The Post
3/4
Starring: Meryl Streep, Tom Hanks, Bob Odenkirk, Tracy Letts, Bradley Whitford, Bruce Greenberg, Matthew Rhys
Rated PG-13 for Language and Brief War Violence
Streep. Hanks. Spielberg.
Don't really need to say more, do I?
If those three names don't get you excited, then you obviously aren't paying attention. Tom Hanks, one of Hollywood's most beloved stars. Meryl Streep, one of the most, if not the most, talented actresses working today. Steven Spielberg, the most famous and successful filmmaker in cinema history. For the first time, these three titans collaborate on a single movie. It's a movie lover's dream. So does the movie live up to the impossibly high expectations it sets for itself?
The answer is yes and no. Yes, because I think the movie does work, contains several fine performances, and legitimate suspense. No, because with all this star power, it's not as good as I hoped. The subject matter is compelling and Spielberg balances numerous storylines as only he can. But the movie goes so fast that it's hard to become emotionally invested in the storyline.
Daniel Ellsberg (Rhys) has just returned from reporting on the horrors of Vietnam. Disillusioned, he steals a considerable amount of classified documents regarding the conflict, intending to hand them over to a newspaper to be published.
Meanwhile, at the Washington Post, heiress and owner Kay Graham (Streep) is preparing to make the paper an IPO. But she is inexperienced and worse, a woman, which makes her investors nervous. And they're always getting the good stories after The New York Times. But things seem to be going well, and her investors only have a week to pull out of the deal (and only if there's a crisis).
The New York Times publishes Ellsberg's papers, but they're only scratching the surface. Nixon is furious and takes them to court. Under an injunction, the Times can't publish any more of the papers. Desperate, Ellsberg turns to the Post. Now Kay and her editor, Ben Bradlee (Hanks), have a decision to make: whether or not to hedge their bets that the courts will side with the press and publish the rest of the papers. The stakes couldn't be higher. If they publish and win, it will catapult them to the national spotlight. If they lose, the paper would collapse. And both Bradlee and Graham could end up in jail.
Spielberg does an admirable job of blending all these elements together. The plot threads coil together tighter and tighter until they come together in a high stakes conference call. The problem is that it moves so fast that a lot of depth doesn't come through. Maybe it's because Spielberg has worked so quickly. From script to editing, making "The Post" took only nine months. The reason being that Spielberg saw parallels between this story and the "fake news" climate. Indeed, it's impossible not to watch this movie and not see parallels between Richard Nixon (voiced by archive footage) and the current occupant at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. While I agree with Spielberg's sentiments and reasoning for making this movie so quickly, I have to admit that the film's quality does take a hit.
Don't get me wrong. "The Post" is worth seeing without a doubt. It's just that with such a pedigree behind it, it's hard not to feel a little disappointed.
Starring: Meryl Streep, Tom Hanks, Bob Odenkirk, Tracy Letts, Bradley Whitford, Bruce Greenberg, Matthew Rhys
Rated PG-13 for Language and Brief War Violence
Streep. Hanks. Spielberg.
Don't really need to say more, do I?
If those three names don't get you excited, then you obviously aren't paying attention. Tom Hanks, one of Hollywood's most beloved stars. Meryl Streep, one of the most, if not the most, talented actresses working today. Steven Spielberg, the most famous and successful filmmaker in cinema history. For the first time, these three titans collaborate on a single movie. It's a movie lover's dream. So does the movie live up to the impossibly high expectations it sets for itself?
The answer is yes and no. Yes, because I think the movie does work, contains several fine performances, and legitimate suspense. No, because with all this star power, it's not as good as I hoped. The subject matter is compelling and Spielberg balances numerous storylines as only he can. But the movie goes so fast that it's hard to become emotionally invested in the storyline.
Daniel Ellsberg (Rhys) has just returned from reporting on the horrors of Vietnam. Disillusioned, he steals a considerable amount of classified documents regarding the conflict, intending to hand them over to a newspaper to be published.
Meanwhile, at the Washington Post, heiress and owner Kay Graham (Streep) is preparing to make the paper an IPO. But she is inexperienced and worse, a woman, which makes her investors nervous. And they're always getting the good stories after The New York Times. But things seem to be going well, and her investors only have a week to pull out of the deal (and only if there's a crisis).
The New York Times publishes Ellsberg's papers, but they're only scratching the surface. Nixon is furious and takes them to court. Under an injunction, the Times can't publish any more of the papers. Desperate, Ellsberg turns to the Post. Now Kay and her editor, Ben Bradlee (Hanks), have a decision to make: whether or not to hedge their bets that the courts will side with the press and publish the rest of the papers. The stakes couldn't be higher. If they publish and win, it will catapult them to the national spotlight. If they lose, the paper would collapse. And both Bradlee and Graham could end up in jail.
Spielberg does an admirable job of blending all these elements together. The plot threads coil together tighter and tighter until they come together in a high stakes conference call. The problem is that it moves so fast that a lot of depth doesn't come through. Maybe it's because Spielberg has worked so quickly. From script to editing, making "The Post" took only nine months. The reason being that Spielberg saw parallels between this story and the "fake news" climate. Indeed, it's impossible not to watch this movie and not see parallels between Richard Nixon (voiced by archive footage) and the current occupant at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. While I agree with Spielberg's sentiments and reasoning for making this movie so quickly, I have to admit that the film's quality does take a hit.
Don't get me wrong. "The Post" is worth seeing without a doubt. It's just that with such a pedigree behind it, it's hard not to feel a little disappointed.
Comments
Post a Comment