REVIEW: "Bridge of Spies' hard to cross

By Adam Pilskog

Based on a true story. Inspired by true events. It seems that everything these days is a reimagining of historical events. Isn't every piece of writing inspired by true events to some degree? Maybe not "The Avengers,GÇ¥ but you know what I mean. This time of year, we are bombarded with biopics and slightly embellished stories of valor and heroism. Some stories are truly worth the yarn spun, and others simply are not. "Bridge of SpiesGÇ¥ falls in the latter column.

It's 1957 in Brooklyn. As the Cold War escalates, family man and insurance lawyer James Donovan (Tom Hanks) is tapped by the U.S. government to defend a Soviet spy in court, and finds himself entangled with the CIA in East Berlin negotiating with the Soviets and Germans in a game of cloak and mouse and cat and dagger. You know what I mean.-á

Having been directed by Steven Spielberg should be enough of a reason to see this film. Throw in the Coen brothers for writers and Hanks as the star, and it should have been a home run. Unfortunately, the film relies too heavily on Atticus Finch syndrome (trademark pending) and patriotism. The story is unremarkable and even less suspenseful than it certainly should be, and there are only so many times we can be expected to watch a good man defying the odds and risking his reputation and safety to simply do the right thing. Sorry, Steven. With a variety of projects on his plate ("Ready Player OneGÇ¥ and "The CircleGÇ¥ should be exceptional fun) he has ample opportunity to move on. After all, he's Steven freaking Spielberg.

Hanks breezes through this performance with his fluttering eyelids and boyish grin interspersed between important speeches. I still think his best performances didn't earn him Oscars ("Captain Phillips,Gǥ "Saving Private Ryan,Gǥ "Road to PerditionGǥ) and this one will go down with a potential nomination, but shouldn't secure any hardware. Of course, some people are raving, but his portrayal of James Donovan is less Gregory Peck and moreGǪ well-aged Tom Hanks on autopilot.

The Coen Brothers are a perennial favorite of mine, and they have turned their attention toward screenwriting in lieu of directing. They tend to alternate between quirky comedies and Oscar bait, and their upcoming "Hail CaesarGÇ¥ will certainly be quirky. Their fatal flaw in writing this story lies in their inability to capture the suspense and tension between the United States and the USSR. Come on, guys, we are on the brink of Armageddon and you choose this story to be about moral character? Amp up the suspense a bit, even if it's just for one scene. There was none to be found. Opportunities were plenty, but missed at every turn. I will commend them on weaving a complex game of espionage and elucidating things nicely at the end for the mainstream audience. Don't worry; you don't need a history lesson before watching the film. This marks two historical nonfiction screenplay bombs in a row for them (remember last year's "UnbrokenGÇ¥?)

Mark Ryland is the lone performance that stands out, and it might win him a best supporting actor nomination. A longtime stage thespian, he plays Soviet Rudolph Abel with a subtlety worthy of mention. Few words spoken, but he still says so much through his expressionless fa+ºade. He can be seen re-teaming with Spielberg in the upcoming "BFG.GÇ¥

"Bridge of SpiesGÇ¥ isn't what I would consider a bad movie by any means, it is just disappointing, long, and boring. Don't expect anything beyond average. 6/10.