Bridge of Spies

I'm not sure if I'm so much on a James Bond kick right now as I am a spy kick. We'll see how many James Bond movies I actually end up watching, otherwise, its just a spy kick.

However, Bridge of Spies was a movie I was incredibly interested in seeing for two reasons, Tom Hanks, and Steve Spielberg. I suppose a sub-reason is that its those two in a movie about the Cold War and that's just an equation for a great sounding movie. But I wanted to see this movie mainly because of those two great names. Steven Spielberg is probably the best movie maker in the business today and Tom Hanks is one of the best if not the best actor in the business today. Add in the fact that they're making a movie with an incredibly interesting premise, there was no way that this movie was not going to be a slam dunk.

Bridge of Spies is based off True events of an Insurance lawyer named Jim Donovan (played by Hanks) as he is recruited to represent a man charged with being a Russian spy in the midst of the Cold War.

The fun part about the first part of this movie is the mentality that people have about this trial. Everyone acts like they're so noble in giving this spy a trial but in reality they all want to see this guy hang for being a spy. Jim Donovan seems to be the only person who actually wants to give this man a fair trial, and he has grounds to do so. The interesting part is, this could have been the whole movie itself. The whole movie could have been Tom Hanks finding all the holes and evidence to defend this man who everyone knows is a Russian spy but in Hanks eyes, its not what everyone knows, its what they can prove. There was a great message in this movie about due process and the true execution of law and order in this country, and furthermore, the consequences of that due process, especially on Donovan and his family.

But in reality, that's really only half of this movie. The first half of this movie is a lot of fun.

The part that really stood out to me was the relationship between Donovan and his client. Mark Rylance plays Rudolf Abel, the Russian spy and there's actually a really great relationship between Donovan and Rudolf.

Furthermore, the movie does a great job at painting this Insurance lawyer, someone who is already considered scum of the earth, as this incredibly honorable person in the midst of public scrutiny.

Because that's a whole other aspect of it. The public perception of not only Donovan but his family really take a toll on his life. And it really tests how much a man will go to defend the ideals of the Constitution.

I mean this was something that I already expected going into this movie. If you watch the trailer, you already get the sense of the message this movie is trying to push.

Now if this was anybody else besides Spielberg, I'd be worried that this movie was too preachy or too jerking of the red white and blue. But Spielberg actually takes what I thought was going to be a message that was going to be beaten over my head with a baseball bat and instead makes it something incredibly tangible and inspiring. I was already inspired by the trailer, imagine what this movie did to me when I was watching it.

Now, I'm a sucker for the whimsy and dream-like work of Spielberg so I wouldn't be surprised if somebody watched this and felt like they were being beaten over the head with some kind of message on the constitution and the importance of due process, even in a troubling time.

That was the other thing that I really liked about this movie. It really focused on the atmosphere of 1957 and how it really focused on the paranoia and scare of the Cold War. And it was done very, very well.

Whether it was the ominous and cavalier attitude towards the CIA throughout the movie, or the lessons being taught to school children about the dangers of the nuclear bomb, it really gave the viewing audience a great look into America during the 50s. Too often I think we get wrapped up in the doowop and greaser haircuts to really remember what the 50s were like and they were scary times.

Anyways, again, that's only the first half. The second half is actually focused on Donovan brokering a deal between the United States and the Soviet Union for a prisoner exchange, a deal that was never acknowledged by either government and required somebody of Donovan's skill and knowledge of the case.

The last act of this movie takes place in Berlin, still in the midst of the Cold War and in a time of a lot of mystery and uneasy alliances.

And the truth is, its really freaking good.

That's just the plain cold truth of this movie. I wish I could say I wasn't taken in by the charms of Steven Spielberg and the great acting of Tom Hanks but... sometimes when something looks this great, it really is.

Now, again, some people might watch this movie and think that its a little bit too much on the nose. Some people might say that this movie was carried by Tom Hanks, which I can sort of agree with, but then you look at the rest of the talent in this movie. Mark Rylance, I'm not even totally familiar this this guy's work and I loved him in this movie. Alan Alda is in this movie. Amy Smart plays Hank's wife and she does a great job. All the supporting actors are good, but in reality this is Hank's movie. And he kills it.

And I think the reason this movie isn't too on the nose for me, is because how relevant this movie is despite being set in the 1950s in the midst of the Cold War.

This movie has a big message on the resolve of prisoners of war, of our methods of getting information from those prisoners, how we treat those prisoners, and especially how we treat others in a time of war.

While this movie does take place in the middle of the Cold War, it is something that the intelligent viewer would relate to our own circumstances, with prisoner exchanges happening to this day, like that of Bowe Bergdahl and other relevant issues. Its an incredibly relevant movie. And some directors can hit that point with almost too much sublty while others can hit it too much over the head that it almost insults the audience. Along with that, some actors can over act that that its not taken seriously, while others can be too subtle and miss the whole message trying to be put across. Steven Spielberg and Tom Hanks are great examples of artists who can find the perfect tone for a movie like this and really make it relevant without being too preachy.

I have no doubt that this movie is probably going to be involved in the Oscar conversation. I don't know if it will win anything, but its definitely a good movie worth checking out. If you like anything that has Tom Hanks, you'll like this movie. If you like Steven Spielberg, you'll like this movie. If you like a movie about the Cold War, you'll like this movie. I wish I could give you a little bit more of a comprehensive review but this is just a really good movie.

I suppose if there was one more thing I was going to say about the movie, it would be that the middle does drag just a tad. Nothing to really complain about, its just a little bit slow at parts. But at the same time, there's just as many parts that are really freaking interesting and you're bound to learn something.

But what did you think of Bridge of Spies? Comment and Discuss below. You can also send me your thoughts on the film on Twitter @MovieSymposium. You can also send me your requests for future movies I should review. If you follow me on Twitter you can get updates on future movie news, reviews, and sometimes even live tweets of films I'm watching.

I'll leave you with this. Here's a song by Carly Rae Jepsen with Tom Hanks... for some reason. In my mind Tom Hanks can do now wrong, so I feel obliged to like this. Enjoy!