Bridge of Spies (2015) Film Review

Within the long career and filmography of the legendary Steven Spielberg, the gradings of his productions can be ranked across a standard America grading policy, with sure-fire classics such as Jaws, Saving Private Ryan and Raiders of the Lost Ark known as being his A-Grade material. However, his more recent creations have lead to splits between the critical alumni and the audience, as Lincoln dazzled and bored its wide audience while Tintin failed to spark audience interest despite its Indiana Jones elements which made the director a household name. But with Bridge of Spies comes his fourth collaboration with Tom Hanks which often comes with success, alongside a dramatic retelling of a Cold War-era debacle, and of course critics have been eating it up, and financially it hasn't done too badly either. But is the hype strong enough to warrant potential awards buzz? 
In the mid 1950s, in the midst of the Cold War between the Soviet Union and the United States, both sides are on edge over the potential threat of spies from each side seeking secrets. One such reported spy was Rudolf Abel (Mark Rylance), who in 1957 was captured by the FBI under the belief that he was the Russian spy who was leaking secrets to the motherland. As a way to prove how fair the American law system is, insurance lawyer James Donovan (Hanks) is hired to take the heavy task of proving that a man known by all (bar Abel) to be guilty that he's in fact innocent. Thus follows not only the heavy task of helping a KGB spy which has put James and his family's lives in jeopardy for being the only people in America willing to commit a level of treason. Meanwhile a US plane goes down and the Soviet Union takes Francis Powers (Austin Stowell) captive to gain US secrets, so Donovan now has the prospect of organising a switch; a difficult task for someone who deals with insurance issues. 

Like I said before, Spielberg tends to have a higher barrier to tackle to create what most would call classic material, and as such is the reason why so few films tend to be remarked as 'the best', and in the case of Bridge of Spies it's sad to reveal that it doesn't fit in with the pantheon of career highlights. Certainly, it remains a good film with a serviceable storyline which rarely halts for unnecessary reasonings, and the occasionally witty one-liners as part of Hanks and Rylance's characters do lend themselves to memorable moments in an otherwise serious picture, but as a film as a whole it doesn't exactly expand into anything  other than a straight-up retelling with plenty of intentionally funny moments. And of course, Spielberg's direction remains as strong as it's been since his earliest days; while nothing quite as bold nor bombastic as say Jurassic Park, but what appears is still strong stuff from the legendary director.

Still, at least we have the immensely charismatic Tom Hanks on hand for a strong lead performance which has been getting some level of Oscar buzz. As the everyman lawyer who stands by his morals, he does make for a strong performance which may be on the spectrum as one of his most memorable roles – although probably not as high on the list as Woody from Toy Story or Forrest Gump. By his side for a good proportion of the film is Mark Rylance in an incredibly likeable performance as the supposed spy, with his simple approach of not worried about anything while being humbled by Donovan's attempts of keeping him away from the death sentence; and as such scenes set in Berlin while he's imprisoned do tend to lack a certain level of charm to them. Also, his American equivalent in the form of Austin Stowell lacks much in terms of character, with a great chunk of his development coming at the hand of his captors. Equally, his fellow captive in the latter half in the form of Will Rogers has little to show despite being a key component in Donovan's pleas with the Soviets. Other co-stars do leave some form of impact on the film though, with Amy Ryan leaving the biggest impact in the form of Hanks' wife along with the numerous CIA operatives helping him out in the risky scenario in play.  

Bridge of Spies may not be Spielberg's strongest entry, nor his best Best Picture contender, but it is still serviceable viewing and certainly one to watch if you're interested in what the critics are eating up right now. It has strong performances from the main actors and a screenplay which rarely slows down, and its conclusion leaves plenty of tense anticipation, but otherwise it is a standard entry to the Oscar competition. Enjoyable, but a tad overlong and with some underdeveloped characters. 7/10.

Doctor Who Series 9 Reviews - Heaven Sent (E11)

WARNING: Due to the nature of this episode, this review will contain spoilers - I recommend reading it after you watch the episode if you do not wish to be spoiled from any of the major plotlines present in this episode.

Following the emotional trauma that the titular time traveller suffered thanks to his former companion's stupidity in the strongest episode of the season at that point (Face The Raven), we the audience were left with the Doctor being teleported away by former recurring acquaintance Ashildr/Me (Maisie Williams) under the employment of a hidden force after watching former friend Clara Oswald (Jenna Coleman) inadvertently sacrificed herself to the Doctor trap. So now, we're left with Peter Capaldi being left to his own devices in his mourning state. With another experimental episode and with the return of a creative duo who this time last year contributed to arguably the worst episode I've ever seen, we have on our hands an episode which can either really work or really fail...

Arriving via teleport in a weird interchanging castle in the middle of nowhere, the Doctor quickly realises that he's in some form of trap, with only himself, a swarm of flies, countless upon countless of decaying skulls and a mysterious veiled creature who the Doctor decrees as being a realisation of one of his first fears. So of course, he explores and fights for a way out, discovering that he can briefly stop and scare away his foe by telling the truth despite still getting into numerous situations where he needs to enter his version of the Mind Palace from Sherlock (also known as "Jenna Coleman still has episodes in her contract; quick, insert her to the episode for cheap emotional drive!"). The focus of this test? Finding out why the Doctor left Gallifrey to begin with...

The biggest thing of note with this episode is of course Capaldi being mostly alone, save for his confrontations with the Veiled Creature and discussions with both fake Clara and random child, and as per usual he's on fine form. Nothing particularly out of the ordinary for the actor really, but seeing him hard at work with very little to bounce off does make for engaging viewing, with the majority of his dialogue being good enough to warrant such a performance. Sadly, while the set-up does make for a strong episode initially, the third act comes along and causes a huge standstill on what was otherwise a good, if a tad unremarkable, episode that succeeded in its experimental nature than this season's earlier instalment Sleep No More. 

Firstly, the very idea that the Doctor would be so willing to withhold his 'secret' to the point that he would die before later deciding to reveal it to himself after, you know, dying god-knows how many times (side note: how did the whole thing start? Was there a version where there were no skulls in the water or not note in the ashes?) does seem rather far-fetched; especially after considering the whole affair being an amalgamation of his own fears which he remarked on quite early on. Plus, there was a shovel on hand. Surely much easier to break into the material "400 times harder than diamond" - which also should have reset often just like the other rooms – if only to provoke a long set of flashbacks through the episode with minute differences which lends itself to said cliffhanger. And of course I'm going to discuss that mammoth of a "twist" in detail.

So Gallifrey is back following a two-year hiatus (unless you count that moment when Clara inexplicably turned up in the barn from Day of the Doctor with a child version of the Doctor in last year's Listen, but we don't talk about Listen so nyeh) and looks as grand as the last time we saw it...except now it's at risk of destruction again because the Doctor is apparently a part-Dalek part-Time Lord hybrid who ran away because he was scared and had recently saved his home world from devastation is the one who will cause its destruction. I'm not making this up. I wish I were making this up. The statements about there being no such thing as a Dalek hybrid (so thanks for wiping Helen Raynor's introductory two-parter Daleks in Manhattan/Evolution of the Daleks, a serial that isn't great but at least had merits) appear to be bogus and the idea of such a cliffhanger became apparently midway through the episode. Does it lend to some excitement for next week? Yes, so well done in reaching the only target that was needed, and making the entirety of what preceded it feel less like a necessary episode and more like filler for 'the big one'. What it doesn't lend is something smart or even stimulating enough for fans old and new to grab onto. 

The best way to describe Heaven Sent is as being an uneven amalgamation of Name of the Doctor, A Good Man Goes To War and Dark Water. Focused mostly on a plot which has interesting elements on hand but slight uneasiness in its confidence, it then decides to focus on the big twist for the last 10-15 minutes just so that it can make the wait for the next instalment all the more captivating, despite the lack of legitimacy it has. No, it's not as awful as the Missy reveal, but it isn't as exciting as the John Hurt reveal; it's the River Song reveal of predictability with a blend of the "Oh no" of the Missy/Master twist. And with the standard Steven Moffat plot holes on hand too, it leads to something which undermines the opening and instead creates an episode known only as "the one where Gallifrey is back". 5/10.