ThiefHott Too much of everything

Stometer Save your money for something good and enjoyable

Donald Seymour This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

Arianna Moses Let me be very fair here, this is not the best movie in my opinion. But, this movie is fun, it has purpose and is very enjoyable to watch.

Sean Gallagher I haven't read enough of Robert Littell's novels to know if he's the American version of Frederick Forsyth, Graham Greene, or my personal favorite, John le Carre, but I've liked the novels of his I've read, and one day, I hope someone makes a good adaptation of one of them. THE AMATEUR, filmed in 1981, was faithful to the plot of the novel for the most part, but was done in a plodding, mechanical style and further hampered by a one-note performance by John Savage in the lead role; only Christopher Plummer's wry turn as the head of the Czech Secret Service (he also poses as a professor) was worth watching. This made-for-TNT miniseries isn't as bad as THE AMATEUR, but it also falls short of the novel.Littell's novel was an epic roman a clef about the history of the CIA, with the usual blending of factual and fictional characters, and while it traveled well-worn territory (and not quite as substantial in that regard as le Carre's novels are), it's still an entertaining read. Obviously, when filming a long novel, even for a miniseries like this, some things have to go, but it's disappointing when great material is here, and the adapters (director Mikael Solomon and writer Ken Nolan) don't bring it to life on screen.Part of the problem is it seems like a greatest-hits version of the novel. You get the various incidents, like the Hungary uprising in 1956, and the Bay of Pigs, but there's no flow to the story. Solomon and Littell also cut out the humor of the novel - the character of Yevgeny, the Russian agent, for example, has a great fatalism about him (in the book, when asked what one of the principles of Marxism (I think) is, he replies, "A spy in hand is worth two in the bush?"), and Rory Cochrane could have played it as such, yet he does absolutely nothing with the part (he's certainly capable of it, so I'd like to think it's not his fault). Also a lot of the subplots are given to the character of Jack MacAuliffe, and Chris O'Donnell simply isn't equipped to handle them all. Speaking of O'Donnell, another problem is while the scope of the story is for 40 years, none of the characters really age, with the possible exception of Alfred Molina (as Harvey, code-named "The Sorcerer") and Michael Keaton (as real-life deputy director of counter-intelligence James Angleton). O'Donnell just looks like O'Donnell with a gray wig. The only actors who make much of an impression are Molina and Keaton. Overall, "The Company", while not terrible, definitely could have been a lot better.

fred-houpt After having read Robert Littell's masterpiece (can you believe that only 6 people have given their opinion on the book over at Amazon???) I was already set up with very low expectations for a film version. I have been more disappointed than satisfied with the film versions of good novels and this was just one more flop.The novel is very long (896 pages) but is as deep as it is wide from the point of view of a plot that grabs you from the outset and doesn't let you go until the very last page. The story he weaves is a believable pattern of interconnecting stories that are borrowed from real Cold War history and fictions crafted from the vapours of that real history. If you know your history well then Littel's craft shines; I mean, without that knowledge you would not be able to differentiate where the real and the imaginary part ways or merge.The film version, in my view, suffers from several weak points and I'll describe them. Much is made of Michael Keaton, one of my favourite American actors, known for his versatility in both dramas and comedy (see: Clean & Sober, Beetlejuice and Multiplicity). He gets the mannerisms and physical gestures of Angleton down pat. What works against him and I know that I am being very picky, are his looks. Keaton looks like what he is: a very healthy and squeaky clean guy. Angelton was a chain smoking and borderline alcoholic whose many decades of this lifestyle left him looking like a train wreck. Keaton looked too healthy. John Turturo would have been a better choice. Alfred Molina is a terrific and very physical actor but for me he drew too much attention and gave me the impression of over acting but without the inner turmoil that his character possessed. His role would have been better captured by a younger Gene Hackman or Charles Durning. Molina was not believable as the man depicted in the novel. Next is Chris O'Donnell, someone I have yet to like in any movie. I think he was completely miscast as Jack McCauliffe. His boyish good looks worked against him. His character would have done better with Jude Law or Colin Farrel.I found Rory Cochrane to be a delight, giving a finely honed and substantial performance. His responses were periodically obscure as if his attention had wandered and I think that the writers/director could have given his character more time....which the book certainly does. The woman actors were all fine and I had no problems with them.All in all I think that one would be better off reading the book as its power far eclipses this film.

danabowe This show does things with the history of the CIA that movies like the good shephard could only dream of. Great story, wonderful acting this is one of the best mini-series i've seen. It is the spy show equivalent of what band of brothers was for war shows. The way the show is filmed to show the history of what we didn't get to see during the cold war is brilliant. Alfred Molina is one of the most underrated actors around. Everyone forgot also how great of actors Michael Keaton and Chris O'Donnell are. Their performances are great especially Keaton who plays the ever stubborn MOTHER very well. This to me is one of the great mini-series made right up there with band of brothers and generation kill. A must see.

Hal Guentert "The Company" had an entertaining quality that leads you to believe you were getting inside information about the period covered. However, like other CIA/spy plots there is a main character who runs around all over the map, more or less trying to save the day, with a few other interesting characters thrown in.I wish I had read the book, but the interesting aspect to this plot was that it at least shows the spies as locals willing to sell information for money and/or a new life, not really heroic characters. However, I agree that the best aspect was Michael Keaton's portrayal of James "Jesus" Angleton as a strange person with incredible power and hold of the flow of information. He does not seem to be either worthy or trustworthy enough to hold such control over an out of control agency.Keaton's performance hints at the quirky and strange person Angleton was and made me wonder how this person could hold his position without much suspicion being place on him for all the moles who could not be found. The others were either too alcoholic or too much in denial to question Angleton and his highly questionable "friendships" in addition to the good chance of being thrown into a mental institution. Angleton's power was in knowing the dirt on everyone, and covering up his own dirt pile. Once it was learned that the mole, Ken Philby, was Angleton's close friend they should have been gone, preferably with prejudice.Although the movie or series does not really go far enough into why nothing was done to change counter intelligence personnel when moles were not uncovered in a very short period of time, it does present the CIA, including Dulles as less than efficient protectors of liberty here in America or anywhere else.After viewing "The Company", it is less surprising that Robert Hannsen, the FBI Mole, was able to sell prime secrets for years, and even become the counter intelligence agent in charge of looking for himself (a mole). The greatest problem with the CIA and similar intelligence agencies is that eventually the fox gets in charge of guarding the hen house or worse.Today, we had better learn these lessons of the past, and get members of other countries military & intelligence agencies, dual citizens, out of our government, or we will continue to self-destruct.