Was London Spy based on a real case?

I need to put some heavy caveats on this post so will get them out of the way at the start. I may have got the wrong end of the stick, I may have completely misunderstood, there may have been a message explaining all which I have missed, and I may just be completely mistaken.
The subject is the 5-part BBC spy thriller, London Spy, which finished this week. To start with it was really good, gripping, exciting and an intriguing plot line with interesting twists. It included my favourite actor, Jim Broadbent, excellently cast as an elderly 'queen' Scottie, and Charlotte Rampling, who is not exactly bad either.
By the end though I was laughing, and then on reflection also somewhat disturbed. MI5, when not blackmailing various innocent relatives of the main protagonists, were murdering and torturing their own spies and former spies. For the second time in his life poor old Scottie was subject of a fake hanging at the hands of MI5, this time successfully, having been kidnapped by a fake taxi driver (presumably also in the employ of MI5). Oh and MI5 also ran an escort agency set up solely to seduce and blackmail both their own staff, rival spies and basically anyone else they fancied getting a hold over.
Needless to say various shadowy and not so shadowy members of the Establishment all thought this was a thoroughly good thing - 'needs must old chap.' A series of conspiracy theories even beyond Norman Baker's wildest imaginations.
The Times TV critic, Alex Hardy, got it right in his review on Tuesday; 'Perhaps the biggest lie told in London Spy was at the start, when it pretended to be really good.' 
All this of course is fair enough. If the BBC want to commission a thriller as fanciful and ultimately dud as this turned out to be, then it is up to us viewers to suspend belief and enjoy it or give up and watch 'Escape to the Country' instead. 
My problem is not with the absurd storyline. No, and this is where I must remind you of the caveats I began with, my difficulty is that the story - to start with at least - was obviously inspired by the real life 'body in the bag' case. 
In London Spy, Alex (the MI5 spy of the title) was living in a flat in London whilst working at Thames House. He kept this secret from his boyfriend, Danny, the hero of the story. He also kept his sexuality secret from his employers.
After he went missing for a few days Danny discovered Alex's naked body trapped in a small box in the attic of Alex's flat, apparently having suffocated to death. The attic itself had been, unbeknown to Danny, converted into some kind of sado-masochistic room-in-the-roof.
In Monday's last episode we learnt that Alex was so clever that he had invented a secret formula which could discover by analysing the way a person spoke, whether they were lying or not. This of course was a terrible threat to the Establishment. As we all know all politicians are liars, and with this new tool it could be proved. A subtle dig at Tony Blair no doubt.
Fearing the consequences of his new discovery MI5 kidnapped poor old Alex and put him in a tiny wooden box. They tortured him and eventually persuaded his mum (Charlotte Rampling) to come along to his attic and speak with him through a small opening in the top of the box. This was all supervised and filmed by MI5 staff dressed in full forensic protective equipment, and watched over by senior MI5 bosses. In response to the pleas by his mum through the little hole in the box (watch it on iPlayer if you do not believe me) Alex agreed to give up his research, move to Canada and never say anything about all this again.
Unfortunately for Alex (and his mum) MI5 tested these pledges against his newly invented truth machine, proving he was lying. Indeed he didn't even (cruel twist this) really love his mum (although actually she was not really his mum but things are complicated enough so probably best not to go there).
Anyway the upshot was that MI5 knew they could not trust Alex. They therefore left him in the box (Box* leaves in him the box so to speak) to suffocate and die. His body was duly discovered by his boyfriend. MI5's plan was that the dim CID officers (a role ideally suited for me!) would then pin the blame on Danny. MI5 would cover up their dastardly deeds, leaving the nasty politicians free to carry on lying to us.
The ending came with Danny and Alex's mum getting together to carry on his investigations - perhaps setting up a second series where MI5 will try to bump them off in some bizarre way as well?
My concern with all this comes back to the point that the 'fictional' story was clearly in part based on a genuine true and tragic sudden death. In the real life 'body in a bag' the MI6 (in this case) IT expert (as opposed to spy) Gareth Williams's naked body was found zipped up inside a sports holdall in his bathroom. It seems Gareth was also secretly gay. The actor who played Alex, Edward Holcroft, even bears an uncanny resemblance to Mr Williams. Did Gareth's family approve of all of this nonsense? Were the BBC trying to suggest that MI5 may have murdered one of their own spies in this bizarre fashion?
I end by repeating the caveats again. I may have got this completely wrong. Maybe it is only me. But if I haven't, and it's not, then it all seems to be a bit insensitive and distasteful, and also absurd.

*Box, a term used by Special Branch officers, when referring to MI5

45 Years - try not to snore if you nod off

Yesterday a Guardian reading friend persuaded me to see one of those films that Guardian readers have to pretend to enjoy.
I am always one for new experiences so having checked the movie was not in French (that would be a step too far) I went along to the Duke of York's and embraced the experience. Refreshingly there was no Odeon hot dog and pop corn, rather it was coffee (fair trade) and flap jack (organic) that we guzzled before the main feature. You could even take a beer (craft) in if you wished but it was a bit early for that.
The film I saw was 45 Years, starring  Charlotte Rampling and Tom Courtney. They play a married couple in the week leading up to the celebration of their 45th wedding anniversary. This is disrupted when Geoff (Courtney) receives a letter telling him that the body of his long dead girlfriend (Katya) has been found perfectly preserved in a melting Swiss glacier. Geoff and Katya had been in love and planning to marry when she fell and was presumed killed in a climbing accident. Geoff went on to meet Kate (Rampling) but had never told her about the previous relationship in any detail, and their plans to marry.
It seems that Geoff and Kate have had a reasonably happy marriage. There are hints at tension over their childlessness, and it seems they filled that hole with a series of rather fierce looking alsatians german shepherds. Max, the current one, is taken for long brooding walks by Kate in the bleak Norfolk countryside when she needs needs to get out of their isolated house.
In truth not a lot happens. Geoff tells Kate a bit more about Katya, revealing he was her next of kin and that she wore a wooden ring so they could pretend they were married. Kate broods about this, stares into the distance and the mirror a lot, and reflects on whether this secretiveness by Geoff had undermined the basis of their marriage.
The younger Tom Courtney used to play the good looking working class hero in those black and white 'It's Grim up North' type British films made in the late 1950's and early '60's. He's certainly no longer a sex symbol in this (unless baggy grey white y-fronts are your thing) and to me does not quite convince in the role. 
In contrast Charlotte Rampling is compelling in a slightly over-arty way. She manages to be both elegant and harsh, and it's possible to see her as one of those teachers that you remember with respect and affection (even if at the time you were rather scared of them). The local postman is a formal pupil and he refuses to call her by her first name.
The plot focuses on whether Geoff and Kate can hold it together for the week through to the celebration. I will not spoil things by revealing if they do.
You will gather that I went to see the film with low expectations. In fairness these were exceeded and I would not want to put you off. It's based on a short story by David Constantine called 'In Another Country.' At times it seemed the title of the film had been changed from that of the book to describe the length of the film rather than the marriage.
Being an arty film it was inevitable that references to the dangers of climate change and the evils of Thatcher were crowbarred into the plot. It seemed to have been filmed at the end of the winter so I never quite understood why the glacier in Switzerland should have melted at that time of year - surely even with global warming this would have occurred in the middle of summer? And Geoff and Kate had a remarkable number of friends at the anniversary celebration considering what a grumpy couple they appeared to be.
The best bits for me were when Geoff and Kate talked about things other than their marriage. Geoff reluctantly attended a work reunion and his reminisces from that had echoes of Kingsley Amis and the Old Devils - especially the story of 'Red' Len (or Len-in) as they called him who now regaled them with stories of his villa in Portugal and his banker grandson.
The film captured the tensions caused by jealousy and things unsaid but in a slow meandering and borderline pretentious way. Oh and a bit of advice please do concentrate - I thought I did but it turns out I missed a crucial bit when Kate climbs into the attic and looks at some of Len's photographs of Katya. I was watching closely but looking for the wrong thing!
I give the film 4/10. It was ok but if I am honest I preferred Mission Impossible 3 and the Man From Uncle. I am though looking forward to Tom Courtney's next film, Dad's Army, where he seems well cast to play Corporal Jones.

Graham Cox

NB I didn't read the review in the Guardian by its (and the BBC's) resident film critic Mark Kermode until after jotting down my thoughts. It's unsurprisingly a good deal more positive than mine, and no doubt more authoritative. Don't let me put you off therefore. Go along and see it for yourself - just make sure you choose a comfy seat and don't snore if you nod off.