Leo Cauffield, chief of British counterespionage, fails by a whisker to arrest two fellow Cambridge-graduated spies who just manage to defect to Moscow, resigns and becomes a journalist. In...
See full summary »
Novelist Catherine Tramell is once again in trouble with the law, and Scotland Yard appoints psychiatrist Dr. Michael Glass to evaluate her. Though, like Detective Nick Curran before him, Glass is entranced by Tramell and lured into a seductive game.
An American diplomat and his fiancée venture into the sordid underworld of sex and pornography in Budapest, Hungary to find out who is blackmailing them with a porno video taken of them with a prostitute.
Leo Cauffield, chief of British counterespionage, fails by a whisker to arrest two fellow Cambridge-graduated spies who just manage to defect to Moscow, resigns and becomes a journalist. In Beirut, home of his Islam-converted father, Leo seduces Sally Tyler to divorce her husband for him. Their happiness with children from both marriages is cut short a few years later, when Leo suddenly disappears; Sally learns soon he's suspected of having defected to Moscow too, which she refuses to believe, but will be forced to while Western secret services want Leo back or dead.Written by
Rupert Everett has previously played the lead in another film based on the story of the Cambridge Spies, Another Country (1984), in which his character was based on real life spy Guy Burgess. See more »
Near the end, after Leo hangs his scarf around his wife's neck, the camera view changes to a long shot but his scarf is no longer there. Her headscarf also changes position on her head during the scene. See more »
There's evidence of someone they call agent Virgin, maybe a convert.The main source of the leak is someone who works inside the foreign office in London and his code name is Homer.
See more »
The opening credits appear on the screen in the fashion of text typed and displayed on a very early computer, during scenes showing events taking place a decade before the time the film is set in. See more »
What a disappointment! After watching the film, there is a very good reason that actual names were not used - other than general similarities to circumstance, this is entirely a work of fiction.
Even a fictionalized account (inspired by the McClean story) could have been entertaining if had successfully delivered an historically accurate context (forget accuracy). There could have been a story of complex emotions, motivations and consequences but instead, you get a superficial drama that misses its mark or worse, doesn't even aim at the interesting targets.
This is a true waste of talent for such a great cast.
15 of 22 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this