It's decent. Mark Rylance in particular gives a fantastic performance and Tom Hanks is as charismatic as ever. Thematically it's all over the place. I found the first third, focused mostly on the courtroom drama, to be a bit of a bore. It really picks up a tremendous amount once Hanks's character travels to Berlin and the rest of the film is continuously engaging and exciting. The ending is incredibly saccharine and Spielberg-esque and was probably the portion of the film I took the biggest issue with. But as a whole this is a very polished, respectable film that should definitely be a crowdpleaser. B

With Bridge of Spies, Steven Spielberg has done it again. Like Lincoln three years ago, I initially wrote the film off to some degree because of the trailers that promised a sober, self-important examination of a significant historical event. However, just as was the case with Lincoln, Spielberg brings the setting to extremely vivid, engaging life, as even scenes that are entirely dialogue-driven feel as immediate and weighty as any of the film's well-executed visual flourishes. The most surprising factor, however, is how well Spielberg's more sweepingly cinematic style gels with the script that was co-written by the decidedly less sentimental Coen Brothers; even though some moments feel distinctly Spielbergian, it utilizes the script's slyly witty and playful edge perfectly, and all without sacrificing the levels of tension and intrigue inherent in the segment set in East Germany. The history at hand is fascinating, and all parties involved make it feel remarkably immediate from start to finish. While the film isn't as much of an acting showcase as Lincoln was, it still boasts some very strong work from Tom Hanks and Mark Rylance. Hanks fills the everyman angle of his character perfectly, and the quiet-but-unshakable conviction that he displays makes his character's actions feel both noble and believable. Rylance is also quite impressive in a much more humanized, even-handed portrayal of a Russian spy than we've seen in other films; he never overplays his hand, yet the grace that he brings to the performance allows him to linger in viewers' minds even though he is offscreen for significant stretches of the running time. Like Rylance's performance, the film on the whole feels like an unexpected, yet wholly-welcome revelation for its genre: it's as thrilling as one would expect from a film with its subject matter, yet it's also so humorous and human that it earns its feel-good ending. In my book, it belongs among the ten best efforts from Spielberg, which is no small praise when one considers the man's prolific resume.

A

deliberate

In the Cold War-era drama Bridge of Spies, as in his very popular Lincoln, Steven Spielberg exhibits a fascination with an enormous political tension reduced to problem-solving men in small spaces arguing, conversing, and debating. The hero in this picture is James B. Donovan, an insurance lawyer who reveals himself to be a levelheaded and virtuous negotiator with a gift for resolving crises on the verge of exploding into violence. He is played by the stalwart Tom Hanks, who is firmly in his comfort zone, but still a warm and winning presence.

Donovan's story as presented here can be neatly divided into two halves. In the first, he agrees with a degree of reluctance to defend suspected Soviet spy Rudolf Abel (Mark Rylance) so as to create the illusion of exemplary representation as Abel is guided through the system toward, most presume, an electric chair. Donovan draws the ire of the nation as he becomes truly invested in the case, even bringing it before the Supreme Court. And in the second half, he is spirited to a divided Germany to oversee a hoped-for exchange of the imprisoned Abel for captured American U-2 pilot Francis Gary Powers (Austin Stowell).

Both sections contain highlights and qualities. The first more prominently features legendary British stage actor and infrequent film presence Rylance in a standout performance. He is both delightful and enigmatic as Abel, playing him as a droll and discreet, yet clearly astute gentleman who empathizes with Donovan as they sit as a proverbial geopolitical card table, but never comes close to showing his entire hand. The second, however, is far more suspenseful as Spielberg stages Spy Who Came in from the Cold-style scenes of men in coats and hats engaging in snowbound spy games at or around the Berlin Wall. These moments are infused with genuine gravity and menace.

A few flaws restrain Bridge of Spies from realizing its absolute full potential. Amy Ryan is squandered as Donovan's wife, only allowed to smile, wear glamorous heels, serve meatloaf, and burn the midnight oil with bland concern. It is a shame her character's point-of-view is only broadly gestured toward, never incorporated. And not for the first time, Spielberg finds a damn near perfect ending (involving a painting and a departing airplane) only to then power on for another few cloying, heavy-handed minutes. Overall, though, this is a fine, smart, and stylish outing by arguably the most famous American director to ever live.

B+

Bridge of Spies never quite crosses the the threshold into being a great film, but the dependably excellent work from Spielberg and Hanks makes it a very good one. The Cold War is a ripe time period for interesting espionage stories told well, and this one fits the bill. A superb standout supporting performance by Mark Rylance (which may very well net award nominations) adds to the film considerably. B+

Great film, that too many people seem not to have seen. It's anything but boring (which concerned me considering the trailer), and Spielberg and Hanks are at the top of their game.

A

It's a film drenched in Spielberg whether you like it or not. It's not the type of deep moral examination of fear and manipulation and blurring of the lines of good and evil that another director could have made out of the subject. But it never wanted to be. It's classical story about a hero and the quiet difference one can make when they believe in things. At that I think it succeeds.

I do think some of the supporting roles come off flat. Powers and Priors scenes aren't that great and don't feel that removed from a movie of much less quality like Woman in Gold, and people like the CIA operatives, judge, etc. don't stand out as real feeling humans. Amy Ryan as his wife does nothing. The film doesn't have the benefit of Lincoln's cast where they could have awesome actors like James Spader or Walton Goggins or Hal Holbrook in all these bit bit parts but the supporting roles could have been felt more real and vibrant instead of stick figures. Rylance was great and emotionally resonant, but I thought this was Hanks movie and he sold everything he needed to in that character, on the line between hero and frustrated real human. I actually shed a tear at the ending when the kids saw what he did on tv and he's passed out on the bed. Great score in that scene too. It's an outrage Hanks went 0/3 for Captain Phillips, Saving Mr. Banks and Bridge of Spies for Oscar nominations

This makes a good pairing with the superior Lincoln with the law tilt and having conversations with stubborn people. I'm not a big Spielberg fan but compared to his work in the stretch from The Terminal to War Horse, he seems to have found a creative groove

This film is not made for me. It's an admirable effort, but everything feels too polished and I was never enraptured. This feels like something Spielberg could have made in his sleep, he played it so safe here. Lincoln was much better.

C+

Bridge of Spies is an extraordinarily dull treatment of an extraordinarily exciting subject. *C*

This got lost in my Zoophoria last weekend, but its really really good. An exceptionally well crafted film and probably my favorite Spielberg since Munich.