source: The Tailor of Panama

If you're a fan of John LeCarre spy novels, you'll love this film. If you're a fan of James Bond, you'll also love this film, because it's a perfect anti-spy caper starring none other than Pierce Brosnan--the man born to play Bond. Brosnan is absolutely convincing as a womanizing, exploitative opportunist, who uses his postion as a MI-6 operative to pull a scam on both U.S. and British intelligence. Where Bond is a likeable rake, this fellow is a despicable, sex-addicted, SOB. Kudos to Brosnan for pulling this off. And double kudos to Rush who should get an Oscar nomination.

There have been a number of John LeCarre's books adapted to movies, usually with good results (most notable are The Spy Who Came In From The Cold and The Russia House), so I looked forward to a ripping good spy yarn with this one. What I got was a ripping good YAWN, or two, or a dozen. The "plot" was lame and predictable, never catching my interest, never really prompting me to care about the characters. The one bright spot in this drivel was Geoffrey Rush, who seems to make each character he plays quite different from the next (Pierce Brosnan just plays Bond turned venal). If you decide to watch this movie, don't say I didn't warn you.

This film is really awful. I mean the cast kind of promises a pretty good film, but it just all fails. There is no fun, no action and no tension WHAT SO EVER. This is one of the worst movies I've seen lately (since Spy kids). How could anyone make this movie, especially Brosnan??? If he was interested in making a good spy film with good effects and action could have waited 'till 2002 to make the next Bond film. Not even laughable. STAY AWAY!!! 2 out of 10

The best scenes in the movie are those showing Geoffrey Rush fitting clients and cutting cloth in his haberdashery. Rush is an outstanding actor and clearly does whatever it takes to turn in a credible performance from even the weakest of scripts. Pierce Brosnan is also credible, perhaps a little too credible, as an unprincipled British MI.6 agent. The problem is that his character elicits no sympathy, which makes the improbable ending eminently unsatisfying. Implausibility in films has bothered me a lot lately, but THE TAILOR OF PANAMA sets new heights in this regard. The writer asks us to believe that the United States would launch a full-scale invasion of a sovereign nation based on the undocumented word of a single discredited foreign agent. Based on poor script, glacial pacing, and inept editing, I rated this film a 4 of 10, which is the lowest I have given a theatrical release in a long time. I cannot recommend it even for video rental customers.

I found that this was a halfways decent Bond spoof-but somewheres along the way-good perf. by Brosnon, Rush and Gleesan get muddied under by the sheer sleezoid factor. You don't need to hear Brosnan say 'F@#@K!' 45 times, you don't need the 'Blue Oyster Club' stuff, you really don't need to see him working over the Embassy gal with such vile glee. There was something just...Wrong about it. The rest-an under-used 'Marta', ditto Jamie Lee, decent local color, fun 'Strangelove' satire on the US-would have worked better if given room to breathe. As it was-I did find myself wincing a couple times, and kept on wondering, how did this go wrong? No being familiar with the source material I can't 'go there', but I do know-Boorman, Pierce B, etc-are all capable of better. ** outta **** for Rush and 'Marta'.

This movie is intelligent, very intelligent: It is a vacuum of the five senses: It will take you inside/out of Plato's cave and you will not even notice the difference because you are a Marxist: You believe in -MACHINES-! Rewind and undo: Mao is not Marx, for example, and you can read M. Proust in its entirety and still you don't have a clue to the French language: Although sin is Catholic, other religions do accept it, including Pagans such as those of Salem, Massachussets: The little street of Salem, Massachussets where the -FALL OF THE HOUSE USHER- occurred: Marx and Engels had an automatic system hither-fore the lights would turn on or off automatically: Voil'a, that is perfect Marxism, perfect lifted! This movie will bring your -SPACEBALLS- in "accord" with your passes: You will need bring a pass, you know all the references, your act as Buddha is finished and now you will only need -LOVE-!

I saw this before I started getting into film, so all i expected from it was the simple demands of a good story - so I can confidently say that the wide audience will feel what I felt: that this movie is so muddled and uneven that its nearly incomprehensible to anyone who hasn't read the book. Its substance is two characters: secret agent Pierce Brosnan, and his tailor (Geoffrey Rush), who he manipulates into all kinds of illegal activities. Its a strange, unsatisfying, impossible to follow movie experience with nasty, unpleasant characters. It also has one of the strangest scenes i've ever seen: the two men talking on a vibrating bed. A very sketch-comedy attempt at humour. 0/5.

Pierce Brosnan happily plays against type as a rogue British secret agent sent to Panama to be kept out of sight and instead decides to instigate trouble by getting involved with a tailor with a past (Geoffrey Rush) and his wife (Jamie Lee Curtis). John Boorman continues to explore one of his dominant themes--the tenuous bonds of family--as intelligently as he did in films such as `Where The Heart Is', `Hope And Glory' and `The Emerald Forest' and it's a reassuring feeling to find someone who finds such comfort in family. Brosnan is delightful as he subverts his James Bond persona at every turn, reveling in his tawdry exploits both sexual and manipulative; it tells us much about Brosnan's approach that he would even dare to explore the undercurrents of his image as well as that of popular film espionage. All in all, it's a fun film to watch, tastefully done and poignant.

It's been over a year since I first saw Tailor of Panama. It's stuck with me - the images of Geoffrey Rush as the tailor, his American wife - a seeming mistmatch in casting - but effective and Anti James Bond played with just the right amount of corpulence.... See it - sweat - enjoy good acting, strong locale, and a plot which serves well to entertain and ends well to satirize America.