Bridge of Spies

I always get excited to go see a new Steven Spielberg film, especially one with Tom Hanks as the lead, because you are pretty much guaranteed that it will be nothing short of "good", if not great. 

Bridge of Spies is no exception to this rule. 

In a weekend where I've seen two other, very solid films (Crimson Peak and Beasts of No Nation), Bridge of Spies continued the trend with ease, much as one would expect a movie with this pedigree to accomplish. 

The intricate details of Bridge of Spies' plot are rather complicated, so it's easiest to provide a high-level overview. Tom Hanks plays insurance negotiator, James Donovan. He is enlisted by his country to provide legal counsel to an accused Russian spy, Rudolf Abel (Mark Rylance). Donovan, a stickler for the rules and the Constitutional rights of any man, defends Abel from every angle, and even goes so far as to appeal his original trial outcome. To put that in perspective in today's world it would be similar to a lawyer defending a terrorist (though a terrorist's rights vs. an opposing country's spy's rights is where the lines begin to get a little blurry in my opinion) and trying to use the Constitution to state that they should receive a fair trial. I imagine that, in a world where Donald Trump is an actual potential Presidential candidate, this wouldn't go over well with the general public. And the first half of Bridge of Spies explores that strain that it put on Donovan and his family.

"Hmmm. I wonder if the only other guy on the street right now is following me?"

"You mean to tell me that
Wilson is...dead?!"

It's during this first half of the film that we get some stellar dialogue exchanges, great courtroom scenes, and a genuinely interesting story. The second half then shifts gears as Donovan is again enlisted to negotiate a trade of Abel for a U.S. pilot (these aren't spoilers, they're all in the trailer below, much less history books). It's here that the true intensity of the Cold War begins to seep through the frames as negotiations come down to the wire. As much as I enjoyed the second half of the film (maybe even more than the first half), I think my main criticism of the film would be that I didn't always feel the tension or the danger that Donovan most likely felt. As terse as some of the negotiations become in the film, they never ended with deadly threats or never seemed to indicate that Donovan wouldn't make it back home. I applaud Spielberg for going for realism in that sense, and at the end of the day it's a complaint for something that isn't really a "must-have" but would have been "nice to have" in order to grasp the brevity of the situation more.

The Russian Embassy: where they try to
make s**t look creepy just for the hell of it

As one would expect though, the performances in Bridge of Spies are spot on. Aside from a miscast Amy Ryan as Donovan's wife (who gets little to do anyway so it hardly matters), Hanks is brilliant as usual. It's no secret that he's one of the best actors on the planet, but it really is mesmerizing to watch how well he can portray a character, even from the opening dialogue. When you're watching him, you're truly watching a master of his craft. Equally as impressive and dryly funny is Mark Rylance as the accused spy, Abel. He has far less to say in the film, but his character's movements and behavior are so methodical that I loved watching him on screen. Both he and Hanks share great chemistry as two fairly different characters and they both are solid anchors for the film. Everyone else, including Jesse Plemons (aka Meth Damon who seems to be literally everywhere this year), do fine despite being in the shadow of Hanks. 

Everything else in the film is of a similar quality too. The script is good and sometimes phenomenal and even a bit funny here and there. Cinematography is solid as is the editing. The movie feels long, but that's more because it actually is (141 minutes) and less because of the pacing. At first, I thought that there was an odd lens hue of a dull grey/blue that would really distract me. Whether or not my eyes adjusted or they toned it down, I'm not sure, but the dreary sense that it creates fits with the Cold War theme and period. Lastly, the original score is typical Spielberg for better or worse. I found that it was pretty cliche at times, overly ambitious at others, but consistently strong throughout. Unique it was not, but it was fitting most of the time. 

Look! It's a spy! On a bridge! Holy cow!

Bridge of Spies will be enjoyed by history buffs and probably most anyone who lived during the Cold War. As someone who has a strong, but passive interest in American history (especially during times such as the Cold War), I found Spies immensely entertaining throughout and highly interesting. Now that I've seen it, I wouldn't need to see it again, not a norm for Spielberg films, but that shouldn't count against how solid of a drama it is in the first place. 

As most of us would expect of a Hanks/Spielberg pairing: it's pretty damn great. 

CONS:

• Could have used a trim here and there. It really feels like two separate movies and I think that's because it lulls during the separation of the two
• Would have liked to feel the intensity and danger of the negotiations more. I'm not sure how that could have been accomplished off the top my head, but in general, the proceedings felt pretty calm to me
• Some miscast characters
• Original score was too cheesy/generic at times
• As always, I have to put it somewhere: this is a one-time view for me

PROS:

• Expertly crafted, frame after frame. Spielberg continues to prove why he's one of the best
• Much like his director, Hanks continues to prove why he's one of the best. Another amazing performance (albeit not that challenging of one) from him
• Equally as impressive performance from Mark Rylance
• Great script/screenplay. It tells an interesting, historical story that I'm sure not many people knew about. Even when it's at its most complicated, with several different chess pieces in motion, the audience always knows what is going on
• Highly watchable film of an important historical time period that just might teach you a thing or two!

Rath's Review Score: 8/10