That is exactly why I find this to be extremely disappointing as a movie. This movie hit me really strangely. It is the only thing missing here but it's a biggie. In the end Bridge of Spies isn't as good as it could have been, but is still admittedly a great film that will undoubtedly get plenty of recognition at the 2015 Academy Awards. Bridge of Spies had that potential, at least, that's what I was expecting. Donovan, once again proving his versatility as an actor.
Donovan is successful and Rudolf is sentenced to life imprisonment instead of death penalty. Cars and costumes were fine but the spirit and the people of the era was absent. Instead it feels more like Indiana Jones, as James Donovan travels to Berlin at the time when the wall was being completed. The guy is sleep-walking through the role, and everyone else is wooden and not worth mentioning, except for Alan Alda who steals every scene he's in. Bridge of Spies does not fail this standard.
Highly recommended, especially if you are over 50. Both spies were caught red-handed and so there could be no doubt as to their guilt in both cases. When Donovan learns that the American student Frederic Pryor Will Rogers was arrested in the border of East Berlin while trying to bring his German girlfriend to the West Berlin, he decides to include the student in the negotiation. This is set against the supposed tyranny and cruelty of communist states. I was expecting this movie to feel more like his last flick, Lincoln. We don't really need to see the pilot until his first scene in captivity.
It was opening night, the theater was packed and I was expecting greatness. It's a classic Le Carre-like spy thriller thriller, not action. I personally felt this film was not to my taste. The Coen brothers writing a movie Steven Spielberg would direct just sounds like a winning combination and it really was. But thrill-seekers, you're better off to see the new James Bond movie instead. Many relevant details have been distorted or conveniently left out of the narrative.
Furthermore, the real reason Mr. Unfortunately, most Americans will passively accept this false narrative without question or without doing any further study of their own. And based on my preliminary research, they seem to be getting most of their facts right. I could now spend a lot of time discussing every single propaganda element within the film such as the dark and gloomy atmosphere in East Berlin; the scowling faces of the East German border guards; the menacing and hostile demeanor of various communist officials or scenes of torture, but I have decided to take a different approach. He admits in his memoirs that at the time he was supposed to be impartially defending Colonel Abel, he was at that moment still a spook! This is most likely due to the Coen brothers' clever screenplay and Steven Spielberg's creative direction. This American lawyer is shown as an impressive negotiator, having cold blood to make tough decisions.
Bridge Of Spies is a historical drama film starring Tom Hanks, co-written by the Coen brothers, and directed by Steven Spielberg. Tom Hanks performance, and Spielberg's seasoned direction manage to save the film. Tom Hanks is solid and believable as the fish-out-of-water lawyer, albeit that the role is played with a large spoonful of patriotic American sugar as Donovan trumpets about the importance of the constitution over the lynch-mob mentality of the general public. Below, I have included a table that shows the results of each trial. In Munich, the director pealed your sole with great story telling, tension and acting.
Donovan boards a plane to Berlin, hoping to win the young man's freedom through a prisoner exchange. And for some reason they do it for him! The director got what he needed, superb acting. I rank it among the best of Spielberg's most recent movies. A special 'casting recognition award' to my wife Sue for spotting that the actress playing Judge Byer's wife — Le Clanché du Rand — was Meg Ryan's mother in Sleepless in Seattle 22 years ago! Should've ended with the exchange taking place. After all, this story is right in Spielberg's wheelhouse.
Yes, the story is well known and we all know how it ends, but this means that the unpredictability needs to be in the nuances. Seeing Steven Spielberg's name come up at the final credits was a sort of cherry on the funeral cake. I am quite a fan of spy movies. Indeed, the names of Eisenhower and Khrushchev are absent, yet in the actual event they were the key players, and by leaving them out, there's no story. I theorize Spielberg did this intensionally. There is nothing wrong with high morals or nostalgia in cinema but when a film tries to portray an episode from a complex political and ideological conflict serving only these ingredients, then I can only be disappointed at the waste of means and opportunities.