Bridge of Spies

Bridge of Spies is more or less a conversational drama in which the space is not limited to one room, but its pillars of are the dialogues and the performances of Tom Hanks and Mark Rylance. From a technical point of view, it is also an average piece, with a successful recreation of (not only) 1950s Berlin and a brilliant scene of a plane being shot down. Afterwards, you can only watch with suspense how the different parties proceed to get their man back, and there is nothing to do but wait to see how it all turns out, whether the spies are exchanged or not. In short, a quality period drama that, apart from a decent story and actors, offered me a nostalgic return to the Glienicker Brücke, which I know all too well from my Erasmus days in Potsdam. (01/27/2016)

Bridge of Spies, or Spielberg's successful attempt to sell the Cold War to mainstream audiences. Spielberg can without exaggeration be called the uncrowned king of midcult, and I do not mean that in a derogatory way. He simply has the ability to direct a film in a highly professional manner and to process any subject matter in a way that makes it accessible to the average viewer, not just the elite festival crowd. However, this comes with a certain pleasing quality, a smoothing of edges, and the ability to squeeze out emotions and move the audience, and not always at the right moment. The touching music in Bridge of Spies really got on my nerves at times. Spielberg's characters are in the right moment at the right place and express the right words and thoughts. He presents history and events in a somewhat more noble way than how they appeared in reality. In some aspects, Bridge of Spies is similar to Schindler's List, although it does not remotely reach the manipulative distortion typical of that film. I am more drawn to the approach that Polanski chose in The Pianist. If I want to see a film without softening filters, I have to look elsewhere than in Spielberg's workshop. What can be fully appreciated is the high level of professionalism, the ability to create beautiful and impressive images (the 1950s are more vivid there than in reality), and Spielberg's mentioned ability to time scenes appropriately and work with human emotions. Spielberg is simply a storyteller who sometimes tweaks stories for the sake of effect and educational messages. From an acting perspective, I have no objections, and Tom Hanks is a representative of Hollywood's elite who is more than suited for this type of role. For informed viewers, Bridge of Spies has one more negative dimension, which is typical of similar artistic reconstructions of real events. You simply know how it turned out with Colonel Abel and Powers in reality, and the tension just doesn't happen, despite the efforts of the screenwriters. Overall impression: 80%. (12/06/2015)

Spielbergian contre-jour, elitism, perfect crowd scenes, liberalism, and Hanks' irritating Glabellar lines passing for acting. The comic-book differences between the Western and Eastern worlds (the snowy white-and-gray washed-out austerity of the Eastern Bloc with the leafy, vivacious sunshine of the West) unilaterally nods its head to the Statue of Liberty, as we'd expect from a Disney-Spielberg conglomerate, but the hero's opening struggle against all odds to ensure that the spy is entitled to not automatically have a rope around his neck in particular takes the patina off America's colorful godly foolishness. As you’d expect, the whole piece ultimately comes off as a heroization of the guardians of American values that must be cherished because humans alone are incapable of upholding those values. (03/22/2016)

Lemonade Steven, or craft certainty. Yet even that can't deny the fact that Spielberg is stealing from himself, and as much as he wants to talk about strong ideas, he still comes out with kitsch that transgresses his "self-genre" boundaries. It's a great watch, and likely a few conservatives who will seem to step out of their conformist zone will give it a few awards, but the next day all I remember is the sheer coldness. What literally sticks out in some of the dialogue is the fact that the Coen brothers would have loved to have made it with a much greater degree of cynicism. (12/14/2015)

I must admit that I was a little sceptic about this movie. Personally, I don’t find the topic of espionage in the 1950s particularly suspenseful, but I was keeping in mind that Spielberg and Hanks were responsible for this and I shouldn’t have doubted them in the first place. I couldn’t have been happier after watching this and I must add that it’s one of the best movies that made it to Oscars this year. The story is absolutely natural and it’s really befitting the Cold War. Tom Hanks is a classic, but everybody is outshined by Mark Rylance whom I didn’t even known before, but now I know that I won’t forget about him. The only issue was the music, which was too American and it could do without all those emotions. The ending is a little too exaggerated, which doesn’t have to suit anyone. I was pissed, but it still didn’t make me take away a star; I’ve enjoyed this movie way too much for that over these two hours and a half. (02/28/2016)