The Night Manager (TV Series)
Apr. 6th, 2016 06:53 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
selenakWhich Amazon Video put up as soon as it had finished its run on the BBC, so I marathoned it. Starring Tom Hiddleston, Hugh Laurie and Olivia Coleman, it's a sleek adaption-plus-update of John Le Carré's novel of the same name. I really enjoye watching, nitpicks aside, but I also groaned when reading there may be a second season and said "please don't" immediately, because if there is, it will make the Broadchurch mistake of adding something to a perfectly self contained miniseries just because it was successful, not because the story needs it.
On to the miniseries that needs no second season, with spoilers:
It delivers the usual John Le Carré tropes (double agents, more-or-less-civilian turns spy, corrupt organizations, etc.), and improves one of them, big time, as the author freely admits himself: making the no-nonsense handler character female instead of male (and a pregnant 40ish woman played by the wonderful Olivia Coleman to boot, the only woman in the entire show who is allowed to look unglamorous and wear normal clothing) chucked the usual Le Carré structure (as he sums up ruefully the article I linked - one white middle-aged man pitched against another white middle-aged man and using a third, younger, white middle-aged man as his weapon of choice" -) right out of the window. I mean, I like Smiley & Co. as much as the next spy novel and spy film and spy tv show consumer, but there's a reason why I loved Claudia in the first season of The Americans so much. Female handlers in spy dramas are still incredibly rare. Female handlers who are pregnant and accomplish their handling throughout without their pregnancy being either a motivation or a negative in the plot? There are none.
Not to mention: the final confrontation when Hugh Laurie's character, Richard "Worst man of the world" Roper, for the first and last time encounters Angela Burr, Olivia Colemann's character, and sneers "who are you in the grand scheme of things?", you can hear the privilege and condescension practically dripping from the walls. People like her just don't exist in his world. Defeated by a pregnant woman in frumpy clothes who looks at him unimpressed and retorts: "“Oh, the grand scheme of things? Dunno, I live in Bermondsey"? What is the world coming to. 'Twas glorious.
Mind you: reading through online reviews and interviews, I find myself disagreeing from other reviewers on several points when comes to the key relationship between Roper and our hero, Jonathan Pine, and Roper in general. Or rather: it didn't come across to me the way it clearly did to lots of people, including John Le Carré, and the director, Susanne Bier. What they saw: Roper as the type of charismatic charming villain both audience and hero (to a degree) are seduced by, resulting in some uncertainty on the audience's part whether the hero will go through with the mission. What I saw: no uncertainty in Jonathan Pine whether or not to bring Roper down whatsoever. Also no attraction to Roper. The reverse, yes, absolutely. The moment in the finale when Roper realises that Pine has tricked him even more thoroughly than previously assumed, has, at least at this particular moment, managed to completely screw him over, and with a look at Pine admiringly mutters "oh, you beauty"? Fantastic. But I never got the sense that Jonathan Pine felt anything for Roper other than hostility and contempt. Which I could understand because I never felt charmed by Roper, either. Sure, Hugh Laurie delivered the goods in terms of charisma. But not charm. (No Harry Lime he.) Roper felt reptilian to me. Partly because Olivia Coleman had played Angela Burr's disgust when she talked about Roper witnessing the use of Sarin and thinking profit so viscerally, and Roper's whole arms trading had so much rl resonance for me right now, partly because Roper's treatment of Jed as his property/sexual trophy throughout was incredibly chilling, and partly because Roper was far too easily ready to abandon his previous No.2, Corky (played by Tom Hollander).
Speaking of Jed: she and Sophie/Samira at the start of the series were two well executed but utterly cliché tropes of the spy genre. Sophie/Samira was the original secret carrier who of course and inevitably is killed, thus causing the hero to get involved with the murky world of the plot, Jed as the villain's girlfriend who inevitably falls for the hero. (No wonder Le Carré refers to her as the "prize" in the article I linked.) Now the way Roper treats her as a beautiful ornament says something about Roper, and the series tries to give her a bit of an emotional life outside this plot function (she's got a child whom he's supporting - when Roper finds out, he remarks that this "wasn't in the brochure", which, again, is telling), but it's still very cliché, including the fact that the series relies on said cliché and Tom Hiddleston being regarded as irresistable to explain why Jed should risk all for him. (She doesn't come across as suicidal, and she doesn't have nearly enough interaction with Pine to sell me on this being a falling in love thing. Maybe an attempt to reclaim some autonomy as opposed to being Roper's property, but that's extrapolating.) This is why the change of Burr from male to female was so necessary, and why Angela Burr stands out so much, not just in Roper's world (where he doesn't mind being brought down by another man who reminds him of himself and whom he has homoerotic tension with, but minds very much when it turns out there was a one-of-the-masses-woman behind his boy) a but the narrative's universe.
The last time I saw Olivia Coleman in the same tv series as Tom Hollander, they were wife and husband in Rev. Here, he's Roper's initial loyal sidekick Corcoran, aka Corky, one very Le Carré-ian character specializing in non-stop bitchy one liners. He's also the only openly gay character in the story, which is used against him when Roper dismisses his suspicions of Pine as frustrated lust instead of sound judgment. Now he actually to me was what the reviews, Susanne Bier and Le Carré called Roper, a villain one can't help liking and rooting for to get away anyway. (No such luck.)
Speaking of old tv acquataintances: David Harewood as Angela Burr's sole reliable ally in the intelligence community. Because a) he's David Harewood, whom I mostly know from the first two seasons of Homeland, and b) he's an American intelligence official in a British tv show based on a John Le Carré novel, I totally expected him to betray Angela, but he never did. Go him!
(As opposed to Tobias "Brutus" Menzies as one of Angela's corrupt superiors, but that was obvious from the moment he was introduced.)
And what of Tom Hiddleston in what is after all the main part, you ask? Said main part made me think that yes, I can buy that being a hotel (night) manager is an excellent preparation for the spy life (you have to put up with any number of outrageous people and keep a poker face, defuse situations, not give into provocations), and I also appreciated that a few years in the military before the hotel service career made it believable Pine would know how to kill someone if he had to, but, see above, if they wanted me to believe Pine was at least partly won over by Roper and Roper's world, Hiddleston didn't deliver for me. Otoh if they wanted me to believe Pine was focused on bringing down Roper throughout and was unimpressed by said world because he'd seen it before from below (aka various luxury hotels he worked in) and above all had seen the human cost, then yes, I believed that. What I had trouble believing, either way, was his relationship with Jed, see above: he didn't come across as suicidal, either, or knowingly ruthless enough to use her as a way to get Roper, or as madly-in-love-despite-knowing-better.
In conclusion: I could watch Olivia Coleman defeat snooty Hugh Laurie all day and night. But I still don't want a sequel.
On to the miniseries that needs no second season, with spoilers:
It delivers the usual John Le Carré tropes (double agents, more-or-less-civilian turns spy, corrupt organizations, etc.), and improves one of them, big time, as the author freely admits himself: making the no-nonsense handler character female instead of male (and a pregnant 40ish woman played by the wonderful Olivia Coleman to boot, the only woman in the entire show who is allowed to look unglamorous and wear normal clothing) chucked the usual Le Carré structure (as he sums up ruefully the article I linked - one white middle-aged man pitched against another white middle-aged man and using a third, younger, white middle-aged man as his weapon of choice" -) right out of the window. I mean, I like Smiley & Co. as much as the next spy novel and spy film and spy tv show consumer, but there's a reason why I loved Claudia in the first season of The Americans so much. Female handlers in spy dramas are still incredibly rare. Female handlers who are pregnant and accomplish their handling throughout without their pregnancy being either a motivation or a negative in the plot? There are none.
Not to mention: the final confrontation when Hugh Laurie's character, Richard "Worst man of the world" Roper, for the first and last time encounters Angela Burr, Olivia Colemann's character, and sneers "who are you in the grand scheme of things?", you can hear the privilege and condescension practically dripping from the walls. People like her just don't exist in his world. Defeated by a pregnant woman in frumpy clothes who looks at him unimpressed and retorts: "“Oh, the grand scheme of things? Dunno, I live in Bermondsey"? What is the world coming to. 'Twas glorious.
Mind you: reading through online reviews and interviews, I find myself disagreeing from other reviewers on several points when comes to the key relationship between Roper and our hero, Jonathan Pine, and Roper in general. Or rather: it didn't come across to me the way it clearly did to lots of people, including John Le Carré, and the director, Susanne Bier. What they saw: Roper as the type of charismatic charming villain both audience and hero (to a degree) are seduced by, resulting in some uncertainty on the audience's part whether the hero will go through with the mission. What I saw: no uncertainty in Jonathan Pine whether or not to bring Roper down whatsoever. Also no attraction to Roper. The reverse, yes, absolutely. The moment in the finale when Roper realises that Pine has tricked him even more thoroughly than previously assumed, has, at least at this particular moment, managed to completely screw him over, and with a look at Pine admiringly mutters "oh, you beauty"? Fantastic. But I never got the sense that Jonathan Pine felt anything for Roper other than hostility and contempt. Which I could understand because I never felt charmed by Roper, either. Sure, Hugh Laurie delivered the goods in terms of charisma. But not charm. (No Harry Lime he.) Roper felt reptilian to me. Partly because Olivia Coleman had played Angela Burr's disgust when she talked about Roper witnessing the use of Sarin and thinking profit so viscerally, and Roper's whole arms trading had so much rl resonance for me right now, partly because Roper's treatment of Jed as his property/sexual trophy throughout was incredibly chilling, and partly because Roper was far too easily ready to abandon his previous No.2, Corky (played by Tom Hollander).
Speaking of Jed: she and Sophie/Samira at the start of the series were two well executed but utterly cliché tropes of the spy genre. Sophie/Samira was the original secret carrier who of course and inevitably is killed, thus causing the hero to get involved with the murky world of the plot, Jed as the villain's girlfriend who inevitably falls for the hero. (No wonder Le Carré refers to her as the "prize" in the article I linked.) Now the way Roper treats her as a beautiful ornament says something about Roper, and the series tries to give her a bit of an emotional life outside this plot function (she's got a child whom he's supporting - when Roper finds out, he remarks that this "wasn't in the brochure", which, again, is telling), but it's still very cliché, including the fact that the series relies on said cliché and Tom Hiddleston being regarded as irresistable to explain why Jed should risk all for him. (She doesn't come across as suicidal, and she doesn't have nearly enough interaction with Pine to sell me on this being a falling in love thing. Maybe an attempt to reclaim some autonomy as opposed to being Roper's property, but that's extrapolating.) This is why the change of Burr from male to female was so necessary, and why Angela Burr stands out so much, not just in Roper's world (where he doesn't mind being brought down by another man who reminds him of himself and whom he has homoerotic tension with, but minds very much when it turns out there was a one-of-the-masses-woman behind his boy) a but the narrative's universe.
The last time I saw Olivia Coleman in the same tv series as Tom Hollander, they were wife and husband in Rev. Here, he's Roper's initial loyal sidekick Corcoran, aka Corky, one very Le Carré-ian character specializing in non-stop bitchy one liners. He's also the only openly gay character in the story, which is used against him when Roper dismisses his suspicions of Pine as frustrated lust instead of sound judgment. Now he actually to me was what the reviews, Susanne Bier and Le Carré called Roper, a villain one can't help liking and rooting for to get away anyway. (No such luck.)
Speaking of old tv acquataintances: David Harewood as Angela Burr's sole reliable ally in the intelligence community. Because a) he's David Harewood, whom I mostly know from the first two seasons of Homeland, and b) he's an American intelligence official in a British tv show based on a John Le Carré novel, I totally expected him to betray Angela, but he never did. Go him!
(As opposed to Tobias "Brutus" Menzies as one of Angela's corrupt superiors, but that was obvious from the moment he was introduced.)
And what of Tom Hiddleston in what is after all the main part, you ask? Said main part made me think that yes, I can buy that being a hotel (night) manager is an excellent preparation for the spy life (you have to put up with any number of outrageous people and keep a poker face, defuse situations, not give into provocations), and I also appreciated that a few years in the military before the hotel service career made it believable Pine would know how to kill someone if he had to, but, see above, if they wanted me to believe Pine was at least partly won over by Roper and Roper's world, Hiddleston didn't deliver for me. Otoh if they wanted me to believe Pine was focused on bringing down Roper throughout and was unimpressed by said world because he'd seen it before from below (aka various luxury hotels he worked in) and above all had seen the human cost, then yes, I believed that. What I had trouble believing, either way, was his relationship with Jed, see above: he didn't come across as suicidal, either, or knowingly ruthless enough to use her as a way to get Roper, or as madly-in-love-despite-knowing-better.
In conclusion: I could watch Olivia Coleman defeat snooty Hugh Laurie all day and night. But I still don't want a sequel.
no subject
Date: 2016-04-06 06:32 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2016-04-06 09:54 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2016-04-06 09:19 am (UTC)And there I think Ms Colman has put forward the perfect case to be M, when Fiennes retires.
no subject
Date: 2016-04-06 09:55 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2016-04-06 09:59 am (UTC)As opposed to Tobias "Brutus" Menzies as one of Angela's corrupt superiors, but that was obvious from the moment he was introduced.
*g* Poor guy. He's one of the actors where I actually saw several of his few non-backstabbing (sorry) roles first, so he's not an instant traitor to me, but yes, of course. He is a definite victim of type casting.
Same in a way for Tom Hollander, whom I first saw in Gosford Park, where he played one of the few likable aristocratic characters - and other than that, usually slimy, snivelling villains (or Mr. Collins).
no subject
Date: 2016-04-06 10:28 am (UTC)Olivia Coleman makes this show so worth watching, and there are only eight episodes, so go for it, I say. If you have Amazon Prime, it's available for free right now on Amazon Video.
...and I just noticed I have no badass pregnant ladies among my icons.
no subject
Date: 2016-04-06 12:11 pm (UTC)Badass pregnant ladies: on lj I would have had a Sydney icon of course, though I don't think that was from S5.
no subject
Date: 2016-04-06 03:42 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2016-04-06 05:27 pm (UTC)I can't help thinking of him as Guy Burgess. So a little of the good, a little of the bad...
no subject
Date: 2016-04-06 10:48 am (UTC)/Maybe an attempt to reclaim some autonomy as opposed to being Roper's property, but that's extrapolating./ - Yes, I think I headcanoned it as her realizing she felt so trapped and out of control she grabbed the first anchor she could find, namely Pine. But some more characterization wouldn't have gone amiss. *shakes head*
/a villain one can't help liking and rooting for to get away anyway/ - Aw, totally, poor Corky was Cassandra, he saw what was going to happen but no-one listened to him.
/What I had trouble believing, either way, was his relationship with Jed, see above: he didn't come across as suicidal, either, or knowingly ruthless enough to use her as a way to get Roper, or as madly-in-love-despite-knowing-better./ - Yes, I had some trouble with that too. I headcanoned this bit too. To me Pine saw in Jed Sophie/Samira. And while he ultimately wasn't able to save Sophie/Samira he couldn't stand to lose Jad that way too. To me the love/lust/attraction got mixed with some powerful feelings of guilt there. In a way, she comes to represent to him the reason he's doing this whole undercover thing and what would be the point to bring Roper down if he can't save her too?
no subject
Date: 2016-04-06 11:19 am (UTC)So, when I read reviews talking about how Pine is almost seduced, I go ????
Also: I like your headcanon re: Jed.
no subject
Date: 2016-04-06 11:43 am (UTC)And, OMG, I forgot to mention it before but Olivia Coleman (and her character) was so freaking awesome! Easily the best part of the show. I could watch her all day long too. (That and Hiddles being artfully shirtless in those hot, fancy hotel/mansion rooms... :D)
no subject
Date: 2016-04-06 02:37 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2016-04-06 04:30 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2016-04-06 04:34 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2016-04-06 04:55 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2016-04-06 05:01 pm (UTC)I guess I'll have to run through it one more time when I'm at my computer. Such a noob, apparently, I didn't mean to make you my unwitting tech support.
no subject
Date: 2016-04-06 05:12 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2016-04-06 05:34 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2016-04-06 05:15 pm (UTC)OMG it was wonderful. Sadly people like her don't seem to exist in fans' fevered imaginations either. I went to the AO3 hoping against hope for Angela Burr fanfic, and instead found roughly 80% Pine/OFC and 20% Roper/Pine. Bah humbug.
My only interest in Jed is that I want her wardrobe, not that I think I'd wear it as well as she does...
no subject
Date: 2016-04-06 05:22 pm (UTC)Fanfiction: I hear you. But didn't expect anything else in something featuring Tom Hiddleston, at least for the first few weeks. Back after The Hollow Crown was broadcast, there was a sudden influx in the Henry IV and Henry V fanfiction. Featuring, in pretty even thirds, Hal/Ned Poins, Hal/OFC, and Hal/Huntsman-from-Snowwhite. The last baffled me for the second it took to recall the Huntsman in that movie I still haven't watched was played by one Mr. Hemsworth, otherwise known as Thor.
Mind you, fandom being fandom, I predict we'll have to wait at least a year or so before two or three Angela stories appear....
no subject
Date: 2016-04-06 05:26 pm (UTC)If I were being optimistic I might guess we'd get a couple of Angela stories at Yuletide?
no subject
Date: 2016-04-06 05:30 pm (UTC)As for Hiddles, I respect him for adoring Miss Piggy, which shows he has taste. But my Loki and Hal issues may have caused me to watch the scene where Jeremy Irons slaps him a bit over much. :)
ETA: If he ever plays Ralph Lanyon, The Charioteer WILL be a mega fandom, with all the advantages and disadvantages. But Andrew will definitely end up as the most hated character ever for a while.
no subject
Date: 2016-04-07 03:33 am (UTC)if they wanted me to believe Pine was focused on bringing down Roper throughout and was unimpressed by said world because he'd seen it before from below (aka various luxury hotels he worked in) and above all had seen the human cost, then yes, I believed that
YES. This is exactly what I got from the show. Having not read any reviews/interviews suggesting any other interpretation, frankly, I find it difficult to believe that any other interpretation could have been intended. I only ever got veiled disgust and contempt from Hiddleston's performance, as well as from the way Roper's lifestyle was treated narratively. It always seemed very clear to me that we in the audience were supposed to see Roper's world as shiny on the surface, but in all other respects deeply, reprehensibly corrupt.
Also total agreement re: Angela Burr being the thing that elevated this whole enterprise. The tropes are SO STRONG throughout--I was actively scoffing my way through the first ep due to the way EVERYTHING was predicated upon the hoary old trope of the femme-fatale-turned-innocent-to-be-avenged, and all subsequent material involving Jed wasn't any better--that the simple change of making Roper's true adversary *Angela* instead of *Allen* just refreshed everything. It brought whole new dynamics, which in turn added much-welcome depth. (Plus there's the thing where Olivia Coleman is awesome and can do no wrong, which certainly didn't hurt.)
no subject
Date: 2016-04-07 06:34 am (UTC)And yes, like I said in my review: Jed and Sophie/Samira follow the tropes they embody to the letter. Bah.