https://www.heyuguys.com/images/2017...vie-Poster.jpg
Printable View
Enjoyed this quite a bit, but I also have a weakness for this kind of brick-by-brick puzzle box storytelling, where you might know where it's headed but still enjoy watching the pieces almost not fit before - gasp - they slide right into place. Maybe I'll have more appreciation for Meryl's performance on reflection, but a few key scenes allowed us to truly recognize the pressure she felt on all sides about publishing this story. Hanks is fine. The standout performance, if there really is one, goes to Bob Odenkirk's nervous reporter with a potential inside scoop on the Pentagon Papers. But this felt more like a pleasant caper than compelling drama, albeit an extremely efficient caper, maybe Spielberg's tightest piece of entertainment since Catch Me If You Can.
I've learned that I don't like Janusz Kaminski. I don't like what he does with light, and I don't like how he - seemingly with the 'berg's blessing - starts so many small scenes with sidling-in low-angle camerawork that feels like level-one paranoia cinema. There's also a strange silvery sheen to these images that similarly irked me in Bridge of Spies, just a little too overblown and grainy. It makes the images look almost ugly.
It's...fine? I think 'berg is still a nice classicist as far as camera movement and placement is concerned. Kaminski also does some good, unfussy work with light and color.
This might be a case where 'berg's unrelenting charity towards situations and characters might go against the inherent tension and paranoia of the story. All the President's Men or Zodiac this is not. The ending also gets heavy on the schmaltz.
Tom Hanks and Meryl Streep are OK-ish but often get way too actorly for my taste (notice Streep's greatest hits of hand waving, touching her hand to her lips, and zoning out into lower third frame space...meanwhile Hanks often veers perilously close to an arch SNL parody). Bob Odenkirk and the grade A line-up of supporting actors (Sarah Paulson! Tracy Letts! Bradley Whitford! Bruce Greenwood! Alison Brie! Carrie Coon! fellow "Mr. Show" alum David Cross!) fare much better.
Yeah, it's okay.
I found the reporting and deciding whether to publish stuff a lot more engaging than the stuff with Kay Graham coming into her own and taking the Post public (the film also messes with chronology here, Graham was initially wary of taking the helm, but by the time the pentagon papers stuff was going on, she was no longer an inexperienced socialite).
The stuff about the Nixon wedding in the beginning I guess establishes the relationship between Graham and Bradlee, but it really slows the film down. I feel like the first hour could lose 15 minutes, and it would be a lot tighter.
I agree Odenkirk is the standout, but I can't buy David Cross as the managing editor of a major newspaper.
F
I
N
E.
This was good, better than any Spielberg film since the underrated War Horse. Odenkirk is not the MVP. FOH with that. Streep and Hanks are definitely the standouts.
I did *shrug*
I thought this was great. The scene with them going over the Pentagon Papers was my favorite part. Also []
Odenkirk was awesome, but I really liked Hanks. Nice to see Streep acting again, and for some reason I almost did not recognize Alison Brie as her daughter.
It's a Spielberg movie which means there's a big chance it is exceptionally well made and engaging, and this one surely is.
In my Spielberg filmography run-through, I compared Lincoln with Selma, noting my feeling of a difference between a mere passion project and a fiery passion project. Well, Spielberg may have finally found his version of the latter with The Post. The script is quite a step-down from Lincoln, very obvious in its allusions to the present day, and sometimes the speeches/references in that vein interrupt the compelling mix of procedural journalist work and political machinations a bit. But maybe unsubtle time calls for an unsubtle film; Spielberg definitely feels that way and pours all in, somehow delivering his most intense and animated camerawork this decade (sans his actual animated film) that elevates the whole thing greatly. From that swirling multi-way phone call of the Decision, to the momentousness of the article shaking the floor as it's being printed, the film plays up history for the present feverishly with all of Spielberg's cinematic talent. Pandering, sure, but also kind of glorious. 8/10
(This would slot in at #13 in my Spielberg ranking)
There were some weird editing choices in this movie. The two that I can remember:
The long unbroken take of Streep and Hanks first conversation ... only to cut to conventional over-the-shoulder shots in the last 7 seconds before they wrap up.
At Graham's house, the sideways tracking shot out of the front room, past a wall, into the hallway where Streep is opening the back door ... only to cut to a closer shot of Streep opening the back door.
The movie was fine, although it felt like a very "Hillary" movie to me. Like, hey, isn't Nixon awful? But let's focus on the moral dilemma of a wealthy businesswoman in a world of men. It's not necessarily a criticism, but it did keep me at a distance. It felt like a movie pitched towards people in power positions, not average Joes like me.
Like, articles like this do not surprise me at all.
I'm relieved that Spielberg did not get an Oscar nod for this. He was easily outclassed in '17.
Yes, he can still frame a shot and his managing of technical elements is fine, but the handling of drama and messaging here feels almost amateurish. Maybe it's the same-old Spielberg, and it's just his recent competition that shines a light on how pat and simplistic this piece is. It's like the FM Top-40 version of All the President's Men and Spotlight. There is absolutely no sense of discovery here. Unlike the much better films covering this world, The Post refuses to let the inherently dramatic procedural work say anything at all for itself. Instead, we are subjected to incessant speechifying and laughable iconography just in case we don't "get" what we should be feeling.
When compared to the nuanced and intricate ways in which young directors like Gerwig and Peele are handling drama, storytelling and visualization, I think The Post suggests Speilberg is becoming increasingly out of his depth when the material gets too serious. Yeah, we always knew the bookends were a problem -- and the same is true here, with a literal shadowy Nixon treating us to a final hamfisted scene on our way out -- but Spielberg's refusal to reign in bad instincts bleeds into the rest of the film this time and I'm not convinced that grace and nuance are part of his toolkit anymore.
His sensibilities seem better suited to fantasy/heightened storytelling in general.
You guys are loony. Spielberg doing his "people who are really good at their job" trilogy is among his best.
I have a vague sense of what you mean, but I'm blanking---what do you view as the other parts of the trilogy?
Lincoln, Bridge of Spies, The Post
Ahhhh, okay. That makes sense. I didn't care for "The Post" as much as others in the thread, but that's a good group of films.
I'm a mild cheerleader for newBerg. I liked Bridge of Spies and The Post.
I consider Bridge of Spies one of my favorite Spielberg movies. Right behind Raiders of the Lost Ark and Schindler's List. Obviously, I don't expect a lot of agreement on this.