Bridge of Spies (2015 Movie)

Directed by Steven Spielberg

Bridge of Spies is a fantastic and amusing film. I somehow realized that it is based

on true events that occurred during the Cold War between America and Russia, and it

provides me with a unique perspective on what life was like during the Cold War. Bridge of

Spies is undeniably a worthwhile watch that can be commended without hesitation. The

amazing, smooth, and perfect portrayal of James Donovan as an attorney who was first an

investor's firm defender but subsequently changed the fate of two of the world's most

powerful countries through the use of his negotiations. This film encompasses a terrific moral

story and it captures justice globalism.

Although the historical setting is crucial in the thriller, politics takes a second seat to

character, and the suspense is based on the characters' knowledge and integrity. Tom

Hanks portrays James B. Donovan, an insurance lawyer and family man who finds himself

thrust into the realm of international intrigue, with only his intellect and self-assurance to

determine whether he would sink or swim. Hanks can usually be counted on to provide a

strong performance, and he does not fail here, portraying a character who is both admirable

and completely average. Bridge of Spies is a film about American values, and as I watched

it, I realized how strongly those values are anchored in Christian humanism. Among such

values, which are entrenched in the U.S. The Constitution is predicated on the basic

conviction in the dignity of every human being. As I payed attention to Donovan defend his

actions and advocate for his client's rights, I heard in his statements a plea to today's

Americans not to abandon their values in the face of fear or to satisfy personal desires, a

plea to stay true to the founding fathers' ideals of justice, tranquility, and liberty.

At its finest, "Bridge of Spies" is something of a Cold War "To Kill a Mockingbird,"

emphasizing on the American justice system, human biases, and the politics of judiciary
constituencies. It also has a hilarious contrast between both sides of a violent confrontation,

with each deciding whether spies should be regarded as criminals, enemies, or worse. Is it

true that spies are essentially government employees?. Should any sovereign authority pass

judgment on the usage of espionage when they themselves employ the same tactic?