Bridge of Spies

6

jrodfilmsOct 30, 2015

overall, its a good movie but it does have some faults.the middle is a bit messy and it seems like theres a few different movies rolled into one. good to watch on a rainy day.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

ydnar4Jan 16, 2016

Any film that brings two powerhouses together like Tom Hanks and Steven Spielberg gets attention and Bridge of Spies is no different. These two guys had already collaborated for a few films like Saving Private Ryan and Catch Me If You Can soAny film that brings two powerhouses together like Tom Hanks and Steven Spielberg gets attention and Bridge of Spies is no different. These two guys had already collaborated for a few films like Saving Private Ryan and Catch Me If You Can so you knew that this would be an interesting film. Honestly although I still think that Bridge of Spies is a good movie I find it very comparable to Spielberg's Lincoln from 2012. It is almost all dialogue. Bridge of Spies does not have very many scenes that are that tense, sure the dialogue is good and Tom Hanks is as solid as ever but this could be a good movie to go to sleep to. I still had to give it a solid rating because I know this film is still good I just wish there could've been a bit more excitement. It the end I found the film to be a little flat.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

6

AxeTOct 25, 2015

There is nothing wrong with this movie. It's very well made and acted. The true story is good and it can be seen why it was of interest to Hollywood especially for its relevant and very obvious analogies to today's issues of governmentThere is nothing wrong with this movie. It's very well made and acted. The true story is good and it can be seen why it was of interest to Hollywood especially for its relevant and very obvious analogies to today's issues of government spying, treatment of prisoners and traitors, and general moralities concerning individuals. All that and it's still just not very stirring. Some critics are being advertised with the claim it's Spielberg's best since "Saving Private Ryan". I don't agree. I'd give "Munich" a 10.… Expand

3 of 5 users found this helpful32

All this user's reviews

6

TheKavehJOct 18, 2015

I honestly don't think it deserves an Oscar nomination, for Tom Hanks, Steven Spielberg, or the movie itself, but Bridge of Spies is still worth going to the movies to see it.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

BrianAD9Jan 18, 2016

Written by the Coens, directed by Stephen Speilberg, and starring Tom Hanks. That should be all you need to know. However, this movie, while good, is kind of boring. It's not even close to being as good as I had hoped it would be, and IWritten by the Coens, directed by Stephen Speilberg, and starring Tom Hanks. That should be all you need to know. However, this movie, while good, is kind of boring. It's not even close to being as good as I had hoped it would be, and I didn't have super-high expectations anyway, as odd as that may sound. Don't get me wrong, it's good. But it's not THAT good. Tom Hanks was great as always, but it's not a stand-out role. Mark Rylance has been nominated for the Oscar for Best Supporting Actor, but he was just a good character. He could have been replaced by anybody and it would have been good. And on that note, this film should NOT be nominated for best picture. There were at least two other films that didn't get nominated that are far superior in every way that didn't get a nomination. It does have some interesting direction, and I liked the way it moved along at some points, but then there were a couple times when I didn't like how it went from one scene to another. Bridge of Spies isn't great, but isn't bad. I think it would have been better as a novel than a film.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

lemonyspricketOct 17, 2015

I fell asleep during this movie, and I love history and documentaries. This movie just moved to slooooowwwww. The best thing about the movie was Tom Hanks and Mark Rylance who I became acquainted with in Wolf Hall. But they couldn't evenI fell asleep during this movie, and I love history and documentaries. This movie just moved to slooooowwwww. The best thing about the movie was Tom Hanks and Mark Rylance who I became acquainted with in Wolf Hall. But they couldn't even save this movie. I'm not sure where all the high marks are coming from. I think it was mediocre at best. Kudos to Mark, high five for Tom, but people, wait until it goes on Amazon Prime and save your money.… Expand

2 of 6 users found this helpful24

All this user's reviews

6

KymBrunnerNov 7, 2015

I'm starting to think Spielberg = melodrama. Love Tom Hanks, great set design and authenticity to the era, but a somewhat predictable ending that takes 2 1/2 hours to play out with not much action. I found it difficult to stay awake at times,I'm starting to think Spielberg = melodrama. Love Tom Hanks, great set design and authenticity to the era, but a somewhat predictable ending that takes 2 1/2 hours to play out with not much action. I found it difficult to stay awake at times, with long courtroom scenes and not much meat or action to the plot. Lots of waiting for answers. They are calling this a thriller? Not so much...… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

Xan_RyilDec 3, 2015

I think this movie to some extent left me disappointed (Much like Lincoln, just lesser). I was left confused because I went to see (As name suggests) a movie full of spies. But it started with a rather legal drama flavour and proceeded to theI think this movie to some extent left me disappointed (Much like Lincoln, just lesser). I was left confused because I went to see (As name suggests) a movie full of spies. But it started with a rather legal drama flavour and proceeded to the second half as thriller and ended with .. Well I don't know what to call the ending. I was so confused about what is going on in James Donovan's mind or what is his code of conduct which is making him make odd choices. That part is for writer. Now what I missed the most was John Williams, a movie like this could have worked a lot better with a progressive score to compliment it's pace but Thomas Newman's work is highly mediocre.
On the bright side, Tom Hanks was very good with the performance. His best since Charlie Wilson's War (resemblance between both characters as negotiators and involvement of Russia). Costumes, Editing and Sets were worth praising too.
Biggest thumb down towards Mr. Speilberg for using very old tactics of basing the humour between two key characters, in this case James Danavon and Rudolf Abel (both contender for Oscar), did not work. Same joke too many times. And movie also lacked intensity. There was not a single moment we felt that James' plan would not fall through.
Overall, movie is watch-able for it's not mater much departments, which makes it not much enjoyable.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

6

MattKingsburyJun 23, 2020

Bridge of Spies is a good movie, supported by strong acting from Tom Hanks and Mark Rylance. Everything holds that little bit extra weight when you realise the film is loosely based on a true story. The film is well shot - even if the lensBridge of Spies is a good movie, supported by strong acting from Tom Hanks and Mark Rylance. Everything holds that little bit extra weight when you realise the film is loosely based on a true story. The film is well shot - even if the lens distortion at times is off-putting - but sadly the entire film just feels...a bit uninspired. The film comes and goes, but I don't feel like a lasting impression has been left. Some action scenes feel like they're there just to say "hey, are you still watching?".… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

YorkManDec 29, 2015

Good film, great acting, good story, great direction. Let down by 2 things.

1st is the length, film is way too long and has far too many unnecessary scenes. 2nd is that as a PG-13 (12A) rated film, the production couldn't represent theGood film, great acting, good story, great direction. Let down by 2 things.

1st is the length, film is way too long and has far too many unnecessary scenes.
2nd is that as a PG-13 (12A) rated film, the production couldn't represent the time the film is set in in a realistic manner. Due to restrictions on how smoking/drinking/casual sexism/casual racism can (and actually more importantly can't) be shown... We get a fact-based film, set in a world of complete fiction.

Beyond that, if you can just accept they spent millions on sets/props/locations etc, but then sanitized it to the point of absurdity, then this film is definitely worth a watch.

For me, it's merely another reason to double-check a film's 'rating' before deciding if it's going to recreate a historical period with any accuracy.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

4

NedRyerson1Feb 13, 2016

Bridge of Spies is another Spielberg’s failed attempt to sneak back in big cinema, a category that this director abandoned a long time ago. Here the scenario is one more time the war, and The Cold War in order to make people believe that isBridge of Spies is another Spielberg’s failed attempt to sneak back in big cinema, a category that this director abandoned a long time ago. Here the scenario is one more time the war, and The Cold War in order to make people believe that is an original theme on his filmography. The protagonist is again a suffered hero, with incredible virtues, like Schindler, standing all by himself against a conflict of catastrophic proportions. Seems well until now, but this film turn itself into the new reference for slowness, there are no major scenes, the storytelling doesn’t exist and the viewer gets lost several times. Definitely Tom Hanks puts all pieces together, a really convincing performance, without him all the movie falls into the abysm. The Coen Brothers in the script were a big disappointment, their classic irony and mystery is absent. Spielberg did something right this time, getting rid of cheap sentimentalism and that is something to be grateful for; although there is still too much to work on. I still have faith on him.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

4

foxgroveDec 11, 2015

A good looking, but too stately and ultimately boring cold war espionage story that outstays its welcome by over half its length. Things start promisingly and one could be forgiven for thinking that the quality was going to match that of lastA good looking, but too stately and ultimately boring cold war espionage story that outstays its welcome by over half its length. Things start promisingly and one could be forgiven for thinking that the quality was going to match that of last year’s brilliant ‘Imitation Game’. Unfortunately, after 60 minutes the attention starts to wander and the not particularly compelling story begins to lose impetus. The acting is reasonably good, although Tom Hanks is nowhere near his best. The cinematography, however, is gorgeous. This is journeyman Spielberg, probably less, and is punctuated with his usual trademark of mushy music. In his good work his scores are integral and accepted despite all their obvious manipulation. In his underwhelming stuff, of which this must definitely be counted, they almost become the final nail in the coffin.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

eva3si0nDec 19, 2020

Bridge of Spies is divided into 2 parts. The first time the action takes place in the United States, excellent judicial drama. With a slow development of events, which is noteworthy completely without musical accompaniment (a rarity in modernBridge of Spies is divided into 2 parts. The first time the action takes place in the United States, excellent judicial drama. With a slow development of events, which is noteworthy completely without musical accompaniment (a rarity in modern cinema). The second part, this is already an action movie in the style of M (James Bond), where the whole action is accelerated and at least repel the turnover of musical accompaniment. And the second part is terrible. In the first, the USSR and the GDR are shown as barbarians. Great propaganda. The most important thing is how Spielberg fakes the facts. Berlin was bombed not by the USSR, but by the Allies. The USSR, on the contrary, helped restore the ruins of eastern Berlin. And finally Abel in the USSR was recognized as a hero and confirmed the status of a spy. And to talk about the light in which the GDR is represented does not have to, some kind of ghetto.
And most importantly, 2 part of the film is a natural B-movie, which you watch by inertia and only for the sake of acting by Tom Hanks.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

4

BroyaxJan 10, 2017

Une réalisation solide, des acteurs impeccables, une reconstitution soignée : de ces points de vue, le Pont Des Espions est un bon "produit", on sent même un effort certain pour reproduire l'atmosphère de la guerre froide, un effort certainUne réalisation solide, des acteurs impeccables, une reconstitution soignée : de ces points de vue, le Pont Des Espions est un bon "produit", on sent même un effort certain pour reproduire l'atmosphère de la guerre froide, un effort certain mais bien vain. On a même une légère guimauve qui vient pointer son groin parfumé à l'eau de rose...

Une guimauve qui participe à cette belle propagande impérialiste pro-américaine de l'Oncle Sam triomphant des méchants bolchéviks et des pays du Pacte de Varsovie et qui se bat pour la liberté contre les méchants Rouges blablabla etc (remplir et déverser ici toute la litanie habituelle de nos chers amis d'outre-atlantique, la main sur le coeur, ça c'est mon fusil, patati patata).

En fait, même les films d'espionnage (américains) de l'époque (de la guerre très froide) ne sombrent pas autant dans cette vieille retape et vieille rengaine. Je n'en aurais pas cru Spielberg capable, capable à ce point : par son film, il a clairement servi la Patrie, la Nation et la Gloire de nos Armes, Amen (putain !).

En dehors de cette "radicalisation" mal venue, le Pont souffre de longueurs : 2h20 pour organiser un échange sur un putain de pont, mais dis donc Stevie, tu te foutrais pas notre gueule par hasard ? Quant à l'atmosphère, malgré tous ses efforts et tout ce pognon, il ne suffit pas d"énumérer les clichés les uns à la suite des autres pour la reconstituer, pour lui donner vie ; il faudrait du talent, aussi.

Evidemment, ça fait trèèès longtemps que Spielberg l'a perdu, son talent. Alors il nous pond ses machins, mécaniquement, sans passion. Malgré ce sacré Tom Hanks ! ce gâchis tout de même.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

3

EludiumQ36Jun 12, 2016

OMG, I could only make it halfway through the film before I felt myself aging. The pacing of this film is the equivalent of two Ambien. I was like "what rookie director thought pacing this like an old "Perry Mason" episode was a good idea?"OMG, I could only make it halfway through the film before I felt myself aging. The pacing of this film is the equivalent of two Ambien. I was like "what rookie director thought pacing this like an old "Perry Mason" episode was a good idea?" And the so obvious cliché defense atty (Tom Hanks) wrapping himself in the Constitution and EVERYONE else shaming him for defending the spy. And then I find that the director is Spielberg, then it clicked why everyone has **** themselves with fawning reviews. Disgraceful. This could've been a very interesting and intriguing film but Spielberg's phoned-in directing made it the worst I've seen all year.… Expand

3 of 6 users found this helpful33

All this user's reviews

1

hotfromcauldronOct 20, 2015

For the first forty minutes I thought I was watching an episode of Father Knows Best. Older sis gets stood up by her mystery man (duh) while younger bro has been scared out of his wits watching a cartoon of an A-bomb attack ala Reefer MadnessFor the first forty minutes I thought I was watching an episode of Father Knows Best. Older sis gets stood up by her mystery man (duh) while younger bro has been scared out of his wits watching a cartoon of an A-bomb attack ala Reefer Madness in school . And I was sure dad/hero/ Hanks and his wife slept in separate beds with one foot touching the floor. But back to the story which is not worthy of a movie , not if you don’t get into the heads of the characters - especially the two Abercrombie and Fitch models- Powers and Pryor- in this reality game of Spy Swap. Mercifully, Mark Rylance plays Russian spy Rudolf Abel - not Christoph Waltz - the only thing that didn't leave me cold. For a movie with a slow start it has way too many endings - the corniest - a faint smile from a passenger on a subway. Plodding, preachy and predictable this “Bridge" finally takes a toll on your patience to where anyone who paid $13 for a ticket would want to jump.… Expand

4 of 11 users found this helpful47

All this user's reviews

1

ArtemSakratApr 6, 2020

Фильм ужасен. Нечего общего с историей. Одно ложь

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

0

ProteusOct 17, 2015

Warning - READ the negative reviews. This was one of the most boring films I have ever seen. It hinges on caring about the fate of a grand total of 3 people. While millions are dying all around we need to care about these 3 people and almostWarning - READ the negative reviews. This was one of the most boring films I have ever seen. It hinges on caring about the fate of a grand total of 3 people. While millions are dying all around we need to care about these 3 people and almost no reason is given to do so. You have been warned. Boring Movie of the Year Award.… Expand

9 of 42 users found this helpful933

All this user's reviews

Bridge of Spies

User Reviews