appear as long as I hoped. But, to me, Richardson made Bill a more complex and intriguing character. He's not exactly handsome but terribly classy and attractive. He had also that aloofness that made you believe in all the mysteries behind. I could never really dislike Firth, or accept him as a dandy so he doesn't seem to manage it as well. As someone else pointed out, he also looks a bit too young and healthy to be a WWII veteran.

Alleline: Both
Can't decide on this one. Michael Aldridge made a memorable smarmy, full of himself Allelline and Toby Jones is more on the humiliated, aggressive side. I think they both did a terrific job and the perfect Percy is probably a toss-up between the two.

Esterhase: Bernard Hepton
No doubt about it. Hepton was hilarious in the two TV series. With his strange accent, proud manners and witty dialogue he was the likeable, yet elegant comic relief. David Dencik's performance was my major disappointement in the new movie- although, frankly, he doesn't appear very long. He has no humor whatsoever and seems like a tense, ungrateful guy all the way.

Bland: Terence Rigby
The two don't have much screen presence, but I enjoyed Rigby's looks and voice, so near to the idea I had of Bland. In his one scene with Smiley, he etablishes a rather well-rounded spy, intellectual, wise but bitter. Ciaran Hinds was not bad nor good. You can hardly see him in the picture !

Control: John Hurt
Both Controls sure look alike a lot, but I think Hurt makes for a more aggressive and witty character. Even when he's broken down by illness and betrayal, you can still recognize shadows of the man behind the schemes of The Spy Who came in from the Cold. Alexander Knox was great too, but he looked too much a helpless victim.

Prideaux: Ian Bannen
No doubt about it, although Mark Strong was fine all the way. Bannen happens to be my favorite actor of all time, whom I discovered because of the series, and I still think Jim Prideaux is the very best performance of his distinguished career. His confrontation with Smiley, in the fith episode is a moment of sheer genius. With subtle touches, he succeded in making the spy/schoolteacher the most lovable character of the series. You believe in his dangerous past and you care for him until the end.

Lacon: Anthony Bate
I liked them both actually. Physically, Simon McBurney was closer to my mental image of Oliver Lacon-a dark, early middle-aged man. But Bate was really very good in the part. Very believable as a sardonic, realistic politician, yet providing a much needed comic relief.

Tarr: Both
I agree with the others it's kind of hard to choose. Maybe the blame must come on the character himself-which is the closest you get to a James Bond thing in an otherwise clearly disillusioned and tired universe. Hywel Bennet went for streetwise sarcasm-and was pretty good at that. Tom Hardy is much of an dynamic, determined yet amorous young hero. He was fine as well. But neither of them turn out really unforgettable.

Connie: Beryl Reid
Not a difficult choice. Connie Sachs is a lovable character indeed but a very hard one too, and by bringing her to life with such touching spontaneity, Reid proved she was quite a girl. Her performance is short but terribly strong: funny, witty and moving all at once. Kathy Burke looked far more resourceful, poised and casual, and you can't quite believe leaving the Circus is the tragedy of her life.

Irina: Susan Kodicek
A lovely lady, but also an original who gave the character identity, charm and soul. Khodchenkova is not bad at all, but never intriguing and if you ask me, a little too young and pretty. After all, Irina was supposed to be thirtyish, depressed and an alcoholic.

Ann Smiley: Sîan Phillips
An obvious choice, as she's the only Ann talking at all. And she had that beautiful scene with Smiley.
She embodied the character brilliantly: free-spirited, mysterious, elegant and looking very beautiful.
The other actress is left deliberately in the shade, but I could not help thinking even her furtive appearances suggested a not so classy Ann.

Karla: Patrick Stewart
I just love his short scene with Smiley: not a word, but what a look he gave the man ! Sarne was fine, as Karlas go, but we don't see much of him anyway. (Yes, I know, it's the big idea)

[–] MrEdnablackadder 12 years ago

Let's save this thread from extinction , shall we ?

[–] elisedfr 12 years ago

By all means, I love it. TTSS is one of the great passions of my life !
" You ain't running this place, Bert, WILLIAMS is!" Sgt Harris

[–] Teaser (55) 2 years ago

Smiley: Alec Guinness hands down. Guinness is the original Smiley and Oldman is a copy. Guinness portrays the human failings of Smiley better than Oldman. Oldman lacks vulnerability.
Guillam: Michael Jayston hands down. Cumberbatch is sort of miscast for Guillam. Jayston successfully displays the father-son type of relationship with Smiley.
Haydon: Firth. Haydon as a lady's man, and also with a penchant for cherub-like boys, is made more credible by Firth.
Alleline: Aldridge. Jones isn't convincing as an ambitious, conniving, Oxford-educated, upper-class White-Hall public servant.
Esterhase: Hepton by all means. He's got class and humor, which Dencik lacks.
Bland: Who cares?
Control: Who cares?
Prideaux: Mark Strong brings pathos to the role in ways that Bannen doesn't. The tears rolling down his cheek after shooting Haydon, and the desperate plea to the young Bill to play with other boys are all excellent.
Lacon: Bate by all means. He is more personable and vulnerable. He looks like the father to two daughters playing string instruments. Also when he says that he and Smiley are givers, not takers. He is more credible.
Tarr: Hardy. Bennett was miscast for the role. He doesn't look like a spy. Also when Bennett is aiming a pistol at the Paris station clerk, he seems awkward.
Connie: Who cares?

[–] kennellygerard 11 years ago

Smiley : Oldman has an incredible quiet menace that alec guinness lacks

Guillam : Cumberbatch - TVs sherlock playing watson to oldman

Haydon : Firth has the perfect smirk for the character

Alleline : Toby Jones perfect casting

Esterhase : Bernard Hepton

Bland : neither.. that part was tiny

Control : both perfect, demented looking

Prideaux : both haunting

Lacon : Simon McBurney is pompous personified

Tarr : Tom Hardy sad ,cocky perfect casting

Connie : Kathy Burke (nobody would seduce her for info) LOL

[–] MrEdnablackadder 11 years ago

Smiley : Oldman has an incredible quiet menace that alec guinness lacks

You think so? I can hardly think of anything fiercer than Alec's "game's over" look.

Ok, now that a few people have participated in this, I'm going to post the results. I will update them every time someone else shares his picks with us. I'm going to consider a both (or a neither) as a tie and give the point to both actors. I'm not including sculpture's picks since he/she didn't complete the "ballot". :-)

SMILEY

Alec Guinness: 4
Gary Oldman: 2

GUILLAM

Michael Jayston: 4
Benedict Cumberbatch: 1
Michael Byrne: 0

HAYDON

Ian Richardson: 3
Colin Firth: 2

ALLELINE

Michael Aldridge: 3
Toby Jones: 3

ESTERHASE

Bernard Hepton: 4
David Dencik: 1

BLAND

Terence Rigby: 4
Ciarán Hinds: 2

CONTROL

John Hurt: 5
Alexander Knox: 2

PRIDEAUX

Ian Bannen: 5
Mark Strong: 1

LACON

Anthony Bate: 4
Simon McBurney: 1

TARR

Hywel Bennett: 3
Tom Hardy: 3

CONNIE

Beryl Reid: 4
Kathy Burke: 1

[–] kennellygerard 11 years ago

i bought the TTSS tv series
because i was looking forward to the film

and i couldn't get over how much Alexander Knox reminded me of john hurt

[–] suicidea 11 years ago

I'd go with the actors of the TV series with all of them, except Control. Both productions had great actors, and more importantly, great acting. They're not "just there," they're giving good performances. So I really haven't got anything negative to say about any actor in either film.

John Hurt seemed tailor-fit for the role. You could even argue that the part was written with him in mind (I know the book was written years ago).

I prefer Guinness as Smiley, but I also think Oldman was the best choice for the part among contemporary actors. He did real well, too.

Same with Colin Firth. Although his looks are totally different from Ian Richardson, he pulled off the role quite well. It's interesting that we see the same character played by two extremely different-looking men, one with an evil, menacing air, the other almost flamboyant and merry, yet they both inspire similar reactions and a feeling of wariness in the audience.

The woman Tarr falls for (I forgot her name, was it Irina?) was so much more attractive in the TV version. I know it's all a matter of taste for everyone, but the actress in the film looked like just another model. The actress in the TV version looked like a very intriguing, special lady that even an agent (usually cold, unattached men) could fall for.

I also must add that if I hadn't seen the TV version first, I wouldn't be able to follow the movie at all. Too many things are "just implied" with no proper explanation. I often complain about audiences reacting badly to films that require thinking and don't spell everything out loud, and I tell them "use your brain, just read a little into the movie" but this time I think the film required too much reading. I know it's trying to fit a 5-hour story into a 2-hour film, but still.

Never be complete.

[–] amyghost 9 years ago

This is a years-late response, but I think it's a good enough thread to keep alive if possible.

By and large, I vastly prefer the actors of the '79 version to the 2012 film. There is an almost indefinably right quality to each of them, something that carries the very aura of LeCarre's universe onto the screen; something in their very physiques and individual physiognomies that seemed almost made from the stuff of the novel. Casting that perfect happens very rarely, and for it to have happened on that scale is nearly unique--even the supporting characters, Sam, Jerry, etc. all carry that same air of being exact fits into the world of the Circus.

Part of this might have come from the fact that not one of these actors carried the tinge of 'cinematic superstar' or 'film glamourboy' about them. All were strong personalities, but were able to put across the effect of the undeniably real in a manner that the modern-era actors of the film couldn't--there's just something too indelibly high-profile in many of today's actors which appears to make it almost impossible for them to subsume that 'Hollywood' aura into the quotidian the way these older performers, chameleon-like, could. I realize I'm speaking in rather cloudy terms here, and it's certainly not as if Guinness, Richardson, Hepton, Knox, Bennett and et al. weren't well-known and highly respected performers in their era--but they carried with them the ability to put forth the impression of complete, average homme moyen sensuel that the modern-day film star just cannot completely convincingly capture. Their attitudes seem to infest every role they play, and can't be tamped down--the characters have to fit their personalities, rather than their personalities being tailored to fit into the characters. This was probably least the case with Oldman, but it was a characteristic that imbued pretty much all the performances to some extent (with the possible exception of Hurt).

Part of the problem is also length--there was simply no way that even the finest actors could have been expected to create such vivid personalities in the course of a two-hour, rather muddily-told film. Hence, I suspect, the introduction of 'gimmicks', such as making Guillam gay: these gimmicks stood in as a sort of shorthand for the complexity that the abbreviated version couldn't allow its characters to portray in depth, fine if that's all time permits, but giving little scope for an actor to stretch him or herself in the way the series allowed.

The film had a fine cast of some very talented people--but I think the limitations imposed on them by the film's very formatting, combined with those almost indefinable qualities that an older generation of actors (at least the cast of this series) seemingly possessed in greater abundance, made for a hugely palpable difference in the very tone of the material as it was presented in the two versions.

[–] Don-the-Lamplighter 8 years ago

Smiley: Alec Guinness
You can't improve upon perfection.

Guillam: Michael Jayston
Not. Even. Close. Making Guillam homosexual seemed like a cheap shortcut to try to make him "complex".

Haydon: Ian Richarson

Alleline: Michael Aldridge
He perfectly conveyed the arrogance that made Alleline such an easy mark for Karla.

Esterhase: Bernard Hepton
Also, not even close.

Bland: Terence Rigby
This one could've gone the other way...if Ciaran Hinds was actually given screen time. No complaints about Rigby, though.

Control: Alexander Knox
I guess I'm in the minority here, but I thought Knox was perfect. His age, IMO, enhanced his portrayal of Control. After all, Control did die of old age soon after Testify. And it leant credence to the perception that he was paranoid and basically was DUE to be replaced.

Prideaux: Ian Bannen
In a landslide.

Lacon: Anthony Bate
Bate was memorable as Lacon. I don't even remember Simon McBurney.

Tarr: Hywel Bennett
I guess I could see someone picking at Bennett's portrayal, but having seen the '79 Series first, he simply IS Ricki Tarr to me.

Connie: Beryl Reid
Reid made the most of her brief appearance without conveying that it was an actress who was trying to make the most of her brief appearance. If that makes any sense.

Irina: Susan Kodicek
Other than George Smiley, after watching the entire '79 Series, it dawned on me that my favorite and most memorable character was Irina. Kodicek was perfect in every facet. She wasn't on screen for it, but her voice to Tarr as he read her note to him in the cemetery was moving, melancholy and haunting all at once.

Ann Smiley: Sîan Phillips
There really isn't much to compare here. But it would difficult to top such a good actress anyway. (I still see Livia from "I, Claudius" whenever I see her)

Karla: Patrick Stewart
Again, not much to compare. Stewart was great.

So yes, a clean sweep for the '79 Series for me. But that's what you get with what, for me, is one of the best TV movies/series ever made.

[–] amyghost 8 years ago

Glad you've helped bump this thread. And I'm on board with you 100% in regard to Knox, Reid and Kodicek, as well as all the others--several of them have taken knocks for their performances, but personally I find them all leagues ahead of the film portrayals--even better than John Hurt and Oldman, great talents though they both are. You just cannot best the cast of this series, quite probably the most perfectly cast from top to bottom ever produced for television.

50 Is The New Cutoff Age.

[–] gonzus (22) 4 months ago

100% agreed. The BBC series is the best that has been on TV, ever. Tied on the #1 spot with its follow up, Smiley's People.

Also keeping this thread alive...