Bridge of Spies

Steven Spielberg’s Bridge of Spies tells the true story of James Donovan, a Brooklyn insurance lawyer recruited to defend Rudolf Abel, a Soviet spy captured in the United States during the Cold War. What begins as an unwanted legal assignment becomes something larger when Donovan is sent to negotiate a prisoner exchange in Berlin, trading Abel for Francis Gary Powers, the American U-2 pilot shot down over Soviet territory. The film was written by Matt Charman with rewrites by Joel and Ethan Coen, and it earned six Academy Award nominations, with Mark Rylance winning Best Supporting Actor.

The film was warmly received as a throwback to classical Hollywood filmmaking, the kind of smart, adult drama built around dialogue and moral conviction rather than spectacle. Some critics found it too safe and too polished, arguing that Spielberg’s craftsmanship came at the expense of genuine tension. But most acknowledged that Bridge of Spies delivers exactly what it promises: a well-told story about a principled man doing the right thing under pressure, made with a level of skill that most filmmakers can only aspire to.

Tom Hanks, Mark Rylance, and the Power of Principled Stubbornness

Tom Hanks plays James Donovan as a man whose defining characteristic is an absolute, almost stubborn commitment to doing what’s right. Hanks makes this compelling rather than preachy by grounding Donovan’s idealism in pragmatism. This isn’t a man making speeches about the Constitution because he loves the sound of his own voice. He’s making arguments because he believes, deeply and without qualification, that the system only works if it applies to everyone, including Soviet spies. Hanks finds the humanity in what could have been a monument, giving Donovan small moments of doubt, exhaustion, and dark humor that keep the character breathing.

Mark Rylance’s Abel is the film’s secret weapon. Playing a captured spy facing possible execution, Rylance creates a character of such calm, intelligence, and understated warmth that he becomes the most fascinating person on screen every time he appears. The recurring exchange between Donovan and Abel, where Donovan asks “Aren’t you worried?” and Abel responds “Would it help?”, becomes the film’s defining moment. Rylance won the Oscar for this role, and it’s the kind of performance that seems effortless in a way that only the most controlled acting achieves.

The Coen Brothers’ contribution to the screenplay is felt in the sharpness of the dialogue and the occasional absurdist touches that lighten the film’s more serious passages. The negotiation scenes in East Berlin have a dark comedy to them, bureaucratic obstacles stacking up in ways that would be funny if the stakes weren’t life and death. The screenplay balances the legal drama of the first half with the spy thriller of the second half with real elegance, each section informing and enriching the other.

Spielberg’s direction is precise and unhurried. He stages the courtroom scenes with the same attention to blocking and rhythm that he brings to action sequences, finding visual ways to express what characters are thinking without relying on exposition. The Berlin sequences, set during the construction of the Wall, are shot with a muted color palette that contrasts sharply with the warmer tones of the American scenes. Janusz Kaminski’s cinematography gives the Cold War setting a tangible chill.

Where Bridge of Spies Plays It Safe

The film’s greatest strength is also its most common criticism: it’s extremely polished. Every scene lands where it’s supposed to. Every emotional beat arrives on schedule. For viewers who prefer their historical dramas with messier edges, Bridge of Spies can feel like watching a film that’s been engineered for maximum respectability. Spielberg’s command of the medium is never in question, but some viewers wish he’d let the material breathe a little more unpredictably.

The first act, focused on Donovan’s defense of Abel in the American court system, moves at a pace that tests the patience of viewers expecting a thriller. The legal arguments are interesting but presented in a way that prioritizes thoroughness over momentum. The film doesn’t truly accelerate until Donovan arrives in Berlin, and for some, that’s too long to wait.

The American characters beyond Hanks are thinly sketched. Amy Ryan, as Donovan’s wife, has little to do beyond worry. The CIA handlers are largely interchangeable. The film is so focused on the Donovan-Abel dynamic that everyone else becomes background. This is a defensible creative choice given how strong that central relationship is, but it means the film’s world can feel narrower than the historical reality warrants.

Thomas Newman’s score, while effective, occasionally underlines moments that don’t need the emphasis. A scene where Donovan watches people being shot trying to cross the Berlin Wall is powerful enough on its visual terms, but the score pushes harder than it needs to. This is a minor complaint, but it’s representative of a film that sometimes trusts its audience slightly less than it should.

Decency as an Act of Courage

Bridge of Spies argues that treating people with dignity, even enemies, especially enemies, is not weakness but the highest expression of what a democratic society is supposed to stand for. Donovan’s insistence on giving Abel a proper defense isn’t popular. His neighbors shun him. His colleagues think he’s naive. Someone shoots at his house. But the film presents his position as the only rational one: if rights only apply to people you like, they aren’t rights at all. In a genre filled with morally compromised protagonists, Donovan’s plain, uncomplicated decency is quietly radical.

Should You Watch Bridge of Spies?

If you appreciate well-crafted historical dramas with strong performances and sharp writing, Bridge of Spies is an easy recommendation. It’s the kind of film that satisfies completely without demanding much beyond your attention and a willingness to engage with dialogue-driven storytelling. Fans of Hanks, Spielberg, or Cold War history will find it particularly rewarding.

Skip it if glossy, prestige-picture filmmaking leaves you cold, or if you need your thrillers to generate genuine uncertainty about outcomes. Bridge of Spies is confident in its convictions and its craft, and it never pretends otherwise.

The Verdict on Bridge of Spies

Bridge of Spies is the kind of film they mean when people say they don’t make them like they used to. Spielberg directs with total command of his craft, Tom Hanks brings warmth and conviction to a role built for him, and Mark Rylance steals the film with an Oscar-winning turn that redefines quiet scene-stealing. It’s methodical where a lesser film would be breathless, and it trusts that the drama of principle is as compelling as any action sequence. A thoroughly satisfying piece of classical filmmaking.