The Tailor of Panama

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.

Sly references to James Bond and Casablanca aside, "The Tailor of Panama" solidly stands on its own merits.

Its quirky excesses(loopy appearances of imaginary characters and serendipitious plot development) may seem, in the beginning, a little out of place for a political spy thriller.

But it doesn't take very long for one to realise that this is NOT a political spy thriller per se. Its that rare gem of a movie where one can safely suspend one's disbelief and yet not lose touch with one's intelligence along the way(Hmmmm....).

With its tongue planted so firmly in cheek(i.e. atypical casting, a sexy double edged screenplay and 'surreal' sendups of American/ British diplomatic gamesplay), I quickly gave up figuring out what's going on and instead focused on what's going to happen. In layman speak, I "went with the flow".

Which is a good thing as I soon discovered this movie to be deliciously entertaining both for the audience as well as the actors involved(noticeably having their share of fun in the quirky performances).

This is the kind of show(sadly, not many of them around anymore)that demands your attention, but will reward you threefold if you are a willing participant.

Not wanting to sound condescending, this is not a great movie. But it is an intellectually entertaining one. Sadly, with the standards of present day popcorn fare degenerating to new depths with each passing pic, I dare to hope that one day, films like "The Tailor of Panama" will again resume its rightful place - as nothing more than just a top rate pop corn flick.

But that day may never come and by default, this show will now have to assume a pedigree normally reserved for greater films. A sad predicament indeed. But that films like these still get made at all is reason enough to hope and celebrate.

I would recommend for all true movie lovers out there to go see this show and be thankful(at least for that two hours or so) that we can temporarily forget bum-numbing stinkers like "Pearl Harbor" ever existed.

I rest my case.

Thank you and good night.

In `The Tailor of Panama,' Pierce Brosnan plays a sort of evil version of his James Bond persona, a womanizing British spy more concerned with his own personal aggrandizement than with duty to queen and crown and all those virtues we, parochially, tend to think of as uniquely `Western' - virtues like liberty, freedom and democracy.

Based on John Le Carre's novel of the same name, `The Tailor of Panama' is not quite so positive in its assessment of the West's innate benevolence. It is, in fact, an attack on the evils of the modern nation-building process, wherein developed countries like the United States and Great Britain engage in all sorts of covert skullduggery in an effort to protect their own strategic interests in the Third World community. If this involves propping up or installing immoral regimes - or toppling potentially moral ones - that, as Le Carre sees it, is all part of the game we naively call `international diplomacy.'

The setting of the film is Panama City right after the takeover of the canal by the Panamanians. Fearful that its interests might soon be threatened, the British government sends one of its own secret agents, Andy Osnard, to ferret out some British citizen who may have contacts with the authorities in the city and may, therefore, be privy to information pertinent to their concerns. Andy alights on Harry Pendel, a good-natured, idealistic tailor who does, indeed, seem to have some entree with the higher-ups in the local government. Harry also happens to be married to Louisa (Jamie Lee Curtis), who actually works supervising the canal, so, of course, Harry can be quite an informative source of information if he happens to put his mind to it. Andy, knowing that Harry has a few major debts to pay off, moves in for the kill and engages Harry's efforts. The only problem is that Harry, beyond being impeccably moral, also loves to spin a fantastic yarn or two, and Andy has to figure out whether the information Harry is feeding him is really the truth or just the product of an overactive imagination.

The complexity of the plotting works both for and against the film. On the one hand, the audience has a fun time following the narrative along its complicated mazelike path, meeting interesting people and visiting unusual sites along the way. Moreover, we are afforded a fascinating glimpse into the sleazy world of backstage nation-building in a so-called `Banana Republic.' On the other hand, we often find ourselves a bit confused as to the why and wherefore of many of the actions, and, far worse, the movie never establishes enough of a quality of credibility to make us believe it all. This is certainly the case in the film's final stretches when the too-easily duped U.S. and British governments launch an all-out attack on the city based on only the flimsiest of evidence. Yet, perhaps, that is Le Carre (and director John Boorman's) thesis: that such takeovers are often rooted in causes that are circumstantial, prefabricated or totally beside the point. If this is the case, both the writer and the director have failed to create the tone necessary to pull off such a sophisticated idea. For, although there are flashes of sharp humor shot throughout the entire film, the general ambience is never far-out and witty enough for us to classify the work as satirical. As a result, the final scenes seem somehow more silly than provocative.

This is not, however, to suggest that `The Tailor of Panama' is not a worthwhile and interesting film. In fact, it succeeds almost on the strength of its performances alone. Brosnan does a superb job poking fun at his signature spy persona, as he utilizes his trademark suavity to get exactly what he wants - be it information, a load of cash, or a roll in the hay with a gorgeous female companion. As the title character, Geoffrey Rush delivers yet another outstanding performance, somehow managing to make Harry seem both incredibly weak and amazingly strong at the same time. In fact, Rush, quite literally, carries this film, earning the audience's sympathy from beginning to end. Curtis turns in her usual fine performance, although her role seems a bit undernourished compared to those of the two male leads.

`The Tailor of Panama,' although ultimately unsatisfying, comes pretty damn close to being a worthwhile success.

The combined efforts of Geoffrey Rush's and Pierce Brosnan's acting ability, combined with John Boorman's directing skill, and John Le Carre's frightening talent as a writer of spy fiction, make The Tailor Of Panama one of the best of all time, and the best of this century.

Harry Pendel(Geoffrey Rush), tailor to royalty, is one of many members of Panamanian High Society, and a proud partner of Pendel & Braithwate. Atleast, that is the man his friends know. Harry is actually the nephew of a British tailor, a former prisoner thanks to his Uncle Benny's insurance scam, thousands of dollars in debt, and, against his will, a Spy for Her Majesty. Andrew Osnard(Pierce Brosnan), is MI6's man in Panama, and the delivery boy of the death of Harry's well lived lie.

In exchange for the money harry has to provide information. Unfortunately the old promises of drunken, one-time revolutionaries just isn't enough. So using his inherited "Fluency" and his "Rock of Eye", as his Uncle Benny put it, he creates a stream of lies, but the boys back home buy it, and Harry has to choose between Panama, or his good name.

Also starring Jamie Lee Curtis, and the lawyer off of Jurassic Park, this movie is a modern classic, both in print and on film. WATCH IT!!!!!!

It's too bad about the low IMDB rating for this movie. It is a deft blend of James Bond, Casablanca and Dr Strangelove which directs its often vicious tongue-in-cheek barbs at both the intelligence industry and the spy films which glorify it. While it can be enjoyed "straight", that is as a story in its own right, I think those who miss its satirical structure (the film doesn't directly let the audience in on the joke - it must be inferred), miss half the fun.