MovieChat Forums > The Spy Who Came in from the Cold (1965) Discussion > Can't believe George Smiley was such a c...

Can't believe George Smiley was such a cold hearted b#$tard...

posted 14 years ago by sanddragon939
20 replies | jump to latest

SPOILERS

After watching this film again, I simply couldn't fathom how much of a cold hearted bastard George Smiley was portrayed as in this film. Its not something obvious, but something you kinda realise when you give the plot, and especially the climatic events, some serious thought.

I mean, let's look at it this way. Smiley went to meet Nancy...that's how Mundt's watchers knew that Leamas was still part of the SIS. So they bring her to East Germany to act as a witness in the trial, incriminating Leamas, and thus unwittingly completing the SIS's true mission of saving Mundt's skin by discrediting Fiedler. Nancy is initially allowed to escape with Leamas, but then killed because she knows too much, by Mundt's men.

So basically, given that Nancy was brought into the scene by the SIS specifically so as to incriminate Leamas, it wouldn't be a stretch to surmise that Smiley deliberately went to Nancy's apartment just in order to incriminate her and ensure her 'abduction' and transport to East Germany. He thus deliberately put her in a situation where, if everything went as per plan (which it did), she would end up being imprisoned in East Germany. Okay, you might, argue, maybe Smiley did set her up, but then again, Mundt let her go, didn't he? It was, after all, part of the 'bargain'...Except that Mundt doesn't 'really' let her go and always intended to have her gunned down at the Wall (which he does)...and given that Smiley doesn't express the least surprise or remorse at this, but instead calmly tells Leamas to jump, it wouldn't be a stretch to imagine that he KNEW this would be her fate...

So let's run over the sequence of events with this fresh insight again shall we...Smiley pays a seemingly innocent visit to a girl claiming hes a friend of her lover for the express purpose of placing her in a situation where she will be imprisoned and then undoubtedly killed...

...and people call James Bond an 'anti-hero'!

I'm not criticising the film mind you...I think its brilliant...its just that I'm absolutely shocked at how Smiley facilitates the brutal death of an innocent woman as part of a scheme to shield a double agent...nothing in the books I've read with the character so far seem to indicate he would be willing to go to such lengths.

[–] Miarse 14 years ago

Smiley didn't "facilitate the death", there was no way of knowing if she would or would not get out alive, he took that risk. One life against many.

[–] sanddragon939 14 years ago

He didn't 'facilitate' the death per se, but he ought to have known that Mundt wouldn't let her get away from East Germany, no matter what bargain he'd made with the SIS. It's obvious that the fact that she knew that Mundt was London's man made her a danger both to Mundt and to the SIS, and it was in the interests of both sides that she was silenced. So when we see Smiley at the border telling Leamas to jump, he seems totally dismissive of the fact that Nancy has just been gunned down simply because he not only knew it would happen, but because he (and Control) were actually COUNTING on it.

[–] Miarse 14 years ago

Interesting perspective, thank you.

[–] balthazar_bee 14 years ago

You bet your rear he knew. After all, wasn't it the fellow who guided Leamas and Nancy to that particular spot in the wall who ended up shooting her? Surely this wasn't an improvised act. All part of the plan, a "lousy, filthy operation," as Leamas said.

[–] Orodruin 13 years ago

At that point, Smiley wouldn't have known for certain what happened to Nan on the other side of the wall. In the book, Leamas actually hears him asking someone over the din, "The girl? Where's the girl?", implying that he wasn't party to Mundt's actions in silencing her.

He was certainly aware of the great risk they were putting her through, but it wasn't his plan, it was Control's. He had, a few years prior, retired from the service because he felt guilty and sick of the entire thing, and he was still officially "retired" at the time this operation took effect. Control himself told Leamas that Smiley didn't like the plan (though at the time Leamas thought he was referring to the plan to frame Mundt.) but accepted the necessity of it.

This is not a signature.

[–] joshua_carpino 13 years ago

miasere and orodruin are right.smiley was just doing his job by the numbers.

[–] haileris-2 13 years ago

Leamas actually hears him asking someone over the din, "The girl? Where's the girl?", implying that he wasn't party to Mundt's actions in silencing her.

Yeah, but at this point I was already doubting anything anybody was saying. It could've been a loud remark to ensure Leamas afterwards that they really, honestly wanted the girl to live, like "Ol' chap, we never wanted this to happen, we're so sorry!"

[–] panosd 12 years ago

you were right to doubt him, I read an edition of the book that had several scholarly essays analyzing the book and the events attached and all of them agreed that Smiley was actually saying "The girl? Where's the girl?" under the *pretense* of caring about her safety when he was actually making sure she had been shot. She was baggage, she knew too much, and it was convenient to have her be disposed there.

Of course, Leamas realises this which is why he stalls long enough to be shot himself, and he dies out there in the cold rather than continue knowing what he was part of... and had been part of for so long. He learned that there was no such thing as a "clean break". Amazing book.

[–] eoinsmith001-968-457573 11 years ago

As I see it, Smiley (or Smiley and Control) cut the "bargain" with Mundt to send Alec back to the West. Of course, with his chronic bitterness, and his having been deceived and manipulated, he most probably would have refused to continue in the spy game, so they set it up that Nan would return with him. She was their insurance that their valuable agent would return across the Wall, and into their keep. The instructions made it clear that Alec had to scale the wall first to pull her over; the rungs stopped far short of the top. The plan was always that she would be shot, and then that Leamas' self-preservation instinct would make him jump down on the right side. It is clear that Smiley expected her killed; the real treachery was that they pretended to give her an exit, in order to dupe Leamas into coming back to the Wall at all. They didn't expect that Alec would abandon a lifetime of survival instinct to foil their plan with his own suicide as soon as he realised what had happened.

[–] glorfintel 13 years ago

Plus, don't forget she was a commie, so not much of a waste in the bureau's eyes

[–] jorget22 13 years ago

Remember what Control said..."both sides do wicked things". BTW, good thread. Thanks everyone.

[–] Barr_Beacon 13 years ago

I think Control summed it up when he said, "Thus we do disagreeable things, but we are defensive. That, I think, is still fair. We do disagreeable things so that ordinary people here and elsewhere can sleep safely in their beds at night. Is that too romantic?

[–] jorget22 13 years ago

Yes, he pretty much summed it up with that statement.

[–] youngian67 13 years ago

By the time we get to the Tinker Tailor era Smiley we know there is a repressed cold sinister side to him as Guiness and Oldman played with relish. This gives us an insight into the kind of stunts he pulled.

[–] DigIt 11 years ago

After so many years I finally re-watched this film, and indeed I had this same thoughts that did not occur then or after I did read the book (also a long time ago).

That is because we all started to believe in the Smiley upholder of the human qualities and decent behavior in the 'service' and loved that in the character.
Even when he met Karla in Bombay he wasn't playing dirty tricks (to his lasting discomforts later on) and that may have happened around this (Leamas' story) time.
I believe we should face it: Smiley is not the adamant hero or a perfect spy, but at least we can see he is more 'moderate' then his adversaries.

[–] Altho73 11 years ago

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
After watching this film again, I simply couldn't fathom how much of a cold hearted bastard George Smiley was portrayed as in this film. Its not something obvious, but something you kinda realise when you give the plot, and especially the climatic events, some serious thought.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

That's because he would have to be in order to succeed. Intelligence agents are not nice guys or saints, they have to do ruthless things that they don't particularly want to do in order to succeed. You have to remember that they are not feted as heroes like VC winners but fade away into nondescript and often lonely lives.

[–] gallae 11 years ago

Smiley didn't have a large role in this film - we only see him three times. It was not obvious that he was running things. That being the case, surely it was CONTROL's choice?

Laura Ess

[–] akeshishian17969 11 years ago

Well, Control was an utter bastard, too. Alec specifically asked him to leave Nancy out of it and Control gave his guarantee, knowing full well she would be dragged into it.

[–] gargarie 10 years ago

aaaahhhh, I hadn't thought about this when I saw it, but I think you must be right... that is really brutal. i will have to read the book and think about it some more... do you think leamas realized this too, and that this had to do with why he preferred to die rather than return to the service? bad enough to have poor nancy killed, but what a deadly betrayal of leamas as well!

[–] Etherdave (183) a year ago

I'm pretty sure this story, in novel and film both, is about the downfall of Alec Leamas, a talented and intelligent upper member of British Intelligence, almost certainly to be Chief one day, who is driven to despair and alcoholism by his own boss, Control, who sabotages Leamas' agents and networks by turning them over, one by one, to East German Intelligence, and then finagles a 'revenge mission' to eliminate Leamas, and discredit a talented and intelligent upper member of East German Intelligence, all to protect its head, Mundt, his own double agent behind the Iron Curtain, and also possibly to protect his own job and position. When Leamas, who has lost his job, his career, his pension, and his reputation, sits atop the wall and witnesses the death of Nan, he finally realizes she was the last thing in his life that hadn't yet been taken away. Control then took her away, too, since she could never be trusted to keep secret the things she now knew. Time to leave the party.