[yasr_overall_rating]
An American lawyer is recruited by the CIA during the Cold War to help rescue a pilot detained in the Soviet Union.
Much like the actual man he portrays, the success of Steven Spielberg’s “Bridge of Spies” rests on Tom Hanks’ ability to negotiate a sentimental, somewhat moralizing script and tell a story most of the audience has already heard. He fulfills his role as insurance lawyer James Donovan by delivering the finest performance of his career.
“Bridge of Spies” is Steven Spielberg’s take on the actual events surrounding negotiations between the United States and the Soviet Republic after Soviet missiles shot down America’s super secret spy plane, the U-2. Years before the downing of this spy plane, Donovan, an insurance attorney, had been given the task of defending accused Soviet spy Rudolf Abel (Mark Rylance in top form). The trial was a show trial, though the evidence clearly damned Abel for what he was. Donovan served to “take one for the team” and withstand the fury of a nation in the throes of anti-Communist furor. In the end, his primary achievement meant saving Abel from the electric chair in a bit of foresight few expected from a man with his limited criminal law background. During their time in court, Abel and Donovan formed a lasting respect for each other, one which became important later in the story. When the U-2 plane was shot down over Soviet air space, and its pilot survived, the winds of history pulled Donovan into a world of intrigue he never expected.
Tom Hanks’ resume speaks for itself. As a 5-time Oscar nominee and 2 time winner, he’s played a variety of “everyman” characters thrust into unique, unexpected situations. Donovan fits right into type as a man living the American dream. Hanks’ performance strikes the perfect balance between understatement and idealistic passion. While the film itself sinks into moralistic sentimentality, something Hanks is known for doing himself, the actor shows restraint when playing Donovan, making his moments of passionate exclamation poignant. Given the challenges he faces, Donovan shows ingenuity and cleverness few could have expected. More than any of his traits, though, it’s Donovan’s stubborn willfulness to do what he believes is the right thing which defines the man. Hanks, as bankable and familiar as he is, sinks into this role like no other. Other than “Philadelphia,” I can’t think of another of his films where I didn’t look up and see Hanks the actor as opposed to a character in a story.
Mark Rylance plays Abel as the understated artist he claims to be. His quiet demeanor belies a mind working like a clock, ticking and calculating his next move, yet knowing his situation is entirely out of his control. This coolness under pressure gives the film its funniest moments and does what Spielberg wants so badly. It creates sympathy for Abel and allows the audience to see him as a man, not an enemy, something Americans in the midst of the first Cold War had no interest in. Rylance’s expressions change only minutely, giving Abel a Russian austerity and demonstrating by contrast with Donovan the real differences in culture between the U.S. and the U.S.S.R.
As is usual in a Spielberg film, the rest of the cast fills small, but important, roles perfectly. One exception is Amy Ryan, who seems miscast as Donovan’s longsuffering wife. Her talents just don’t match up to the role, mostly because she doesn’t have enough screen time to flesh out Mary Donovan’s motivations or develop her as more than a woman afraid for her family. German actor Sebastian Koch, on the other hand, makes the most of his few moments as a lawyer with hidden motivations. These two actors simply do what they can with the parts they play, however, and Koch has better lines.
Spielberg directs a screenplay unevenly written by Matt Charman, Joel Coen, and Ethan Coen. They have created what can feel like a morality play, harping upon idealist notions of what America and the Constitution should be, and how they should be used in the world. Playing on CIA stereotypes and a milieu from the Red Scare, they are obviously making a point about today’s America as much as America from the past. While Hanks brilliantly handles his idealistic lines, much of what we see in the first third and parts of the final act of the film express heavy handed ideals. Not necessarily wrong ideals, just ideals which we’ve all heard many times before. Spielberg’s direction pulls the film along quite well, however, as he finds a groove missing since “Saving Private Ryan.” What he builds on the foundation of that screenplay shines.
“Bridge of Spies” is beautifully rendered as a story and in its environment in total. The set transports us back to a time when everyone lived under the very real threat of nuclear war. As Spielberg does so well, he places moments of unexpected poignancy throughout the film, making something as simple as children jumping over a fence a grim reminder of the tragedy of a divided Berlin. Every set piece creates such an engaging environment, I found myself wanting to brush snow from my shoulder. Spielberg once again shows his mastery at setting the scene by creating a fully realized environment for his characters to inhabit. The authenticity he creates gives the film real weight, especially during the tense climax.
That Spielberg time and again creates suspense and magic out of history continues to amaze. While “Bridge of Spies” doesn’t quite reach his masterpieces “Schindler’s List” and “Saving Private Ryan,” it attains a level just below those films. Hanks shows the maturity of a master thespian at the top of his craft, giving much of the film much of the credibility it needs to spark discussion and argue its points. Because of his performance, Donovan and his story remind us why we need idealists in the first place.
In theaters October 16th
