Bridge of Spies

Bridge of Spies, or Spielberg's successful attempt to sell the Cold War to mainstream audiences. Spielberg can without exaggeration be called the uncrowned king of midcult, and I do not mean that in a derogatory way. He simply has the ability to direct a film in a highly professional manner and to process any subject matter in a way that makes it accessible to the average viewer, not just the elite festival crowd. However, this comes with a certain pleasing quality, a smoothing of edges, and the ability to squeeze out emotions and move the audience, and not always at the right moment. The touching music in Bridge of Spies really got on my nerves at times. Spielberg's characters are in the right moment at the right place and express the right words and thoughts. He presents history and events in a somewhat more noble way than how they appeared in reality. In some aspects, Bridge of Spies is similar to Schindler's List, although it does not remotely reach the manipulative distortion typical of that film. I am more drawn to the approach that Polanski chose in The Pianist. If I want to see a film without softening filters, I have to look elsewhere than in Spielberg's workshop. What can be fully appreciated is the high level of professionalism, the ability to create beautiful and impressive images (the 1950s are more vivid there than in reality), and Spielberg's mentioned ability to time scenes appropriately and work with human emotions. Spielberg is simply a storyteller who sometimes tweaks stories for the sake of effect and educational messages. From an acting perspective, I have no objections, and Tom Hanks is a representative of Hollywood's elite who is more than suited for this type of role. For informed viewers, Bridge of Spies has one more negative dimension, which is typical of similar artistic reconstructions of real events. You simply know how it turned out with Colonel Abel and Powers in reality, and the tension just doesn't happen, despite the efforts of the screenwriters. Overall impression: 80%. (07/12/2015)

The most characteristic Steven Spielberg film in decades. No side is black and white, the main character played by the perfect Tom Hanks has increasingly clear human motivations amidst a thickening plot, and the technical aspects of the pivotal scenes (the plane, the wall, and ultimately all of Berlin) is so close and formally perfect that it takes your breath away. Despite the generous running time, you never get a moment to catch your breath, and every plot twist or complication forces me to spin my brain over and over again and think about how to maneuver out of the situation at hand. And that's where my only, yet all-encompassing, criticism is directed. Everything turns out exactly as I expected without knowledge of the given historical events. The painfully contemporary message reaches the viewer impressively, but there remains a feeling of being a bit shortchanged, which Steven brought on himself. In his hands, such a topic could not go wrong, but despite its formal perfection, it could have turned out even more sincerely. (01/12/2015)

A film with a testimonial value that is much more than how it actually entertains and enriches the end viewer. At the same time, though, it's typical Spielberg of the last decade. That is to say, smart, honest, with less verve than before, less original and groundbreaking, but also, nonchalantly academic, with accurately rendered period realities of Berlin and an overall magnificent production design (for that money!). It also knows how to play with characters (a reliable Hanks, a fantastic Rylance) and those wordless Kaminski details (the last scene) – something that can be called a constant for a very long time. A safe bet. It’s not bad, but nothing to write home about, either. (06/12/2015)

As soon as I saw only old people in the cinema, I knew I wouldn't be the target audience. It's nicely directed and fairly intelligently written, Tom Hanks is excellent and occasionally pulls off a joke, but I can't speak more highly of it. What bothered me was that we don’t get any courtroom stuff, the running is excessive and it’s not very entertaining. Catch Me If You Can, for example, was also just a long conversation, but it had a better paced and a much more powerful and entertaining effect on the viewer. With Bridge of Spies, I was more interested in when the ending would be than how the film would end, and I suppose that's wrong. I don't regret going to the cinema, it had its light moments (the plane crash, the conversation in Berlin), but it didn't pull me in. Strong three stars. 70%. (09/12/2015)

Though Bridge of Spies is certainly a little embellished and insufficiently exciting, it is still a reliably entertaining spy thriller with a gorgeous retro visual aspect. I was already overjoyed by the camera movements, taking in three people at the table in the way it would have been shot 50 years ago. A great atmospheric setting in the period, elegantly written dialogue, a great Hanks, a nice role for Mark Rylance. Global politics should be run by people like Spielberg. And only them. (24/12/2015)