Head-to-Head: Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy, 1979/2011. Tinker (Michael Aldridge v.s. Toby Jones), Tailor (Ian Richardson v.s. Colin Firth), Soldier (Terrence Rigby v.s. Ciarán Hinds), Poorman (Bernard Hepton v.s. David Dencik)

**SPOILERS** **SPOILERS**

I supposed before I get into each of the performances of the Circus individually, that I'd look at how brilliantly each of the members of the Circus are introduced in the 1979 miniseries. It's brief, but that opening scene with them each walking into the room, silently, yet showing so much about their respective characters, is quite great really. Bernard Hepton's Toby Esterhase arriving with tail between legs, eager to please like a little puppy, keen beyond his ability, perhaps. Michael Aldridge's Percy Alleline struts in with all the sheer pomposity of a natural born (or so he'd like to think) leader, pipe in hand and with such an air of pretension about him. Ian Richardson's Bill Haydon playfully tiptoeing in, tea and biscuits in hand, looking more at ease than anyone else in the room; and the chain-smoking Roy Bland (Terrence Rigby) who seems like he'd rather be anywhere than here. The 2011 version does not really have an equivalent scene and to an extent, suffers for it. 

Michael Aldridge and Toby Jones both played Percy Alleline ('Tinker') in 'Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy' in 1979 and 2011, respectively. 

Despite having distinctly more screen-time and material, however, I don't feel that Michael Aldridge makes that much of an impression as Percy Alleline. Oh, he's certainly servicable, and emphasises the ambition of old Percy just about well enough, but unfortunately his performance always feels a bit lacking, a bit too consistent. He's actually rather good in showing Percy to have that big bluff manner about him that verges upon bullying, working well with his wide frame to make for an intimidating enough figure who puts fear and obedience into the hearts and likes of Toby Esterhase, but I never really got the sense of that inner calculation that Toby Jones brings to the role--although to what extent is Alleline really a master strategist? One of the more underrated character actors of recent years, Jones brings his usual brand of slimy pompousness to the role, as well as a bit of that old-fashioned charm he has in most of his roles. 

Both Aldridge and Jones are aware that Percy's not by any stretch of the imagination a villain, and I think Aldridge does well enough with this by laying some seeds of weakness and insecurity within his performance to emphasise that yes, perhaps Percy isn't all he's cracked up to be. My only reservation with this though is that his confrontations with Smiley and Control don't have the same sort of frisson that Jone's elicits in the 2011 adaptation with that subtle yet pretty effective way of slipping beneath Hurt and Oldman's defences and making a rather big spectacle of it. Jones always has a sort of underlying intelligence to most of his roles, and this performance actually evoked some memory of his pretty good performance as Truman Capote in the unfortunately neglected 'Infamous'. Aldridge is smarmy and sure of himself to overcompensate for any lacking attributes, but I just don't think he brings enough aggression to the role that Percy needs to combat the passive-aggressiveness of Control and Smiley. I will say that both performances are to an extent shortchanged by their lack of 'big scenes', so to speak; particularly Jones, who is pretty limited so far as screentime is concerned. Nevertheless I do think Jones manages to make Alleline into a pretty memorable character, overall, nothing earth-shattering but certainly effective, while Aldridge is for the most part servicable, he's lacking in some respects but actually quite good in his final scene as he begins to deal with the fallout of his actions, unfortunately it is kind of cut short by the arcs of other characters.

Jones: 3.5

Aldridge: 3

Ian Richardson and Colin Firth both played Bill Haydon ('Tailor') in 'Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy' in 1979 and 2011, respectively.

If you haven't already been warned off by that HUGE label above, then turn away now, but to really get into both performances I will have to bring into discussion that SPOILERS Bill Haydon is the mole within the Circus, leaking information to the Soviets. This sort of role, the 'who' behind the 'whodunnit', is probably the trickiest of all performances to pull off, since it requires the actor to both in some way (s) allude to the truth, so as the make the eventual reveal not out-of-the-blue, yet he or she also has to maintain that facade of innocence but not laying it on too thick, and remain engaging and approachable as a character without being too obvious. It takes careful, precise writing and acting to craft out just the right balance of ambiguity and fact within such a character, and more often than not it fails, which leads many films and novels to 'cop out' by usually placing the blame of the crime on, say, the most obvious perpetrator, or some random mook, or some strange metaphysical occurrence, etc. I will note that many of my favourite mystery films hold a special place in my heart in large part, due to their handling of characters of the akin: 'Stalag 17', 'Laura', 'In the Heat of the Night', 'The Prestige'.

And of course, 'Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy'. And via re-watches in vein of my above criteria, one performance that has come under serious scrutiny and re-evaluation by me is Colin Firth's 'turn' as Bill Haydon. Well the first time I watched the film I thought Firth did a good enough job of playing the cheeky, very British, a convincing enough spy and I held my reservation of him being too obvious a suspect due to a fact that an A-lister playing a supporting role usually gives the game away. Upon re-watch, some of that old charm really wore on me, and I began to see cracks in his performance that I believe were not wholly intentional, and really lessens a lot of the initial impact I had to the reveal of who the Soviet mole was. A multi-layered approach to the character of Haydon is necessary, but also requires the actor to mend these different sides and also, to not give the game away. Well Firth I feel gives the game away, way too early, just the way he postures himself in those Circus meetings, almost too defensive of his actions to push Control and Smiley out, sure the way those scenes were written it is kind of obvious that Haydon's got something to hide. Still, Firth could have played those notes much more quietly. It's not that he's bad in these sort of scenes really, but I have to say that upon re-watch of both versions, quite frankly, he can't hold a candle to Ian Richardson's portrayal.

Richardson was a great actor; I haven't seen as much of him as I'd have liked to but having just begun the UK series of 'House of Cards' I must say, he was an incredibly underrated and terrific screen presence who just exudes presence without even saying a single word. That mellifluous, distinctively smooth speaking voice and accent of his, alongside with his unconventionally refined and intrinsically mysterious appearance actually reminds me most of all of another famous actor who's landmark role was in another landmark mystery film, Clifton Webb, and 'Laura'. The physical resemblance is quite uncanny, but even more so the excellence with which they go about setting up their characters as men not solely defined with their complicity, and yet amidst all the different flavours of their portrayal, an underlying merging factor of what makes them the 'who' in the 'whodunnit'. I'm afraid I can no longer be lenient on Firth being too obvious a mole solely because of his A-lister status, because in the same sense, Richardson and Webb were the most well-known of the potential culprits in their respective films as well, and yet not once do they give the game away.

As Bill Haydon, Richardson is simply pitch-perfect from his very first appearances. Limited though they are, he so eloquently evokes the very precise, classy manner of Haydon through his movements and voice, always as if he's on a different plateau to all the other members in influence and intellect, a true fatherly figure; and yet also with a more earthy undertone to it that suggests a certain cynicism with his job, and the lesser men performing duties around him. Firth, in his interactions with Cumberbatch's Guillam is perhaps a bit too forceful, too obviously showing that he and the Circus have something to hide and arousing our suspicions immediately, but Richardson is darned perfect in alternating between patronizing Guillam as a 'pariah', to quietly giggling in an admiring manner at Peter taking the piss out of his fellow Circus officials. Richardson strings along these various faces of Haydon in such an effortless manner that makes sense entirely in accordance with his playful interpretation of Bill as a man who does his job well, but doesn't take it too seriously. Firth, I guess, takes a different approach that is far more stiff and professional in his manner of speaking, he shows a certain displeasure to the ways of Percy Alleline and his 'little cabaret', and is good enough in showing that Haydon really does not have time for the conniving toadying of the likes of Alleline and Esterhase. However, I do feel his delivery of 'why don't you fuck off to his majesty' a bit too overt a line of dialogue and delivery, almost like the film is trying to make too much of a statement about Haydon being a bit of an odd one out in the Circus. What Richardson does brilliantly is leave many of these quirks of Richardson unsaid, yet conveys it so well through his performance, and makes them not only entertaining to watch, but also quite endearing, in the sense that the audience, getting to know Bill Haydon a bit better, is more inclined to like him, despite some of his less than savory qualities.

Of these qualities, most notable perhaps is Haydon's condescension, particularly to George Smiley. Firth goes for the safer route of making mountains out of molehills, he definitely overplays a fair few moments when he's acting like a complete dick to Smiley, no reservations involved, it works well, but mostly because of Oldman's mostly silent reactions. Richardson and Guinness, on the other hand, share something that is absolutely brilliant, the most perfect anti-chemistry I have ever seen onscreen. This may sound like sarcastic praise but abide with me. The crux of the relationship between the two characters is Haydon's past affair with Smiley's wife, Ann. Despite the miniseries never actually showing any of the affair, nor Guinness' reactions at the time to it, both actors are absolutely flawless in showing the history of their troubled relationship. Richardson's aloof manner of wandering by the way is intertwined with a rather uncanny awareness and bluntness he brings to the sly humour he has in his interactions with Guinness' Smiley, really bringing the flair to the 'classy bunch' he remembers them to be part of. I have heard some minor reservations by some people that Richardson was not 'sexy' enough to play Haydon, but I don't think that's the point of the affair at all; he exudes this sort of quiet, incredibly compelling allure over the audience instead of Firth's usual charming routine (which I must note, does work, I guess, in the sense that you can imagine Ann faaaaawning over Mr Darcy and his wet t-shirt contests), and I think that alone helps to already establish his sovereignty over George, his emasculation of him.

With Jim Prideaux, Firth's performance is strongly aided by the strength of his (and indeed, Strong's) contrasting approaches that merge quite nicely into that single look they share near the film's conclusion, but I do think that due to the limitations of the film's running time the friendship is given the right amount of power, but nothing more. We only catch brief glimpses of Firth here and there throughout the film and I must say, he always looks like he's up to something; whereas Richard, on the other hand, in the flashbacks and present scenes, is decidedly more casual and therefore more effective in showing how routine the character's handling of espoinage affairs is, up till the point he has to deal with his good friend's imprisonment by the Soviets. I would say that Richardson, though downplaying the strength of companionship between the two at this point, is equally effective as Firth in showing the history between the two men, as he drops his usual facade of indolence and becomes altogether more serious and irritable, a fascinating display of an enigmatic yet approachable man stripping down layers and yet still remaining distant. All these little scenes for both versions, lead up to the final reveal that Bill Haydon is the mole. Firth's reveal scene I must confess is a little underwhelming in the way it is handled, I will give him credit for handling it well enough to make it resonate with the viewer, but it really does pale in comparison to Richardson who is absolutely brilliant in his almost silent resignation, but still with that certain degree of arrogance within himself as he tries not to outwit, but to continue to play mind games even when, nose bleeding and utterly defeated, he is truly at wit's end.

The final few scenes of Bill Haydon are what really makes or breaks the performance, and I will say that Firth, while imperfect in his approach, does manage to make a certain impact by his more directly emotional portrayal of a man suffering from the weight of rerality, and the repercussions of his actions, and actually does manage to make me feel sorry for Bill Haydon to an extent. I think he kind of overdoes the line 'I'm not (Karla's) bloody office boy!', but makes up for it with his assertion that he's 'someone who's made his mark'. Firth is good enough I suppose in showing the man's pride in his work and shame at his failure, but really it's nothing compared to Richardson's amazing scenes, some of the best acted I have ever seen in any film/miniseries/television show/play...anywhere. Coming under Smiley's relentless questioning, Richardson bursting out into laughter and tears about his actions being a 'necessary' evils, and his disillusionment with the Circus that led to his defection to the enemy, is simply heartbreaking without compromising the 'villainy' (if it can be called as such) of Haydon's actions. Simply put, it's probably the greatest portrayal I've ever seen of an emotional breakdown into nothingness that really shows how hollow an existence Haydon has led ever since he betrayed his principles for the sake of what he sees, as the greater good. When he discusses the machinations of he and Karla's plans to deceive Smiley through an affair with the latter's wife, you don't feel hate for his deviousness as the wit he displays seems so emptied of emotion and vigour, retaining the intelligence of the man but without his former spirit.

Watching Richardson slowly break down the defences of this enigmatic man into someone more truthful, more understandable and yet so painful to watch is an incredible achievement as we watch his final moments of tying loose ends up with his girlfriend, Smiley's investigation, and finally his own death. That last scene with him and Bannen is just remarkable not only because of Bannen's cold yet deeply heartbroken portrayal of a betrayed man, but also Richardson's remarkable conclusion to the character, by accepting his guilt and death but trying to make final amends. Firth's final speechless scenes are also incredibly effective, but I would say considerably less so than Richardson's, they're not bad of course, in fact they are probably the high points of Firth's portrayal, but in contrast to Richardson's great work, my favourite television performance of all-time, it can't help but be overshadowed by the sublime magnificence of Richardson's portrayal.


Richardson: 5

Firth: 3

Terrence Rigby and Ciarán Hinds both played Roy Bland ('Soldier') in 'Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy' in 1979 and 2011, respectively.

Roy Bland is actually a fairly, well, bland role in the scheme of things, but I do think Terrence Rigby gets much more of an opportunity to make an impression than Hinds. Most of this comes in his one big scene with Smiley, and Bland very effectively accentuates that very naturalistic, amicable yet also rather nihilistic manner of his. Rigby has a kind of Peter Ustinov-esque air about him, and I felt he could have been an absolute scene-stealer if he'd been given a few more scenes. Nevertheless, it's a very good characterization of one sort of washed up, yet not quite disgruntled, swine who doesn't really have a conscience, and doesn't seem to fussed about that. I won't say that Ciarán Hinds is bad at all, but it's just that he doesn't really have anything to do, at all, besides one speech which is quite frankly, rather inconsequential exposition, and sit around and look a bit intimidating. Hinds does not get any opportunity to flesh out his character, while Rigby has a bit of material and really does make the most of it, more than anyone else could've, probably.

Rigby: 3.5

Hinds: 2.5

Bernard Hepton and David Dencik both played Toby Esterhase ('Beggarman') in 'Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy' in 1979 and 2011, respectively.

Bernard Hepton re-enacted his role as Toby Esterhase for the 1980s miniseries sequel to 'Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy', 'Smiley's People', which I am incredibly interested in seeing as he apparently takes on an entirely different approach to the character which is, in the words of many, both genius and makes sense with his depiction here. Mr Esterhase, I would say, is the closest we get to a comic relief character insofar as his primary qualities are his breezy manner, distinct lack of autonomy, and his general willingness to please. I may sound like I'm calling him out but don't mistake me; Esterhase is one of my favourite characters, but I will say that to properly demonstrate why he is, a performance must touch upon the right notes of his characters very, very carefully, and avoid descending into parody.

David Dencik as Toby Esterhase does not have that many scenes in the 2011 adaptation overall but unfortunately, he already manages to make a somewhat negative, kind of detrimental impact to the proceedings. Dencik plays Esterhase as being completely spineless and somewhat idiotic, highly incapable and sort of the proverbial scoff for levity within the Circus. Which I guess, works in one sense, as he is completely eaten up by the scenery-chewing of John Hurt and Toby Jones in the Circus boardroom scenes, and the quieter Oldman and even Firth, heck even Hinds makes a bit more of an impression in those scenes. Dencik I thought was fine enough the first time I watched the film but like Firth, but to an even larger extent, my reservations grew to an extent on re-watch that I ended up verging upon dislike of his portrayal. One reason for this being Bernard Hepton's great portrayal of Esterhase, which really does go out on a limb, but not in the conventional way at all.

Hepton plays the role as yes, a pushover, but with rather more complexity than Dencik bothers to give/can give. Firstly there's that accent he gives him which is almost exaggeratedly British in its intonation, almost as to mask some kind of foreign flavour he has underneath it, generating from the character conception alone a mystery that is well differentiated by the other darker enigmas on display. Beyond that Hepton is remarkable in imbuding Esterhase with such a polite, posh manner to him that's obviously quite a put on and yet feel entirely natural as something he'd be able to maintain so much as part of his personality. Really, I found Esterhase's conversations with the fellow members of the Circus particularly interesting because of how jovial and actually, quite sweet, he comes across as just this little puppy the other members subtly belittle and take advantage of. I particularly enjoy a specific little interchange between him and Guillam where he describes information as being 'ultra, ultra-sensitive'; Guillam's consequent response of 'I'll try and keep my mouth ultra, ultra-shut' is priceless not only because of Jayston's delivery, but the priceless look on Esterhase's poor face. Dencik, unfortunately, is quite boring and stoic in similar interactions, a bit of a stick in the mud really. It is not detrimental to the film really, but adding a bit more style to Toby's patheticness as a characters would have done a lot more to help him stand out.

Within Esterhase, Hepton also imbues a sense of ambition to move up in the ranks in the Circus that is palatable because of his little hints of Toby's inner desperation to be recognized. It's wonderfully underplayed work by him that makes Toby suspect enough as a potential mole, without compromising the inherent weakness of the character. Esterhase is very much aware that he is a 'little guy' compared to the 'big guy (s) of Percy Allenine and Bill Haydon, and this chip on the shoulder is evoked very well by Hepton, whereas with Dencik he leaves this aspect of the character to the domineering presences of the likes of Jones, Firth, Hurt, even Hinds. I don't know if my line of argument here is evident enough but Dencik really is underwhelmingly underwhelming.

Both characters get a big scene--indeed, probably the closest the 2011 film comes to an 'Oscar-y scene' is in the scene where Smiley interrogates Esterhase coldly about the address of a London safe house in order to catch the mole. Interestingly the potential is there for Dencik to give an Oscar-nomination worthy one-scene wonder of desperation and a man being broken down to nothingness. Dencik, however, continues to be underwhelming, and is not bad really, he cries well enough I suppose and has the right amount of belligerent anger to his tone, but it doesn't really add up to much. The real power of the scene resides with Oldman (I'll stop there for now). Hepton, in contrast, makes the gradual breakdown so incredibly powerful. Much of the credit has often gone to Guinness for unraveling the reserve of Smiley to reveal the cold, calculating and even montrous persona underneath all those layers, but Hepton, 'On the Waterfront'-esque style, is often neglected. He's incredibly moving in showing through Esterhase's mostly silent reactions, as his normally calm manner slowly breaks down, that he is both not a mole, nor a traitor, but instead a pawn in the game who is forced to suffer the consequences of his subservience. He works in complete, perfect harmony with Guinness to bring out the best of both portrayals and the basest emotions of Smiley and Esterhase. Hepton's excellent work turns potentially stock character into an incredibly effective facilitator of other characters, and a fascinating character creation of a fish out of water.

Hepton: 4.5 (verging on a 5)

Dencik: 2

Picture Credits:
coveringmedia.com
movie-dude.co.uk
picturefrommovie.tumblr.com
whysoblu.com
let-the-right-one-in.com
focusfeatures.com
blurray.highdefdigest.com
tr10023.com