That's great. I just wish it wasn't a snoozefest until the third act.
On a technical level, it's classic Spielberg. What PTA said about just how the whole dance is choreographed is spot on.
But like, damn dude, it just absolutely failed to grab me until the end. Perhaps it's because it's such a slow burn of tension that we don't really understand the stakes until we get to know the characters better.
Movies don't have to work for everybody, Cil. The Post took longer to grab me than I wanted it to.
Agree with most here that first act is very weak. I think this is because the first act is mostly about
them being jealous of the NY Times having the papers instead of them? It was about them finding sources instead of their moral dilemmas of whether they have to do the right thing or not. Once they acquire the papers, it's great.
I really appreciated the way Spielberg filmed this like a thriller. There is a sense of urgency that is less present in, say, Spotlight or ATPM (which are more about a sense of danger).
A few things I think a lot of folks aren't really getting about this movie.
From beginning to end The Post is about choices. It's a series of set pieces observing whether someone will do the right thing or the wrong thing and why. Yes, it's patriotic and affirming of press but it's so much more than that I feel many are missing.
It's about the complicity we all share-not just newspapers-in our tendency for seduction by politicians, by ideologies, by presidents, by American dreams. From Saving Private Ryan to Munich, Spielberg's whole filmography is about characters questioning whether the institutions and values they were raised with ever really existed in the first place, and one step further, how to bear the weight of a legacy that is possibly imaginary. The Post is a movie about people coming to terms with their own complicity with evil and wrongness, and that just about nobody escapes without error.
It's great.
-Vader
This is an interesting point, because a lot of people I've talked to have had the preconceived notion that this film is entirely anti-Trump, freedom of the press, #metoo, etc. It is, of course - however, I think another large part of the film is about people coming to terms with who they're friends with and the moral questions of whether that's right or not. Hanks (who I think is terrific as Bradlee, btw) has a few monologues where he addresses the "wrongness" of reporters or newspaper owners - like Kay - having friends in high places and that this could skew "unbiased reporting".
I would have thought, after eight years of Obama, that the Trump crowd would be pretty darn accepting of that view considering how the press worshiped at the feet of the previous president. But of course, most of them are too dumb to hold more than one thought in their head at once.
Saw this one over the weekend and really liked it. I found it much more engaging than the trailers made it out to be. It's just a notch below Lincoln for me, but I think it's one of Spielberg's best in recent years.
Worst Spielberg film since Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. I really like Bridge of Spies, but this was just so by-the-numbers. And it will age terribly. It's timely relevance depends entirely on the current administration.
This may be mid-tier Spielberg but his craft here is being seriously underappreciated. This is one of the best shot movies of the year.
There were some camera movements that impressed the hell out of me in this one. Especially how it moved in small spaces with many characters in said space
This may be mid-tier Spielberg but his craft here is being seriously underappreciated. This is one of the best shot movies of the year.
There were some camera movements that impressed the hell out of me in this one. Especially how it moved in small spaces with many characters in said space
That’s what PTA recognized as well. Never underestimate the master, even when he’s playing with half a strength, he’s way above the most.
