There are certain genres in movies that appeal to many and for Steven Spielberg, period stories are one of them. He even strives for people to focus on a particular event with his new film Bridge of Spies. Well, with Bridge of Spies he is doing it once more but instead of providing us with one movie, he treats us with two: first a movie about the trial and then a movie about James Bond. The downside is that the movies are just okay because there simply was not enough time to develop either one.
Bridge of Spies is set in 1957 and stars Hanks as attorney James B. Donovan. In the first part of the film, he is unable to convince the court and takes up the thankless task of winning a case for an accused spy, Rudolf Abel (Mark Rylance). Eventually in the latter half, Donovan has to fly out – into cold war inflated east German to get rudolf abel back, ‘A pilot’ in hostage held by Russians, Francis Gary Powers (Austin stowell) in a plane n shot down.
Subordinating everything of the persons intercession, the way the action looks and the standard of the performance, these two interconnected sections are rather different, Leina believes. Importantly, the two also have one other thing in common – contempt, or perhaps disappointment, of that which is held within America and more so American more than themselves, as well as the ideals they promote. This last thing is actually the most fascinating part of everything and the entire affair.
Donovan at first, has reservations in representing Abel – he is an insurance lawyer and does not want to risk the reputation of his firm as a firm that defends spies. He however jokes that it is necessary and the CCC reminds me of the fact that in our country, there is a reasonable man, who believes no matter what, everybody must be given a chance to be tried as a person, advanced or of lower status than that which he presently is, as Donovan quickly realizes. As Donovan soon finds out however, nobody including the judge, peaks and the prosecutor and the peo, ab does not everyone including the judge, lawyer, every people want fair trial for Abel. It all depends on all of them that Abel not simply sits behind bars, but it is more important at all costs even over legalities that he should be locked up in a prison. Everything wrong that can happen to Abel, happens. And no matter how hard Donovan tries, he cannot change this.
Atkins is attractive ugly everyman Hanks Donovan we all want to be in those images. He is the one who has high regard for the principles on which this country was built on and the manifestoes in the Constitution. One who does not give in to the widespread hysteria that something Must be done immediately due to the fact that a person looks or may be considered dangerous. Nevertheless, Spielberg introduces the perspective that most people refuse – the one that says Abel should go to prison for whatever he has done because he is an enemy of our nation and does not deserve any rights. Since the procedure of the trial itself is very short and the verdict is peaceful, it is rather dull. Nevertheless, the message put forth in it is bold.
In the second half of this movie, rather than addressing the U.S. crowds again, Reuben Donovan has to maneuver the interests of U.S., East German, and Soviet governments. This is not an easy task for him as it appears that the intention behind these games is to never have a common goal – the U.S. wants a pilot back before he knows too much, the Soviet Union wants a spy back before he knows too much, and East Berlin is willing to hand over a captured American student in exchange for a place at the negotiating table. In fact, only Donovan – who is an idealist, can be said to want the right thing. In this film also, the opposite genre is evident in that the ‘hero’ is the East German regime with the US shown as vilified equally. It is subtext made overt when Donovan having sent to an East German jail for the night assures his CIA friend that it is not much worse than being held by the Americans in West Berlin.
Thus, in this respect, what Bridge of Spies is lacking is a plot where there are sufficient complexities for Donovan in the affirmative. By the very beginning of the trial, it is apparent that Donovan cannot defeat his opponent, so there is no tension built at all. Then, in Germany, whether Donovan is jetting away to the East or something else, or he perhaps gets into some sort of trouble with various authorities there, there is never a point in time where one feels he is going to be unsuccessful. Just as the trial comes to an end, it is a foregone conclusion that there will be a prisoner swap. There is no suspense on how to come up with such complex engineering, and once more, we are left with a lack of suspense.
Hanks, as always, is nice, as far as the rest of the cast (and Rylance in particular) is concerned, but Donovan does not “argue” as a well-rounded persona, just a naive, benevolent one. How is it that Hanks is able to call for high-sounding ideas and yet manages to avoid making himself sound and truly looking pertentious which certainly has a positive effect on the film. Yet, it would be nice if Donovan’s troubles in Germany were more serious than just being arrested for a night and having a little cold and his real concerns at home that his family and his job are still a threat and addressed at all.
Turning to production aspects, in regard to the film’s picture and the camera work done by Janusz Kaminski, while there are indeed some beautiful shots in the film with the close-up shots of Abel going about his spy business making us feel as though we are doing the activity, there are other moments that totally missed the point and not so effective.
Again even the presence of Kaminski’s trademark use of backlighting is noticeable and way too often hides facial expressions and emotions along with the camera, which might focus people’s attention. These images may be stunning; nonetheless they have no place in the context and actually rather obstruct the narration rather than enhance the narrative.
Conclusion
Although Bridge of Spies seems to be set decades ago, during the Cold War, the point that Spielberg is making about today’s age is well depicted. He cautions or refers to people’s tendency of sacrificing their ideals for a false sense of safety by highlighting the fact that that is something that we routinely do, that we are all too willing, more often than not, to part with our beliefs. That is a strong accusation, one that is stronger than the very film from which it comes. Hanks and the cast are nice, but the existence of two distinct narratives limits attaining the desired level of detail on either of them.
Watch free movies on Fmovies
