The Tailor of Panama (2001)

Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

I don't have all the words right now but this film is a work of art.

The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

Blistering performances.

The movie disappoints because it lacks the subtlety, intelligence and penetration of the source novel. With Le Carré on board as executive producer one could have hoped for a better adaptation, but this is not the case. Ah, well, Le Carré is a man of considerable wit - hopefully he laughed all the way to the bank...On the other hand the movie is not without merits. It does reflect some of the black wit and verve of the source novel, what with a variety of greedy, dissolute or misguided characters who evolve against the background of a Panama pulsing with threat and temptation. Also present is the profound warning against certain kinds of "politics" or "diplomacy" : treat other nations as stone-age hellholes, banana republics or pirate nests and they may very well turn into one of these things, which may be great fun in the short term but produces nothing but deepest tragedy in the long term. The cast is stellar and the performances are quite good, although the movie, as I've said before, would have benefited from greater subtlety and nuance. As it is, the characters (and with them, the actors) do not get enough room to breathe and grow naturally. This results in a number of missed opportunities : Mickie Abraxas, for instance, is just an annoying drunkard instead of a once promising and interesting person broken by mistreatment, and his egregiously unnecessary death does not feel all that sad. By the same token, our tailor does not seem all that devastated by his friend's death, nor by the knowledge that he caused that selfsame death by spreading around equal parts of lies and nonsense. Still, the depiction of Panama - or, in this case, "Panama" - is very well done : a sweltering, volatile, intrigue-riddled place where everything and anything can be sold or bartered, from firm young female flesh to the Virgin's blessings.

Geoffrey Rush is excellent as Harry, an Englishman with a sadly shady past who has re- invented himself in Panama as the best tailor in the country, making clothes for the rich and politically powerful. Into his world comes Osnard, played by Pierce Brosnan. A morally corrupt, self-serving MI6 spy, sent to Panama as a last chance after seducing a Euro diplomats wife. Many were bowled over by the irony of casting Brosnan, so associated with James Bond, as this much realer, creepier Bond alter ego. A man who is handsome, and self-confident, but whose endless seduction of women seems smarmy not sexy, and who delights in screwing other people while profiting himself. For me the casting was actually problematic. Brosnon's terrific, but the irony is so distractingly obvious, that it pulled me out of the story, and made me think too much about film and our hero images instead of simply accepting the character. Beyond that, Osnard is drawn a little too broadly for my taste. He's so transparent, I have a hard time he gets anyone to trust him even for a moment. If his inner self-serving pig were a bit better hidden, it might have given the audience more to unravel, and make other characters' willingness to do his bidding a bit easier to buy. The mix of tones also was a bit of a misfire for me. Never quite darkly funny enough to ascend into true satire, but certainly never edgy enough to be taken seriously, there's a lack of danger here. Unlike 'Dr. Strangelove', we never really think Harry and Osnard's games will reduce Panama to a pile of rubble, and the intimation of it seems false and a bit silly. Yet, all that complaining is because the movie is good enough, smart enough, brave enough and entertaining enough that I felt frustrated it didn't quite work as brilliantly as is should. But I'd certainly still recommend it, in spite of my long winded misgivings, and I'm also willing to give it another look.

The Tailor of Panama is a comedy-drama thriller that features Pierce Brosnan, Geoffrey Rush and Jamie Lee Curtis. Brendan Gleeson, Daniel Radcliffe, David Hayman, Lewis Daly, John Fortune, Catherine McCormack and Harold Pinter co-stars.It is based on the spy novel of the same title by John Le Carré, who wrote the screenplay with Boorman and Andrew Davies.It was directed by John Boorman.Set amidst the controversy of the handover of the Panama Canal from America to Panama in late 1999, this thriller follows seductive British spy Andrew Osnard, who has found himself recently banished to Panama. When Osnard stumbles into a tailor shop, he meets Harry Pendel, a garrulous sort with an unmatched penchant for fabricating wild tales with real-life details. Osnard threatens to expose his shady past, until Pendel agrees to provide him with information about the political situation in Panama. Pendel's wife Louisa tries to remain unscathed by her husband's constant follies, which escalate and put him in the midst of international discord, while also threatening the shaky relationship between himself and Osnard, who cannot escape each other's grasp.This film is "Casablanca without heroes" and that's precisely how Boorman depicts it.It is a melting pot of greed, ambition, and backroom maneuvering.Also,it reveals how a simple fabrication can provoke trigger-happy forces around the globe.This is a literate and entertaining comic thriller.

Very good, intelligent, funny and entertaining movie.Finally a screenplay worthy of being called that, some good dialog and excellent acting (both Rush as well as surprisingly, Brosnan). Brosnan is much more comfortable in this role than he ever was with James Bond. Here he is believable, charming and evil at the same time... On the downside, even though I am a big fan of hers, I have to admit that Jamie Lee Curtis was totally miscast as Rush's engineer wife, she doesn't even come close...It makes you wonder whether something similar to the plot in this film could really happen (or has already happened)...