Bridge of Spies

Based on a true story. Inspired by true events. It seems that everything these days is a reimagining of historical events. Isn’t every piece of writing inspired by true events to some degree? Maybe not The Avengers, but you know what I mean. This time of year, we are bombarded with biopics and slightly embellished stories of valor and heroism. Some stories are truly worth the yarn spun, and others simply aren’t. “Bridge of Spies” falls in line with the latter.

1957, Brooklyn. As the Cold War is escalating, family man insurance lawyer James Donovan (Tom Hanks) is tapped by the US Government to defend a Soviet spy in court, and finds himself entangled with the CIA in East Berlin negotiating with the Soviets and Germans in a game of cloak and mouse and cat and dagger. You know what I mean.

Directed by Steven Spielberg should be enough of a reason to see this film. Throw in written by the Coen brothers and starring Tom Hanks, and it should have been a home run. Unfortunately, the film relies too heavily on Atticus Finch syndrome (trademark pending) and patriotism. The story is unremarkable and even less suspenseful that it certainly should be, and there are only so many times we can be expected to watch a good man defying the odds and risking his reputation and safety to simply do the right thing. Sorry Steven. With a variety of projects on his plate (“Ready Player One” and “The Circle” should be exceptional fun) he has ample opportunity to move on. After all, he’s Steven freaking Spielberg.

Tom Hanks breezes through this performance with his fluttering eyelids and boyish grin interspersed between important speeches. I still think his best performances didn’t earn him Oscars (“Captain Phillips”, “Saving Private Ryan”, “Road to Perdition”) and this one will go down with a potential nomination, but shouldn’t secure any hardware. Of course, some people are raving, but his portrayal of James Donovan is less Gregory Peck and more… well-aged Tom Hanks on autopilot.

The Coen Brothers are a perennial favorite of mine, and they have turned their attention toward screenwriting in lieu of directing. They tend to alternate between quirky comedies and Oscar bait, and their upcoming “Hail Caesar” will certainly be quirky. Their fatal flaw in writing this story lies in their inability to capture the suspense and tension between the US and USSR. Come on guys, we are on the brink of Armageddon and you choose this story to be about moral character? Amp up the suspense a bit, even if it’s just for one scene. There was none to be found. Opportunities aplenty, but missed at every turn. I will commend them on weaving a complex game of espionage and elucidating things nicely at the end for the mainstream audience. Don’t worry, you don’t need a history lesson before watching the film. This marks two non-fiction screenplay bombs in a row for them (remember last year’s “Unbroken”?)

Mark Ryland is the lone performance that stands out, and it might win him a Best Supporting Actor nomination. A longtime stage thespian, he plays the Soviet, Rudolph Abel with a subtlety worthy of mention. Few words spoken, but he still says so much through his expressionless façade. He can be seen re-teaming with Spielberg in the upcoming “BFG”.

The Cold War was a scary time. Or so I’ve heard. There are admirable men and women whose actions prevented us (America) from facing catastrophe and their stories are things of legend worthy of public celebration. I just wish this film was a bit more intense.

“Bridge of Spies” isn’t what I would consider a bad movie by any means, it is just disappointing, long, and boring. Don’t expect anything beyond average. 6/10.