MovieChat Forums > Mistral001
Mistral001 (4)
Posts
Replies
I agree that the umbrage that Leamas shows regarding the suggestion by Fiedler that Mundt was a British agent in the film was over-played. A trained interrogator would pick up on this and think "The lady doth protest too much, methinks". It certainly annoyed me.
Probably the biggest departure from the book occurs at the end. In the film, the young guide shoots Leamas and Nan, while in the book the the precise origin of the shots is not mentioned.
In the book, there are shots when the searchlight picks up Leamas and Nan at the wall and various orders in German were heard while the shots rang out. I think the intention of the author was to attribute the shots to the border guards, however there is mention of French and English voices as well as German voice while the shots were being fired, which leaves a certain amount of doubt as to who exactly was responsible for the shots. The film is more unequivocal as it clearly shows the young guide firing the shots and the implication is that it was Mundt and hence possibly British intelligence, his pay master, who was behind the shooting.
I forget where in the book that it states that a romantic relationship between Nan and Alec was not necessary to the plan's success, but it is certaily in there. It was only necessary for them to be close work colleagues. The book goes into more detail about Nan's role in the plan. Ashe's role is explained more in the book as well. Ashe and Nan belonged to the same Communist Party local group. Ashe, arranged the trip for Nan to go to East Germany, so it was not a coincidence that she happened to be in East Germany when the trial began.
Nan was absolutely key to the plan working and I do not think that this was emphasised enough in the film. Fiedler based nearly all of his evidence on Leamas being a creditable witness and Nan was put in a position where she unwittingly totally demolished Leamas as that creditable witness resulting in Fiedler's case falling apart.
Leamas was not a spy, but a British secret service agent. He used to be a spy-handler in Berlin, but since all the spies under his control had been killed he was pulled out of Berlin. It is not explicitly stated in the film, but there is a strong indication that he was going to be fired because he had messed up in Berlin. Instead he was offered one last chance to stay on. His new mission was basically working under cover pretending to be a drunk and an embittered ex-British agent so that he would be seen as a potential defector by the East. In the film he seemed to be always broke, but there is little doubt that through-out the period the film covered, he would have been receiving a fairly good salary as a British agent.
Leamas was no-doubt an alcoholic by the time he left Berlin, a condition which would be a big drawback to getting and retaining a job outside the secret service, but was probably a bonus in the new role that Control wanted him to play. The new mission would have been the least option open to him and one that would use all his talents what the were.
View all replies >