Spies of Warsaw (2013) User Reviews

At the time when spies were in demand.

[Reno-Rangan · 8/10 · 8 January 2014]

BBC's television mini series about spy drama of pre world war II tension. Seen lots of lots of world war movies, but this one commence before the beginning of the war where spies from different region of Europe collide each other. So it is a cat-mouse game with many dangerous path ahead. It was a beautifully shot movie with sufficient art structure to construct curiosity in both the episodes. Definitely not like James Bond movie with lots of strong action sequences. I don't know about this book so I can't remark any differences between two. It had all the ingredients like romance, friends, betrayal, family and threats that a man as a spy who can go through in reality.

It was based on the book which set in October 1937 in the capital of Poland, Warsaw. A French spy Jean Francois Mercier is assigned to look the situation on the German border. As his first report confirms something big is getting ready by the Hitler, which creates diplomatic tension between the neighboring countries especially Poland. So he hires some people to do inside jobs and that put many in danger. So constantly the locations change when characters start to explore in the cities between Warsaw, Paris and Berlin. Between all this he meets a young French woman and instantly fall in love with her. When the country near to be at war, what are their plans and how it can be executed is the rest which unfolds in an exceptional manner.

It is a television series and does justice for what it has to be so if you are expecting like a Hollywood movie you will be let down. David Tennant was Amazing, one of his best performances I have seen. It was a bit slow in pace, but if you give a day gap between two episodes, it won't affect you much with the speed. You must remember it was not like todays spy movies where there is lots of equipment available to get in touch with the main office. But then it was left to that one man and he must take all the tough decision himself in the tight situations. So in my opinion, this mini series about serious issue was way better than the commercial movie which deal with the same subject. I believe it is a fine adaptation so you may try if you are interested.

Yes, it is slow, but...

[desertsailor · 8/10 · 23 April 2013]

Sorry, lots of whining about how slow the pace of the series is. If you have read the source novels you should know that Alan Furst takes his time. They're all about mood, and ambiguity, shadows, and wheels within wheels. I think the series, while not great, catches, visually, a lot of Furst's writing, and ambiguity. If you are expecting Skyfall, don't bother. If you are willing to let the thing roll at it's own pace, it is well done. My review is generally positive despite BBC America's decision to do the thing in four parts in On Demand, with an endless series of exceptionally low rent commercials that break the mood considerably. Several years later: I got to see a full length version without commercials- a huge improvement over the wretched BBC America version. As mentioned, if you are familiar with the novel, it is a more than credible job. David Tennant is always excellent, a pre-Torchwood Burn Gorman, several other familiar faces. Well worth watching on Amazon.

Piece of good, bright entertainment.

[daguchna · 8/10 · 3 February 2013]

Some people say that series is boring, cliché and poorly written, but I don't think so. I had a lot of fun watching "Spies of Warsaw". It has everything required to make interesting thing: good cast and quite good script, pretty locations and some action. Not too much, because it's not typical action movie and shouldn't be considered as one of them. Maybe that's why some people were disappointed with that series. Stories about spies, these more realistic ones, aren't so attractive like James Bond movies... It doesn't mean that "Spies of Warsaw" isn't interesting picture, of course. Even when it has weaker moments, good acting of both English and Polish actors (David Tennant! Marcin Dorociński! Mirosław Zbrojewicz!) lets you forget about it.

I hope that it's not the last co-production of BBC and TVP. That combination seems to have a lot of potential and it definitely shouldn't be wasted.

If you like WW2 and spy stuff check this out.

[ib011f9545i · 7/10 · 3 June 2020]

It is a mystery to me why this production is not better liked. David Tennant is a great actor and I think he is great in this. I think the plot and production values are fine. The only flaw is that it is a little slow but I think it is worth sticking with it. I wish they would film some of the author's other works,he is a great spy writer.

Somewhat uneven, but definitely above average

[BeneCumb · 7/10 · 8 February 2023]

I was referred to this Series when browsing a list of best British spy series, realising that I have seen a little with David Tennant (whom I like) present and all this has been him being a policeman/detective... So I decided to kill two birds with one stone and delved into the world of frivolous glamour, deception and betrayal in a period when particularly smaller nations in Europe had uncertainty and difficulties in many layers.

Well, the events got going, the depiction seems realistic (several episodes based on real events), the cast includes pleasant British character actors (Tennant, Lesser, Haddington) and some also good Polish actors -- so I really can´t say that Spies of Warsaw is protracted or dull. True, I had-have not read the book, but in thrillers, for the sake of delight, I prefer twists and solutions unknown beforehand - it is yet no Hamlet or similar, after all...

Additional plus for the depiction of an era rather unknown today - Poland in the late 1930ies, and with both Warsaw and Berlin being splendid cities with fine architecture destroyed by subsequent war.

tense pre-WW II spy story

[blanche-2 · 8/10 · 21 July 2020]

David Tennant stars in "Spies of Warsaw," a 2013 miniseries also starring Janet Montgomery, Anton Lesser, Marcin Dorocinski, and Julian Glover.

Most of the film takes place before Poland was invaded. A military attache, Jean-Fracois Mercier (Tennant) has a network of agents and is assigned to Warsaw to see what the Nazis are up to. Mercier has evidence showing that the Nazis are getting ready to invade. However, he is stonewalled by some of his commanders, who doubt the veracity of his evidence.

In the meantime, he falls in love with a beautiful woman, Anna (Montgomery) who currently lives with a Russian.

I see that this miniseries received some lousy reviews. I can understand that if you've read the book; often, a good book doesn't translate well to screen. I haven't read it.

One of the critiques was that an important part of the book was left out, that is, spying on the Germans measuring the width of the roads in the Ardennes to see if their tanks could make it. I'm not sure what miniseries he watched and gave a rotten review to, but that scene was most definitely in the miniseries.

Another review complained about the locations, saying that it looked like Belfast dressed up to look like another country. The movie was filmed in Poland. I guess I'm not sure what film the above comments referred to.

I thought this movie was tense, and if not action-filled, very absorbing. I was interested in the fact that France was so ardent in her commitment to Poland to save it from the Nazis. We see where that went. And the end of the film is based on a real incident I hadn't known about.

David Tennant, from reading the reviews, was not the Mercier of the book. I still liked him.

A note about accents, a tired topic for anyone who reads my reviews. The people in the film are not speaking English with foreign accents. They're speaking their own language, so accents are not necessary. Some of the actors had them because in real life they have accents, but again, they're speaking their own language and the accent is a dialect.

Why would David Tennant be speaking to French people in English with a French accent? It's ridiculous. You notice that Chekov plays are not done with Russian accents. They don't use accents in Shakespeare. Many early films were set in other countries - no accents (example: The Mortal Storm, Zoo in Budapest).

Not too bad. Not good either.

[exisce · 6/10 · 7 August 2020]

I think the main problem of this film is that there is no single character for you to care about. David Tennant is an amazing actor, but I think he is terribly miscast in this; Janet Montgomery is, well, just listless almost all the time. Their crazy love for each other has zero credibility, even though the script had enough time to provide at least some character or relationship development. I found most supporting characters boring to the point of annoying, as well. The spy part of the plot is weak, with some attempted twists across the movie, which don't even feel like twists because you didn't care in the first place. There is no effort whatsoever made by either the writers or most of the actors for us to like the characters. And all of that happens at an excruciatingly slow pace. I am not sure anyone here mentioned the score. While not bad in itself, I believe it's not suitable for the film at all, so I felt kind of distracted and in a wrong mood for what was happening onscreen most of the time. I would only recommend this title to the most dedicated Tennant fans and... no, that's it.

"Real" spies movie

[camarill · 9/10 · 9 May 2014]

I enjoyed that TV-movie. The story was no blockbuster/Bond style (though I like that too) but concerned an interesting moment of History. The acting was good (David Tennant of course!) and the characters plausible. It was also a pleasure to watch again Burn Gorman. Most of them when speaking French had an acceptable accent. Another reviewer complained about costumes, but as said in "La Rumba", if they were dressing our (French) soldiers that bad, it was so they would have less regret dying... I don't know Warsaw so I can't judge on the location views; and I'm not a specialist of History and then don't know if there were any goofs. Yet I noted at least two mistakes: (here be small spoilers) when Mercier is phoning from Paris, the phone booth is in rue Moulin, XXIth arrondissement! Must be the Tardis in disguise, and way in the future, as to now, there's never been more than twenty arrondissements... And when the Rozen leave, the plane wears a French flag but RAF cockades (red inside, blue outside).

Tough Novels To Translate To the Screen

[monticellomeadow-95356 · 6/10 · 22 September 2020]

The reason Spies of Warsaw doesn't work particularly well in this adaptation is the difficulty in making Alan Furst's novels play out well in a screenplay. He has written over a dozen of these pre-World War II books, all set in Europe. Most are quite enjoyable. Spies of Warsaw features good acting, pretty good atmospherics. I actually thought I was seeing 1938 Warsaw. But the mini-series attempts to tell Furst's story in 3 hours, over four episodes. And in order to make it more "watchable" to a larger audience than the book had, they emphasize the love story and cheat on the spy story exposition. Furst's books take time to tell and unravel the plot. No getting around it. If you hadn't read the book there was a lot that probably caused you to say "Huh?" Perhaps a 10 hour miniseries would have worked. Maybe 5 hours. But to do justice to Alan Furst's spy novels you just can't compact the story like Spies of Warsaw.

Moderate; the tension is bearable.

[dixon-lynda · 5/10 · 31 January 2013]

Sorry, but it is the leading man who mainly disappoints. David Tennant is totally miscast and is not helped by a poor script, awash with clichés.

I have been to Warsaw three times and there was more tension in the air during my visits than here with spies all over the place.

It may have worked with a different lead, as Tennant sleepwalks his way through the scenes and physically has an uncanny resemblance to John Laurie when playing the crofter in the original version of the 39 Steps.

When he twitches those eyebrows he also looks like a mad scientist rather than the smooth Frenchman tempting every woman from Paris to Warsaw to jump into bed with him. Add to that a non-existent personality and you are left with a problem.

There is absolutely no chemistry between Tennant and Janet Montgomery who is very unenthusiastic throughout. Some decent efforts by a few of the supporting cast, but poor old Julian Glover was given a bad hand with some awful lines.

And the continual movement from Paris to Warsaw and back again several times over was very confusing

Sadly quite ridiculous.

Thoroughly enjoyable! Quality drama!

[geoffcoo · 9/10 · 20 January 2013]

What a marvellous 2 parter. The acting and settings were very good indeed. The story moved very nicely, building the appropriate tensions throughout. Based on a novel by Alan Furst, of whom I had never heard, it was historically accurate(with the exception of some British beer mugs in Prague). I hope the makers will give us more of the novels in the same format.

The first part was sufficient to make me buy the first of the Night Soldiers novels by Alan Furst. Having already read it, I shall now read the rest of the series, in sequence, so a way to go before I reach Spies of Warsaw.

Poorly executed spy drama

[kieran-mclaughlin1 · 5/10 · 5 May 2013]

Why do they have to tinker with a great story? Alan Furst's novel is moody, atmospheric and evocative of the period, pre-WW2 Warsaw. The BBC adaptation is lifeless and sterile. The screenwriters have tried to cherry-pick the salient parts of the novel, but all this has achieved is a confusing storyline with no sense of continuity. David Tennant is hopelessly miscast as Mercier, which in turn ensures the viewer will find the series pretty unbelievable. Janet Montgomery's portrayal of Anna Szarbek(Skarbek? Why?) is unfortunately not very likable, which in turn means their relationship suffers on the screen. Both Tennant and Montgomery have mishandled the relationship between Mercier and Szarbek, which is one of the critical drivers of Mercier's actions. A number of other characters (Jourdain, Dr Lapp) have been similarly poorly written and portrayed. Very disappointing all round. I just hope they don't try and adapt any more of Alan Furst's novels - fans of Furst's novels will be very disheartened.

A captivating story.

[Sleepin_Dragon · 9/10 · 22 February 2020]

The fascinating story of the build up to The Second World War, French spy, Mercier is assigned to Poland, to learn exactly what The Nazis are planning behind the borders. Mercier produces a great deal of evidence proving The Nazis are battle ready, but the powers that be are not convinced, or rather don't wish to be.

Mercier sees what's happening, and what's likely to happen, whilst all around him carry on with everyday life. Tennant impresses throughout, he is wonderful as Mercier, well supported by a great cast, including Anton Lesser, Janet Montgomery and Richard Lintern.

There are many films and dramas which tell the story of The second World War, Spies of Warsaw is a fascinating insight into the unnerving build up to The War.

A terrific espionage drama, which is beautifully made, intriguing and rather captivating. Well worth watching. 9/10

A favorite mini-series of mine

[springforward · 10/10 · 22 December 2021]

Yes, David Tennant is one of my favorite actors- and he's wonderfully cast here. But the movie has strong direction so the supporting characters also gain true sympathy and increase the emotional depth. Especially Marcin and Miroslaw are strong supporting actors. I love finding new actors from other countries. Thank you for making a film that shows the efforts that so many determined people made during WW2 by working together. I don't want to share spoilers as that would reduce the impact.

Boring

[AgentFalco · 4/10 · 25 July 2013]

I don't write many reviews but felt compelled after finishing watching this last night to warn others. How can such an interesting period of history be made into such an incredibly boring film. I felt no empathy for most of the characters which is ridiculous by the end I just didn't care. There was no chemistry between the two leads played by David Tennant and Janet Montgomery and Janet's character Anna in particular annoyed me and I didn't understand what Jean-Francois saw in her to make him so enamoured of her. At one point when Jean-Francois was in a deep depression because he was separated from his love I thought I was watching Twilight without the fun vampires! The only characters who felt conveyed the sadness of the war and the despair that was felt by so many as Nazi Germany began its move across the world was the old couple Viktor and Malka Rosen beautifully acted by Linda Bassett and Allan Corduner. I would only recommend to die-hard David Tennant fans.

Spies of Warsaw (BBC Four) - Review

[mail-479-241123 · 3/10 · 22 January 2013]

Spies of Warsaw (BBC Four) was probably meant for BBC1, but then someone at the BBC sat down and watched it.

As we know, it's not currently very fashionable for BBC executives to take an interest in BBC programmes, but on this occasion it's just as well one of them looked at it before making the mistake of showing it to a larger audience.

Adapted by the usually brilliant Dick Clement and Ian la Frenais from a novel by Alan Furst, the first episode was actually only about ninety minutes long. It felt, however, like it was on the air for about 12 weeks.

Even in the first ten minutes one could have timed the action by calendar. Sorry, did I use the word, "action"? Slip of the pen. At one point, near the end of the episode, I found myself asking the question, "Is this still on?"

It's difficult to say what happened, the plot being revealed at such a painfully leisurely pace.

The gist of it appeared to be that David Tennant – a French spy in bright red pantaloons with stripes down the side – fell very slowly in love with Janet Montgomery, the mistress of a dull, whiskered Russian exile.

Then we were very slowly introduced to a mysterious Countess, who very slowly turned out not to be a Countess, and was then very slowly strangled by some Nazis.

Oh, there was a brasserie with a bullet-hole in the mirror above table 14. I think this might have been significant in some way. Or maybe it wasn't.

There was certainly great attention to period detail, which helped to slow down the action even more. Then there was the usual confusion when it came to who should speak with which accent. The Nazis spoke in German with subtitles in English. The Polish spoke English with Polish accents. The French spoke English with 'Allo 'Allo accents. Everyone spoke very, very, slowly indeed.

Tennant was wasted as the enigmatic, complex and conflicted Mercier. He doesn't really do enigmatic and complex, does he? He does quirky and eccentric. About twenty minutes in, he had a stab at being deep and conflicted, but all we really wanted was to see him whip out his sonic screwdriver and pull one of his funny faces.

Did I mention that it was quite slow? I still have episode two of Spies of Warsaw on my TIVO. I think it's going to be there for a very, very long time.

Read regular TV reviews at Mouthbox.co.uk

The only Tennant vehicle that has ever disappointed me

[cassandra2006 · 4/10 · 6 September 2013]

I will and do watch anything with David Tennant in it as IMO he is an exceptionally gifted performer but, from the off, this telemovie bored me witless. I didn't buy most of the tension and, with few exceptions, the performances were largely uninspiring. The writing rarely grabbed me and, visually, the timing of suspenseful scenes was often poorly judged. But my main gripe was that the direction, cinematography and editing were all IMO so remorselessly pedestrian. In addition, the lead actress - who we are meant to accept as the 'romantic interest' - appeared to be not just uninvolved with her lover but I personally doubted she was even a serious actress within the meaning of the Act! I gather she has won deserved success in other projects that I haven't seen, but in 'Spies'? Not for this viewer. Tennant looks, sounds and is lovely and could not act badly if he tried conscientiously for a year but, really, even his illustrious talent and legendary energy could not save his character for me in this movie. Especially not when he's obliged to wear some of the silliest military uniforms you could find outside of a Gilbert and Sullivan opera. Possibly the window of opportunity to create incisive TV drama about mid 20thC spy stories has slammed shut for the time being. I bought the DVD and have watched it just once and won't do so again. Probably.

Abominable Adaptation of Novel

[jlthornb51 · 3/10 · 17 May 2015]

This is simply an abominable adaptation of the novel. Alan Furst's books are about period atmosphere and capturing the era more than plot. This film fails in the atmosphere category completely. That being said, as a spy film it's okay but it's in no way Alan Furst. The cast is excellent, although the leads have no chemistry. The plot is interesting but drags a bit. The suspense is minimal and the film simply moves from point A to point B. There just isn't much one can say about a mini-series that is not noteworthy in any way. It really is neither boring or engaging. Not terrible for a film but for an adaptation of a specific novel, an awful failure.

Disappointing

[bilborough64 · 2/10 · 4 April 2013]

I use the word "disappointing" to be polite. I love spy novels etc, but this was pathetic. I did stay for 30 minutes to give it a chance. Tieing up an 18 year old German soldier to a tree right after you are discovered spying on the new German 'super' tank. Get real. I know something of history and even though this was fiction, it was bad fiction. I couldn't tell what country the main character was from until 30 minutes into the program. Even at this point, I don't remember his name. David Tennant is a great actor. I've seen his "Hamlet". What possessed him to take this role is beyond me. Let's just say, I changed the channel to watch PBS. They had a program on called 'Nature'. The subject was plants talking to each other.

Woeful from Warsaw

[Prismark10 · 1/10 · 12 June 2015]

Dick Clement and Ian La Frenais are the writing team that wrote the sublime Porridge as well as The Likely Lads. I want to remind people of this just in case someone watched this and thought they were two substandard writers who deserved to be taken to a forest late at night and shot.

Spies of Warsaw takes place in the run up to the second world war as various spies from major countries converge in Poland hoping to gain influence in the future of the country. David Tennant plays a French military attaché Colonel Jean-François Mercier who runs a small network of agents and Janet Montgomery as his love interest Anna Skarbek.

What should be an interesting tale of espionage, intrigue and love turns out to be dull, flat and uninspired. Its mind numbingly tedious.

David Tennant plays his character with a mockney accent. The same accent the Scot used for his Doctor Who. You never at once feel drawn in by any of the characters, care about them or even feel involved with the plot. It even ends on a damp note. Not once did I think we were in Poland or France or Germany. I actually reckoned the drama was shot somewhere in Belfast where they dress buildings up to look unconvincingly like Nazi Germany.

Director Coky Giedroyc has to take the blame for bringing such a poor script to screen. Its interesting that he was responsible for shooting the original unaired pilot of 'Sherlock' before it was reworked and an experienced film director became involved and re-shot an expanded story with great success.

Badly made on a low budget by the wrong people

[remittance-994-216758 · 1/10 · 7 May 2014]

I gave it 1 because I couldn't give it 0.

Ian La Frenais and Dick Clement may be good writers of comedy series, but the BBC utterly failed when it appointed them to make what turned out to be a very bad adaptation of a very good book.

They completely failed to develop the story as it unfolded in the original work by Alan Furst. They failed to develop the original sub-plots that made this story work and added all sorts of unnecessary ones that were not even in the book. Presumably this was done to Make the programme more "exciting". I know adapting books to the screen (big or small) requires changes but I was left wondering whether these two had even read the book before they set to work.

Oh, and as for the uniforms. Good in the most, but Tennant's dress uniform in Episode 1 was completely wrong and looked about three sizes too big for him. He ended up looking like an extra from an Italian comic opera. Mercier, the aristocratic cavalry officer, would not have been seen dead in it.

All in all wasted opportunity to turn a good book into a good TV series brought down by an obviously small budget, poor direction and poor choice of writers. Gods help us if they ever get turned loose on other works by Furst.

Highly stylized and monumentally dull

[areische-79273 · 4/10 · 25 April 2021]

First, bias disclosed - Furst is not my favorite writer. He's one of those who spends enormous amounts of time on the mise-en-scene, if you will, at the expense of narrative flow. That makes me a skeptic to begin with. If you love Furst, don't waste your time with my review. I obviously don't.

More to the point, the casting is all wrong. One of the things that makes some current European shows so engaging is that the actors look like real people, not plastic Barbie and Kens. Not here - casting was aligned with the character's role in the script. Bad guys look like bad guys. Good guys look like....stick figures. Some of the secondary characters are tolerable but David Tennant is totally miscast. To call it acting elevates his action several levels above its pay grade. I'm not sure I saw a single expression change over the two installments I was able to sit through.

More to the point, he's totally unprepossession physically, so there' not even that element to offset the one-dimensional performance. He looks like the before panel in one of those old Charles Atlas ads we of a certain age used to see at the back of comic books. The image from the rear of him walking down a darkened street is almost laughable; he looks like a scarecrow in motion.

The plot is totally predictable, down to the female League of Nations lawyer and the treacherous head of delegation who is constantly thwarting Tennant. Other stock characters include the Russian-Jewish couple who are recalled during Stalin's later purges, the German engineer who is selling secrets to subsidize his affair with a French spy and the loyal sidekicks from the Polish intelligence service. You could have sketched them out with stick figures on a cocktail napkin and used that as a script, that's show simple minded they are.

No, I'm usually not this negative, but in this case, the plot is nonsense, the characters are unbelievable and the casting is atrocious. But, the popcorn was pretty good!

The most boring and cheap looking spy series every made

[phd_travel · 1/10 · 10 July 2013]

This is a miscast cheaply made boring WWII spy movie/TV series. The scenes are so limited - the same courtyard street or forest. Hardly show any parts of recognizable Warsaw at all.

David Tennant is hardly a dashing spy - he looks like an owl with his blank staring eyes.

Janet Montgomery is quite pretty but she can't make up for this dud.

The supporting cast looks like the least photogenic of all BBC British actors and actresses. The accents are inconsistent - the French sound like British. The Germans speak in German with subtitles even though the Polish characters are speaking in English. Why bother? There just isn't enough story - and the screenplay is boring. The editing spends long periods on uneventful scenes and dialog. A dull book and a dull series.

Don't waste your time.

This dud should never have been made.

Clumsy 40's wannabe spy thriller......

[s3276169 · 5/10 · 19 July 2017]

Spies of Warsaw is a clumsily transparent 40's style spy thriller.

This is yet another throw back mini series that tries in a very transparent and bumbling manner to recapture a 40's essence, found in films like Casa Blanca. Of course the obvious problem with copying better films, is all sense of originality and creativity is lost.

The outcome is a wooden mini series that feels self consciously clichéd and clumsy. The performances of the quality cast are regrettably constrained by the caricatures they are forced to adopt like a poorly fitting set of clothes. Quality actors like David Tennant don't stand a chance to really shine, which is in no way any reflection on their talent.

Sad to say, whilst I like the idea behind this series its slavish adherence to a tired formula does it a real disservice. Five out of ten from me.

The overriding problem with this adaptation of Furst's novel is two fold..

[rusoviet · 5/10 · 5 July 2018]

1. the script writer did not provide enough information of new cast members when the new cast members 'pop up'. Unless one had read the novel it makes no real sense. So many of the cast seem to be being filmed on their first read through that or the director made no real demands on what skill they 'had' to be cast to begin with.

The other is the miscasting esp. of 'Jean-Francoise Mercier as played by David Tennant. He is dull, weak and completely one dimensional in his delivery.

The film omitted a major part of the novel, prior to 1st Sept. 1939, where Mercier contacts German 'agents' inside Germany who take a hiking trip into the border region of Germany and Belgium/Luxemborg and document the German panzers 'measuring' the width of the forest roads in the Ardennes for the invasion of June 1940. It was a well crafted passage in the novel and a shame it was not added.

It is a shame for the novel is very good but you'd never know it watching this series and sadly it doesn't bode well for future film adaptations of Furst's work