Never Seen It #221: Bridge of Spies

Look at the blog now. You shouldn't take it with you. You're looking at a blog, you're an American, you're a spy. You could well be detained. Just avoid interacting with people generally. You don't belong, so don't stick out. Food is scarce over there and things have started to fall apart. There are gangs, and rule of law is less firmly established over there, people are watching 400 movies they've never seen before. And definitely stay away from the Wall. On their side, there's a line cleared of buildings along the Wall. They call it the "Death Line." Cross it and you'll be shot.

Bridge of Spies

2015

Steven Spielberg

A couple members of Group C have some thoughts about this Spielberg flick. Let's see what they have to say. What do you have to say? Meet us in the comments and let us know.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

Walter

Something about Tom Hanks' role in Bridge of Spies makes me feel like everything is going to be okay, like there are still folks in the world who care about strategies and games, not for profit, but for humanity's sake. There's a lot to unpack in this movie. Subtle suspense, such as the moment when Mr. Donovan hears news that the East German Republic is willing to release Pryor on checkpoint Charlie. Why at that location? Will he be shot? Not until the end is the suspense revealed, and Mr. Donovan plays his hand well to wait to ensure Pryor's release. That's another thing in this world—patience. This concept feels almost of a generation passed. Practicing patience is tiring, suspenseful, and rewarding. It's a gift, so implies Abel. Not necessarily a gift that will ensure his own safety, but a gift nonetheless. But patience isn't only what Abel sees in Mr. Donovan. He also sees empathy and compassion. I'm not sure if that was meant as the meaning in Abel's gift to Donovan, but I like to think the portrait is of a man who can stare at it, seeing a near replica of himself as if he's looking in the mirror. And in that mirror, he feels great self-esteem—like he has gotten something right in his life. What's one thing you've gotten right in your life?

GRADE: 5 out of 5

~~~~~~~~~~~

Sean E.

When Bridge of Spies hit theaters back in 2015, I remember catching a trailer or two and instantly dismissing it. Something about it screamed The Good Shepherd to me—Cold War, spies, lots of grey suits and slow dialogue. And since The Good Shepherd was, frankly, boring as hell, I figured this would be more of the same. So I moved on.

Boy, was I wrong.

Bridge of Spies might not be a timeless masterpiece or the definitive Cold War movie, but it's a genuinely solid historical drama. It takes a real-life slice of Cold War tension and presents it with clarity, nuance, and—importantly—heart. Spielberg's direction is restrained but confident, and Tom Hanks brings his usual gravitas to the role of James Donovan, a man caught in the moral and political crosshairs of international diplomacy.

What really struck me was how relevant parts of this story feel today. Donovan's insistence on giving Soviet spy Rudolf Abel a real legal defense—not just the appearance of one—stands out as a principled stand in a time of paranoia and fear. The public backlash he receives for doing the right thing feels incredibly prescient in today's polarized climate. It's a reminder of how easily people abandon their values when fear takes over—and how important it is to have people who hold the line.

That said, the film isn't without its flaws. The two American prisoners at the heart of the eventual spy swap—Francis Gary Powers and Frederic Pryor—are barely developed. Powers, the U-2 pilot shot down over the USSR, is treated by his own government more like a PR liability than a person. He's blamed for crashing, for not using his suicide device, and for being used as a Soviet propaganda tool. As if he had any real control over that while imprisoned. And Pryor? He's barely more than a footnote—a well-meaning but naïve student who takes a poorly timed bike ride into East Berlin and ends up caught in the gears of geopolitics. The film could have done more to flesh out their stories, especially since their fates drive so much of the narrative tension.

Still, those shortcomings don't overshadow the film's strengths. It's a gripping, thoughtful look at the Cold War, diplomacy, and what it means to do the right thing when it's unpopular.

One last thought: are diplomatic negotiations during prisoner swaps really that brief? In the film, it's like: "Here's what I want." "Okay, how about this instead?" "Nah, let's stick with my original offer." "Alright, I'll run it by my boss." It all felt a little too neat and fast. I can't help but wonder if real-world exchanges are actually that straightforward. There's got to be a memoir or account out there from someone who's done this kind of thing that sheds more light on how these negotiations actually play out.

Final Verdict: 4 out of 5. Definitely worth a watch—especially if, like me, you assumed it'd be a snooze. It's not.

~~~~~~~~~~~

Joe

It's interesting to think that Steven Spielberg doesn't really make movies that mystify me. They do a lot of things to me, such as excite me and make me appreciate the idea of movie magic, but they don't mystify, or confuse, or make me think all that deeply. I think this is okay.

Like, I'm not complaining, okay? I don't need to walk away perplexed from everything I watch. That's not healthy. Sometimes, you just need a really well-made popcorn blockbuster. Get the voice of Woody up on that goddamn screen and let him talk about DEMOCRACY. There's no hidden meaning here. No thematic secrets to be unveiled or unboxed. The message is made crystal clear. The excitement comes from watching the story unfold, beautifully, intricately, with a master behind the camera.

I'll admit that there were moments when Spielberg zigged when I thought he was going to zag. That's good, to keep the audience on their toes. I didn't know what this was about and so for a little bit, I wondered whether this was going to be a courtroom drama. I wondered that for about 30 seconds, until all of a sudden we jumped to the end of the trial. And then there were also seemingly random interstitials of young men (including that handsome fella Jesse Plemons) learning how to be spies for America, which took me a hot minute to get my mind around. Of course, when the pieces clicked into place, it was off the fucking races, but credit where it's due: this was not initially an "obvious" movie in any sense.

When it did become obvious—that Tom Hanks' James B. Donovan was willing to lay down his life for his freedoms if he had to, so sterling was his sense of character, of justice, of what was right—then we saw it play out, and it was a joy to behold. No twists, no surprises, just a straight shot to the ending that you expected, but were happy to see anyway. This is why Spielberg is one of the best to ever do it—no tricks, just a focus on pure craft.

Sometimes, it's a little tough to swallow movies that talk about freedoms and the important of our democracy and all that. This film was only made ten years ago, but a lot has happened to America in that decade, not much of it good. It's hard to take Tom Hanks' conviction seriously when see through the prism of our current political climate. That's the movie magic for ya, though—Bridge of Spies was good enough that it fucking made me believe in the U.S.A. anyway. 

The last time this blog covered a Spielberg flick, it was Saving Private Ryan. I talked at that time about the fact that Spielberg had so perfected the craft that I got distracted by it sometimes, just pondering about how the film was made and what insane tricks this dude could pull with the camera and his direction, all to the detriment of my investment in the film itself. I had trouble getting lost in it. I didn't get that sense from Bridge of Spies, though. Maybe because the set pieces were more reasonable. It's easier to forget it's a movie when you watch Tom Hanks get his coat stolen in East Germany than it is when you watch Tom Hanks as a dutiful soldier, surrounded by a massacre on the beaches of Normandy. It's a matter of scope, I guess? Bridge of Spies was small and focused, and all the better for it.

I'm just talking out of my ass, of course (always am). I feel like I have to with Spielberg, though. This is good because it's an extremely well-made movie, not because it has anything complex to say. I am versed in the language of the latter, not the former, so hence the talking-out-of-ass compulsion. There are deeper movies that give me more to think about over longer periods of time. Like, I'm not gonna wake up four weeks from now thinking about some interesting thematic detail from Bridge of Spies. But in the immediate aftermath, in that brief moment when those credits start rolling, there is no other director that makes me feel this way. Spielberg makes me thankful that movies exist.

GRADE: 4 pukes out of 5

~~~~~~~~~~

GROUP AVERAGE GRADE: 4.33 pukes out of 5

Thanks to Walter and Sean E. for their great write-ups! Okay folks, see ya in the comments.

(NEXT TIME: Gonzo exchanges Rizzo for Pepé the King Prawn on the bridge in Muppets from Space.)