Bridge Of Spies (Spielberg & Hanks)

humanji

So out of the blue I find out that Steven Spielberg has a new film. Bridge of Spies is based on the true story of James Donovan (played by Tom Hanks), who was tasked with negotiating the trade of a Russian spy for a US pilot during the cold War. It's written by the Coen Brothers and Matt Charmon (who I know nothing of, but the Coen Brothers peek my interest).

The trailer is here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-2x3r1m2I4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-2x3r1m2I4

For a while I've found most of Spielberg's later films to not be my cup of tea, but I think that's possibly down to me always wanting to relive those childhood movies I loved when I was young (the last film of his I really enjoyed was Tintin, for example). But I do have a soft spot for Hanks and spy thrillers, so this is an unexpected surprise for me.

I also find it incredibly strange that I knew nothing of this film. There was a time when I'd know every single thing Spielberg did, in case it was a new Indiana Jones movie. I guess the last one really had an effect on me.

Sad Professor

No John Williams.

OldRio

I prefer my 'Cold War' spy movies understated and well written. Slow moving but well crafted. The British do them so well. This looks a little 'Hollywood' for my liking.

We shall see. Thanks for the heads up.

Arghus

I would have a degree of hope for the movie, considering the people involved and the subject matter.

But that trailer is awful. Bombastic, on-the-nose and it gives so much of the film away. Of course the finished product may look nothing like the teaser, but it doesn't bode well for the future.

WHIP IT!

Go see this at your first given opportunity, it's absolutely fantastic. I'm not sure there's ever been a better, more rounded actor than Tom Hanks. Mark Rylance is also superb as the Russian spy - a very unique performance, I can't think of another character/performance I can compare it to.

Best film I've seen in a long time...

Technocentral

WHIP IT! wrote:

Go see this at your first given opportunity, it's absolutely fantastic. I'm not sure there's ever been a better, more rounded actor than Tom Hanks. Mark Rylance is also superb as the Russian spy - a very unique performance, I can't think of another character/performance I can compare it to.

I love Cold War stuff but Hanks is putting me off, such a light weight, does he have to be in every Spielberg film? Where did you see it btw?

conorhal

Technocentral wrote: »

I love Cold War stuff but Hanks is putting me off, such a light weight, does he have to be in every Spielberg film? Where did you see it btw?

There is a bit of a Depp/Burton thing evolving around their collaborations, however... Catch me if you Can was damn good.

Harry Palmr

Interesting throwback, it seems to be a minor sleeper in the US market, opened modestly but has quietly kept going on a slow week by week decline. Only cost about $40m as well which is practically a short tv series these days!

pixelburp

Technocentral wrote: »

I love Cold War stuff but Hanks is putting me off, such a light weight, does he have to be in every Spielberg film? Where did you see it btw?

'light weight' is a little unfair I think: Hanks suffers from some typecasting, his physical manner & demeanour means he's often perfect for those ordinary, decent characters; the kind of people that aren't necessarily bubbling with complexities and darker shades, but are still difficult to portray all the same. It's hard for any lead to be naturally likeable yet unremarkable, and Hanks nails that so organically it's easy to forget he's acting just like the actors with the more 'tortured' roles.

That said, his work on Captain Phillips alone made me appreciate him a little more as an actor, the last scene in particular he really shows a raw form of acting.

WHIP IT!

Technocentral wrote: »

I love Cold War stuff but Hanks is putting me off, such a light weight, does he have to be in every Spielberg film? Where did you see it btw?

I'm dying... the producers gave me a special early screening... swear

fin12

Its in the cinema on the 26th of November. I really like Tom Hanks.

Stinicker

I seen this film a month ago when I was in South East Asia, it is really good and I think Hanks did a stellar job, I'm a big fan of his and it was a good film in my book. Has it been released in Ireland yet?

fin12

Stinicker wrote: »

I seen this film a month ago when I was in South East Asia, it is really good and I think Hanks did a stellar job, I'm a big fan of his and it was a good film in my book. Has it been released in Ireland yet?

No its in the cinemas on the 26th of November.

errlloyd

Haha crazy. Eve Hewson is making her big release acting debut in a movie inspired by events surrounding the shooting down of a U2 Spy Plane. The very same incident that inspired the name of her fathers band.

JP Liz V1

WHIP IT! wrote: »

Go see this at your first given opportunity, it's absolutely fantastic. I'm not sure there's ever been a better, more rounded actor than Tom Hanks. Mark Rylance is also superb as the Russian spy - a very unique performance, I can't think of another character/performance I can compare it to.

Best film I've seen in a long time...

Was mixing Rylance up with Richard Jenkins

WHIP IT!

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

Was mixing Rylance up with Richard Jenkins

I can kinda see it, mind you...

longfellow deeds

I like the older British spy films, y'know less action and more acting,
this film I thought was more like that a bit of a throwback to the sixties.
A good but not a great film I'd say, but it is definately worth the watch just for Rylances performance, WOW !!!, this guy is a masterful actor.
Now that Spielberg has given him a platform I suspect we're going to see a lot more of him on the silver screen in the future.

OldRio

To be honest it really isn't a spy film. I to was hoping for a throwback to the 60's British spy films but alas it wasn't.
Agree about Rylance though. Excellent performance.

maximoose

Saw this lastnight, wasn't mad about it.

Hanks/Rylance were very good, but I just didn't find the story very gripping and a bit boring at times tbh.

The forced humour had me rolling my eyes a few times as well

That "Would it help?" recurring joke was awful

spurious

Yeah, there wasn't any of the decisive moments that I felt were ever going to go anything other than the way we wanted. I did like the 50s look of things and Rylance and Hanks were great, but I really wasn't bothered about Powers or the other guy. As a vehicle to make us feel sorry for the 'Commie spy' it was great.

Quite disappointed in it.

The Black Oil

The nightmare that is foot surveillance led by Herc from The Wire is how we begin. The Russian spy (Abel), an excellent performance from Mark Rylance, is caught very early on. This leads us to James Donovan (Tom Hanks). Another Wire alum, Amy Ryan, plays his wife. Donovan is a keen negotiator, determined, principled and observant. Given the situation, he's subject to significant scrutiny and baggage associated with the case, including his family's safety. The wider safety issue is about America. Despite the story, there is not much legal ping pong in court. The law is discussed and depicted, however what happens behind the scenes is what matters and the need for a positive outcome, albeit off the books. Juxtaposed to Abel and Donovan is the story of Francis Gary Powers, the famous U2 pilot. Overall his situation unravels (not what happens, but his training, etc) a little rapidly for my tastes.

Well-made and some nice touches, but I was hoping for something more.

fin12

Spielberg thriller Bridge of Spies turns into a legal drama as it is understood book author believes he has not been adequately compensated

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3337992/Spielberg-thriller-Bridge-Spies-turns-legal-drama-understood-book-author-believes-not-adequately-compensated.html

Looper007

Shame this is getting many thumbs down by many, Hanks, Spielberg and Coen Brothers mix doesn't seem to impress much on here.

I have to say I loved it, yes it has the Spielberg good old American coy moments in it but damn he know to do a great film. Hank's is excellent as per usual, as is Rylance although Amy Ryan is wasted as Hanks wife as is Alan Alda as his boss. The film reminds me of the good old 60's thriller's like the Spy who came in from the Cold. It's very talkie, but you can see some Coen brother touches in there, when Hank's meets Rylance's family in East Germany, that's definitely very Coen brothers. I do think it's a tad overlong but with two top central performances it's a fantastic watch.

NachoBusiness

I loved this film. Been a long while since I enjoyed a film as much.

Really nicely paced. Hanks was excellent, as was Rylance

pixelburp

I think in many ways this felt like a companion piece to Spielberg's last effort, Lincoln; both predominantly 'indoors' films, and both followed an unwavering idealist as he wielded the power of diplomacy to solve a crisis that might otherwise undermine the principles of American democracy. The darkened, smoky rooms & muted palette in Bridge of Spies was equally evocative of that previous film. The introduction of the crashed US pilot broke the mood a little, but by and large this felt like a sequel-in-spirit. Not sure I'd even call it a spy film really, it felt more like a Capra-esque morality tale, of staying true to a noble ideal, and fighting the good fight against those who might be bigger and more morally flexible than you. That it involved spies was just a sideshow really.

As for Rylance's performance, it was fine; subtle & all in the eyes I guess. I didn't think there was anything to the character in the first place, so it was to Rylance's credit that he managed to imbue a certain sorry mystery to Abel that otherwise, to me, wasn't really present on the page.

Not a great film by any means, but it's worth saying that an adequate Spielberg effort is still head & shoulders above most studio flicks these days.

NachoBusiness

pixelburp wrote: »

The introduction of the crashed US pilot broke the mood a little, but by and large this felt like a sequel-in-spirit. Not sure I'd even call it a spy film really, it felt more like a Capra-esque morality tale, of staying true to a noble ideal, and fighting the good fight against those who might be bigger and more morally flexible than you. That it involved spies was just a sideshow really.

The film was not supposed to be centrally a spy story as the central character was not a spy. Also, of course it's a morality tale. I haven't read Donovan's memoir but by all accounts the film honhttp://www.biography.com/news/bridge-of-spies-true-storyours the spirit of it.

Also, you say the introduction of Powera broke the mood as if this was some character they made up. This is a true story, the mood may shift but as it should given that had they executed Abel, there would be no story..

http://www.biography.com/news/bridge-of-spies-true-story

pixelburp

NachoBusiness wrote: »

Also, you say the introduction of Powera broke the mood as if this was some character they made up. This is a true story, the mood may shift but as it should given that had they executed Abel, there would be no story..

I wasn't talking about the veracity of the character or his point in the story. I was literally speaking of the crash; the film had a very distinct pace and tone, like I said was a very 'indoors' film with its smoky, muted interiors and scenes of interrogation and discussion. The crash scene felt like it was from another movie altogether: a straight-up action set-piece that didn't really have a place being in this kind of film, and it jarred a little with the pacing of the rest.

e_e

Hanks and Rylance were fantastic but I think the film really starts to spin its wheels once they get to Berlin. It felt like 2 movies in 1 with the second one being a tad underdeveloped and lacking in tension.

It's funny, I watched Carol in the same week as Brief Encounter and compared them favorably and this week I saw BOS in close proximity to Doctor Zhivago, another re-released David Lean film with similar ideas to a big movie out now. I enjoyed Bridge of Spies while it was on but I would have liked a little more breathing room for the situation and characters to develop.

K-9

It's very nice, well made and loveable, Hanks is brilliant, perfectly understated, the Supreme Court scene a case what this could easily have been over stated with hyperbole.

It also doesn't delve deep enough into the McCarthy Era, there's nothing there hinting at American paranoia about Reds under the bed, not like the sympathetic Nuclear scare.

It's a nice bit of fluff, but if you want depth, go John LeCarre. Tinker, Tailor, Soldier Spy is far superior.

Jude13

Watched it on the plane a couple of days ago and although it looked lovely I struggled to stay awake for it, no real suspense. Not a bad movie I just expected more.

fin12

Saw Bridge of Spies yesterday, enjoyed it. Tom Hanks is a brilliant actor.

Cantstandsya

Saw this today, really enjoyed it.

Darkglasses

Quite liked the film overall, but my God that last scene on the train in America was a stinker. Should have ended the film on the bridge I think.

tunguska

Saw this last night just on a whim and I absolutely loved it. I can see why some folks haven't taken to it, its not full of action or anything like that. But for me it was deep and meaningful, I liked how Hanks' character stood by his beliefs, even when he was getting a tonne of sh1t from everyone, including his wife.
I had seen the force awakens the day before and was pretty underwhelmed, so Bridge of spies has kind of given me my belief back in good movies.

Harry Palmr

Harry Palmr wrote: »

Interesting throwback, it seems to be a minor sleeper in the US market, opened modestly but has quietly kept going on a slow week by week decline. Only cost about $40m as well which is practically a short tv series these days!

and sure enough it's quietly paid its way. $130,323,059 so far overall, with a bit of life still in it. I think it'll be one of those films that doesn't really get remembered even within the Spielberg canon but is well thought of by most of those who saw it and it'll be a TV regular as sure as eggs is eggs.

MPFGLB

I expect Hanks & Rylance to be up for acting awards for this movie....both are great
Rylance is the master of understatement in acting...he has the confidence to 'do' little when a lesser actor would 'fill' the part

Those critisizing Hanks don't realize how well he does every man ...not many can carry it off

Dempsey

A good periodic piece for anyone interested in the Cold War and Hanks is as good as ever. A film you'll happily watch but wont be rushing out to recommend to friends as a must watch.

solid spielberg / hanks vehicle. not amazing but a good watch that you won't be disappointed with.

wp_rathead

considering it is Tom Hanks and Spielberg I heard very little about this movie - very enjoyable!!

MrKingsley

Saw this last night. From the reviews its been getting, i found it a massive let down. Hanks was excellent however the whole film was very light and soft i found.

I wanted to gag during that last train scene.

I would have been even more disappointed if i had known that the cohen brothers were writers before i saw it. My expectations would have been even higher

Keplar240B

Disappointing
What a boring dull movie

Russkie Spy gets arrested (no background given or show how he was caught or anything)

Boring boring court trial , Hanks defends

Gary power gets shot down over russikeland (they have could have done way more with his story
a Tv movie was made about it in seventies. Gary should have been THE focus of movie IMO)

Hanks goes to Berlin, few meetings in Berlin he losses a coat

Spies exchanged in most boring exchange in movie history

Hanks goes homes falls asleep

lots of the usually Spielberg schmaltz

I knew all the history before hand so I knew everything that was going to happen maybe someone with no/less knowledge might find it a bit more entertaining

WHIP IT!

Keplar240B wrote: »

Disappointing
What a boring dull movie

Russkie Spy gets arrested (no background given or show how he was caught or anything)

Boring boring court trial , Hanks defends

Gary power gets shot down over russikeland (they have could have done way more with his story
a Tv movie was made about it in seventies. Gary should have been THE focus of movie IMO)

Hanks goes to Berlin, few meetings in Berlin he losses a coat

Spies exchanged in most boring exchange in movie history

Hanks goes homes falls asleep

lots of the usually Spielberg schmaltz

I knew all the history before hand so I knew everything that was going to happen maybe someone with no/less knowledge might find it a bit more entertaining

You seem like great craic.... fancy a pint??

Snake Plisken

Saw it last night and really enjoyed it great performances all round and found the story interesting and held my interest, u didn't know the Coen brothers were involved in it. A solid 7/10 from me.

leakyboots

Saw this last night, enjoyable enough fare without doing anything too unexpected along the way. Hanks and the Russian spy are great in it.

Technocentral

Mark Rylance is outstanding as Able in it, one of the best performances Ive seen in the last 10 years, overall v good film.

flangemeistro

Technocentral wrote: »

Mark Rylance is outstanding as Able in it, one of the best performances Ive seen in the last 10 years, overall v good film.

I think he deservedly won best supporting actor at the Oscars.

no.8

pixelburp wrote:

Not a great film by any means, but it's worth saying that an adequate Spielberg effort is still head & shoulders above most studio flicks these days.

Blasphemous!!!

no.8

Keplar240B wrote:

Disappointing What a boring dull movie

Apologies from Stephen that it didn't contain jokes and toilet humour at the right time (e.g. 'the swap' scene or indeed as the house was shot up)

Guy:Incognito

no.8 wrote: »

Apologies from Stephen that it didn't contain jokes and toilet humour at the right time (e.g. 'the swap' scene or indeed as the house was shot up)

no.8 wrote: »

Blasphemous!!!

3 years man.

Harry Palmr

I saw this on Channel 4 last week (?), it was very much a TV movie that somehow got the big screen treatment. I doubt it would have got made without Spielberg's interest. Rylance was easily the best thing in it. Solid even stolid fare with very little flair.