Bridge of Spies - Review Thread

Bridge of Spies(10/17/2015)

Given their lovable all-American personalities you’d think that Steven Spielberg and Tom Hanks would have worked together more than they have. They’re paths never actually crossed until 1998 when they made Saving Private Ryan, which is an acknowledged classic of sorts, but I don’t know that Hanks was instrumental to its success and outside of that movie the pairing has not always been golden. That’s not to say that the two make bad movies when they get together, far from it, Catch Me if You Can is widely liked and The Terminal is a lot better than its reputation would have you think. However, neither of those movies are what you’d call “classics.” On the contrary, they’re the kind of movies you catch on HBO or something, think “wow, that was really good,” but then never think about again un-prompted. There’s nothing wrong with that, but when Steven Spielberg makes a movie it’s supposed to be an event, he’s capable of such greatness that when he opts just to make a simple well-made drama it kind of feels like a waste of potential. So what is it about the Tom Hanks/Steven Spielberg that has underwhelmed more than not? I think it might be that the two are so simpatico in their old school populism that they don’t really challenge each other. It’s been a decade since The Terminal and only now have they tried to have another go, this time in the form of a cold war era period piece called Bridge of Spies.

The film recounts an incident which was front page news in the 50s but which isn’t particularly well known today. It begins in 1957 with the arrest of an aging man named Rudolph Abel (Mark Rylance) in his Brooklyn apartment by the FBI for allegedly engaging in acts of espionage. Abel is guilty of everything he’s been accused of, this is shown to the audience in no uncertain terms within the first five minutes of the film, but that’s perhaps beyond the point. Quickly the film begins to focus on attorney James B. Donovan (Tom Hanks), who is tapped to represent Abel in court despite the fact that it would make him very unpopular with the public. This is not predominantly a courtroom drama however and this section of the film focuses primarily on how much the deck is stacked against Abel and how much of a hated figure he was during the Red Scare. As this is going on we get a parallel story about an air force pilot named Francis Powers (Austin Stowell) who is tasked with flying U2 reconnaissance missions over Russia until one day his plane is shot down and he parachutes into enemy territory and is captured soon thereafter. It’s soon proposed that Abel and Powers could be swapped in a prisoner exchange but the U.S. government can’t really negotiate for it themselves and instead Donovan is sent to East Germany to negotiate on their behalf.

As I said earlier this isn’t really a courtroom drama and despite the title I wouldn’t really think of it as a spy movie either. Espionage is certainly going on in the background but it’s espionage of a highly realistic nature and it isn’t the focus. Instead this is should be viewed as a historical drama of the “fascinating untold true story” variety. The story itself is certainly interesting but it doesn’t exactly seem like a story that was screaming to be filmed by the world’s most famous filmmaker, so what exactly attracted Spielberg to the project? I think it’s because Spielberg sees certain parallels between the story and the world of today. This is especially true of the first half of the film, where everyone seems to want to railroad Abel into the electric chair and don’t seem to think that the normal laws of American justice apply to him because “we’re at war.” This is not dissimilar to what has been happening to Guantanamo detainees and the pressure that their attorneys face is not unlike some stories I’ve heard from people who are representing accused terrorists. Additionally I think that Spielberg, the director of Munich, might have had Israel on his mind when he chose to make the film. Prisoner exchanges with the Palestinians are a semi-regular occurrence in Israel and tensions around them run high. Returned prisoners feel a great deal of guilt and face a certain level of prosecution and I suspect that the attorneys tasked with representing terrorists over there face all of the same challenges that Donovan did.

Bridge of Spies is not the kind of huge production that Steven Spielberg made his name one, rather it’s the kind of mid-budget drama that Hollywood supposedly doesn’t make anymore, but Spielberg does add in a couple of touches that make the film stand out. Much of the second half of the film is set in the hornet’s nest that was a divided Berlin and is actually set right as the Berlin Wall was being built. I don’t know that I’ve seen another movie that focuses on this particular moment in history and brining a unique milieu to the screen helps a lot. Spielberg also provides a couple of neat flourishes, in particular he seems to have developed an eye for these trick scene transitions. For example there’s one moment where a judge walks into a courtroom and says “all rise,” at which point the movie cuts not to a courtroom standing up but to a classroom full of kids standing up to give the pledge of allegiance. It’s also worth noting that this is the first Spielberg film in a very long time not to feature a score by John Williams, who was busy working on the music for the new Star Wars. In Williams’ place is Thomas Newman, though this doesn’t make as much of a difference as you’d think. Williams is best known for his rousing themes for epic action movies and while his scores for smaller Spielberg movies like Lincoln have been solid they don’t necessarily bring a whole lot to the table that other composers couldn’t.

Back during the 2012 Oscar race I heard some pretty valid arguments that if Spielberg’s credit had been put at the end of Argo instead of Lincoln it would have likely been seen as one of his lesser efforts and likely would have been held to a much higher standard and while it likely would have still been enjoyed by audiences but would have gotten a less rapturous reception. Its been three years and now Spielberg has seemingly put that theory to the test by making a movie that is in fact roughly analogous to Argo and is indeed likely to have a much more muted response. That response is partly because Argo is in fact a more energetic and audience pleasing film, but another big part of it is simply that artists place on themselves by setting high expectations. I’m as susceptible to this as anyone, which is why I find it so hard to be wildly enthused by this movie even though I have very few actual complaints about it. It’s a really well made drama with some interesting things to say and it tells its story very effectively. I enjoyed my time with the movie but I don’t see it making a particularly long lasting impression.

***1/2 out of Four

Steven Spielberg started as career as one of the most amazing genre filmmakers of all time. Horror, science-fiction, action, the dude was able to take on each genre and embrace the best aspects of them while injecting a lot of character and heart. This resulted in a lot of classics like Jaws, Close Encounters of the Third Kind, and Raiders of the Lost Ark. However, in the 80s Spielberg started to focus on making “serious, adult” films like The Color Purple and Empire of the Sun. I use quotes because I don’t really find those films any more adult than his initial crop of classics (which were absolutely made for adults) but there’s certainly a distinction in the type of films. Personally, I’ve always preferred Spielberg’s more genre infused fare. He’s certainly made some great non-genre work like Schindler’s List and Munich, but sometimes his more sentimental aspects can get the better of him, as with Amistad and the aforementioned Color Purple. Spielberg’s newest effort, Bridge of Spies, doesn’t really fall heavily into genre, and while it doesn’t climb to Munich heights, it is a damn good movie in its own right.

The film takes place at the height of the Cold War in the late 1950s when suspected Russian spy Rudolf Abel (Mark Rylance) is arrested by the CIA. The American government does not want to seem unfair, and thus hires attorney James Donovan (Tom Hanks) to defend Abel in court. However Donavan takes the task more seriously than intended and puts forth a serious effort to defend his client’s rights. Donavan truly believes everyone is entitled to a fair defense, a decision that puts him at odds with his family, colleagues, and the American public. The situation is further complicated when American spy pilot Gary Powers (Austin Stowell) is captured by Russia. Talks of a trade break out between the nations, with Donavan being called upon to negotiate the swap in East Berlin.

Bridge of Spies is at its best in the first act when the focus is on Donavan taking Abel’s case. The general public immediately wants to see Abel incarcerated and even killed for being an enemy to the state. There’s certainly parallels to be drawn to the treatment of prisoners in Guantanamo Bay as well as general themes of xenophobia. Much as people seem to believe in universal human rights, many become foreigners people tend to be looser in their morals, particularly when the subject is conceptualized as an enemy. Though the Donavan is given the case as a means of maintaining American ideals, it’s quickly revealed that the motivation was really to safe face and appear virtuous. None of Donavan’s colleagues any sympathy for his efforts and the judge insists Abel be found guilty and everyone move on. It’s a really critical look at the system that still rings true today.

In these early scenes, the film actually reminded me a lot of the Frank Capra classic Mr. Smith Goes to Washington in that the film is about (and directed by) an optimistic, noble American trying to hold on to idealized values in the face of a harsher reality. A film that looks wants to believe simplistic notions of Americana but acknowledges things are more complicated than that. However as the film comes to a climax, Spielberg’s schmaltzier tendencies start to sneak in and the film’s power begins to fade. The climax and ending are undermined by some clichés, melodramatic dialogue, and an ending that seems to fly in the face of the tone and themes established for most of the film. After challenging perceptions of American justice for the entire runtime, the film flinches in the ending.

That isn’t to say the film becomes terrible after the first act, far from it. Spielberg may indulge in his more sentimental side, but the man is still one of the most capable craftsman in the business. This is a really well made film. The period detail is excellent and the performances are very strong. Tom Hanks is pretty much perfectly cast here as a good virtue American fighting for his values and he certainly has some great moments. Mark Rylance also finds a lot of strength in subtle decisions as Rudolf Abel. Spielberg also crafts a lot of really strong scenes. The film opens on a low-key foot chase with hardly any dialogue which is really thrilling, for example. Spielberg’s recurring cinematographer Janusz Kamiński probably steals the show here with his excellent use of lighting and period photography. The film also makes great use of its East Berlin setting in the third act.

There are moments in Bridge of Spies that felt like I was watching one of the best films of the year. There’s some really interesting and relevant political material, good performances, amazing cinematography, and is generally a really well put together film from one of cinema’s great masters. Unfortunately, it’s weighed down by some key issues which really undermine the content. All the same I’d still recommend it to pretty much anybody. This is unambiguously a movie for adults and in its best moments, it’s pretty damn good.

B+

Spielberg has given his take on WWI, WWII, and the Civil War, and now he tries his hand at the cold war. Bridge of Spies tells an intriguing story about a prisoner exchange between the US and the Soviets which is expertly told. Its nice to see a spy drama grounded in the reality of what espionage actually was like. Granted there's not a whole lot of 'spy stuff" per se (though the one rare moment we see at the beginning is pretty cool), but there is a lot of the intrigue and politics that goes with it.

There's some great writing and great acting in this film. Th writing includes some great thoughts and ideas surrounding constitutional rights and the contrast between American and Soviet ideals, and the ideas of what is and is not considered treason. These ideas are supported by solid performances, not only by the indomitable Tom Hanks, but especially by Mark Rylance as the calm and collected spy Abel. I loved any scene he was in.

Bridge of Spies is a solid drama. It fulfills that need for a great story by a great storyteller that doesn't rely on gimmicks or fantastical elements. Its an adult drama. Its not perfect; sometimes the score gets in the way and the ending is a little weak (so should we care what other people think, or shouldn't we?). But I guess Spielberg often has ending problems. I highly recommend Bridge of Spies to anyone who appreciates period pieces like this or realistic spy films.
8/10