When I was first properly getting into films in my early teens Spielberg was the guy. He was the director of my favourite film at the time, Jaws (1975), and was also the director of so many of my other favourites at the time. As my love for film continued to grow, I started to find directors who beat out Spielberg from the top of my list of best directors, but he managed to get himself back up there as I saw Saving Private Ryan (1998) and Schindler's List (1993), although he has never retaken that top spot with Stanley Kubrick sitting on the top of that list. One of the reasons that Spielberg has fallen down that list is because for every masterpiece he has made he has also made some stinkers. However, it is undeniable the footprint that Spielberg has left on the industry and despite his film catalogue becoming cluttered with mediocrity in recent years he is still very capable of making quality pieces of film. Bridge of Spies (2015) is very much an example of his obvious quality. The film is based on a real event from the cold war where an American lawyer, James B. Donovan (Tom Hanks), is hired by the CIA to defend an accused Soviet Spy, Rudolf Abel (Mark Rylance). They expect him to defend him to an extent, but Donovan goes above and beyond what was expected of him and so finds himself becoming ever more embroiled in political events of the time and being accused of being a communist himself. He manages to save Abel from the death penalty, and when an American soldier, Francis Gary Powells (Austin Stowell), is caught in Soviet territory Donavan is brought in again to negotiate the exchange of Abel and Powers.
This is a film very much built on two performances, that of Hanks and Rylance. Rylance's performance in the film earned him an Academy Award and I feel like it is a well-earned one. He plays the role of Abel extremely well, coming across as charming, intelligent and witty whilst also always keeping an air of mystery about him. We know very little about his character, only ever getting fleeting moments of genuine character building, but he is a character who grabs every scene with his nuanced performance. Every movement seems real and feels like a real person rather than an actor playing a character. I cannot say whether I think he deserved to beat the other nominees to the vote as I have seen none of the other films that were nominated but off this performance, I can very much see why he did win. Hanks also puts in a stellar performance in the film and is probably the perfect casting choice for the role. The role required an air of arrogance and confidence mixed with humility, empathy and intelligence and Hanks oozes all of that in spades especially as he has got older. However, the problem that Tom Hanks faces in this film as he does in most films, he is in nowadays is that he is Tom Hanks. It is obviously an issue that he cannot overcome, and nor should he really try, but unlike with Rylance's character where he was almost unrecognisable as an actor, Hanks is always clearly Hanks. This isn't a huge problem, but it does mean that you never really feel like you are watching the character of James B. Donovan, but Tom Hanks. Despite this he is still able to put in a fantastic performance.
The film is technically undeniable in its quality and this is due to Spielberg being a brilliant technical master of film as well as being endlessly reliable in creating a well-made film. If you give Spielberg good material to work with, he will always make it work and he knocks it out of the park here. The story is constantly intriguing and exciting and never has a lull and this is very much down to Spielberg's effectiveness as a filmmaker. The film never becomes flashy with spectacular set pieces or elaborate sets, but instead goes for an exaggerated sense of realism. The Spielberg tropes are obviously here, with the blindingly lit scenes being the most obvious trope (Spielberg loves really bright lights, it’s almost a fetish of his). Another trope that does appear in the film which I am not too big of a fan of, and that is the over sentimentally that is rife in his films. This film seemingly avoids the sentimentalism all until the end where it smashes you in the face with schlock and cheesy happy ending vibes that don’t really fit the rest if the feel of the film. However, this is a Spielberg film. It would feel kind of wrong if he didn't feel it with sentimentalism and over the top cheese. He knows what the masses want, and he gives it them in spades.
Bridge of Spies is an excellently made film from an excellent Director and an equally excellently performed film from excellently film, leading to the film being, say it with me now, excellent. It is a story that is gripping from start to finish and with brilliant performances from Tom Hanks and Mark Rylance it is a vastly entertaining piece of entertainment. Spielberg will always be a director with a place in my heart for the absolute classic films that he has made that have shaped my love of films and are films I always cite as being some of my favourites. He may seemingly be losing some speed as he enters the twilight years of his career and it is very likely that he will come out with some less than great films in the next few years. But it is also equally likely that he will make a few more great films before his time is done, and Bridge of Spies is evidence of that.