MovieChat Forums > Our Kind of Traitor (2016) Discussion > Good cinematography, but a surprisingly ...

Good cinematography, but a surprisingly weak screenplay...


The motivations of the 'ordinary heroes couple' are weak and unconvincing.
Why were they later involved ?
Nobody would have done that.

The British are cliché: Honorable men & women, defending women when they are molested by Russians…really?

The Russians are cliché: Hard-drinking, women-beating, tattooed mobsters…
Sure, they exist, but do we need to see them again and again in movies ?

Just about everything in the screenplay was written in a too-simple-to-believe & stereotypic way.

I didn't like the film's tendency to paint Russia as a failed state run by mobsters.
That's the clichés we already get in the tabloids and not worthy of Le Carré.


The cast was a mixed bag: Skarsgard is fine like always, but McGregor and Harris were miscast.


And this last 'fight scene' between bare-chested, tattooed Russians in a dark wood
was about the most ridiculous 'showdown' I've seen in years…a failure of directing & writing.

The only strong asset of this rather weak Le Carré adaptation is
Anthony Dod Mantle's fresh and inventive cinematography.

5/10 - 6/10

reply

Yes the cinematography was good other things not so much.

------
You're just one bad day away from being me. - Frank Castle.

reply

I agree except the last fight. It was quick and the hero didn't begin to use his fists, he merely shot him. Done, no unecessary action.

reply