It has been 12 years since the premiere of the last truly good movie of one of the world's most respected filmmakers - Steven Spielberg. It is about Munich and the series of movies after it, identified with dubious quality and excessive controversy as far as the final opinion of fans and film critics. I can say a few good words about Tintin's Adventures, which is mostly funny and I would look at it again; to highlight the acting qualities of Daniel Day-Lewis and his "Lincoln"; to be frightened when we hear in one sentence Indiana Jones, Crystal Skull and Quality; or to ask ourselves "What the hell is wrong?" when we remind ourselves that "The Spy Bridge", "War Horse" and "The Good Man" are also the work of this otherwise genius and overall flawless director. In a side-by-side interview where we discuss potential speculation and valid theories about what has changed over the years and whether Spielberg has lost his mojo, we will probably come up with an adequate explanation and rebuttal of the theory that if there are no Nazis and / or Jews (and why not close encounters of a third kind) involved in one way or another in his films, then this man is incapable of creating a grimly ingenious film. This fascinating introduction is fully justified. I love Spielberg and appreciate every new film. Or at least I stand with almost zero expectations in front of the big screen and try to enjoy the two hours of a masterwork who I secretly hope in its finished look to have added value so that I can with a hand on my heart to recommend to you and to think about the next time I will watch it again.
The expectations of "The Post" are relatively high given the loud names involved in the production. Regarding the subject of the film, those who viewed the trailer, I can say that I personally am not excited, and I do not think that by digging into the old, almost conspiratorial wounds of the US government regarding the war in Vietnam, we can get a historic drama that is really exciting. Still ... "The Post" was inspired by the clash of The Washington Post with the United States government on the so-called "Pentagon Papers," a secret military intelligence that ended in the press in 1971 thanks to analyst Daniel Elsberg. The documents contain information that Lyndon Johnson's administration has lied both the people and Congress and has secretly escalated the war in Vietnam. It's a hilarious hint that the whole thing has been prepared by several cabinets before, of course, according to the model of the puppet. The person in front of the camera has little in common and does not know a species, but the evil big brother behind him plans and moves his inhumane plan slowly and patiently. Although I believe in the dragons and I am one of the 9/11-deniers, I will not hesitate to unravel any conspiracy theories, including the names of Eisenhower, F. Kennedy and all others before Nixon. In short, the Vietnam War is, above all, a spectacular human offense that is a grave demonstration of an injured ego, an inability to acknowledge its "mistake" and stop crippling another generation in the heyday of its forces physically and above all psychologically.
We may see The Post as a pleasant, repetitive social clash between the dark, mysterious and seemingly transparent, at least in words, state structure and the fourth power, in the role of the most popular (then) media - the truthful, objective and free speech, printed across the large sheets of white paper. We can do analogy with Snowdon, even Assange, and sorry to report the fact that "nothing has changed". But, as I said, it is not really the focus of Spielberg's next directorial failure (?) To deliver quality cinema, similar to his best works before. "The Post" is a film about real investigative journalism, about the mistrust in politics, and the people who proudly flutter the national flag, beating in the chest that they do it for the little man, unselfishly. A film about moral values, making important decisions, neglecting your interests even when it comes to hereditary business. For the newspaper industry, the owl to the printing machines and the endless labor of those black workers who (literally lol) have recruited every single text from these huge pages of popular daily newspapers. The business as a whole is to be a newspaper tycoon, along with two more dozen pimples, soon to be dead plumbers who are always better than you. We have to note Meryl Streep's character good work. Her place in history, in that story, the decisions she has made, what social footage they have left, and all the trivia surrounding the life of Kai Graham publisher. In fact, Streep's game is not the best in her career, but it's much more memorable than Tom Hanks's. An actor I adore not less than Steven Spielberg, but also in the moment of inertia, depriving us of his great talent.
The star cast is complemented by a number of popular (especially lately) names such as Kari Kung, Bob Odenkirk, Sara Paulson, David Cross, Jesse Pulmans, Michael Stahlbarg, and many others. Unfortunately, their stellarness was not lined up in the best way, that is, to have our heads brilliantly executed, even when they were given secondary roles. Part of the little satisfaction that this film gave me was the recognition of the actors in question and their association with their far better roles in the hit series I will not name now ("Fargo"). Of these, Ben Bagdikian (Bob Odenkirk's character) remains the most impressive and worthy of recognition. Perhaps the only one, out of two or three scenes with Meryl Streep, which actually delivers a meaningful message, exposes scenes that keep you on your fingertips, gripping your throat tight while you're afraid of the future of one or the other, you care about the developing story and you still want to know what will happen in the next few minutes of Spielberg's masterpiece. Bruce Greenwood, who did much better as a corpse in "Gerald's Game," like Hanks did not provide anything distinctive and different from his series of television appearances, which we usually portray with "Hey, It's That ..." . Regarding storyline and script - Liz Hanna's work is satisfactory. Nothing more or less. "The Post" develops monotonously, looks like a documentary, and thanks to the visual mastery of Janusz Kaminski, where Spielberg's handwriting still appears, we should not be removed from the film. On the contrary, we continue to keep track of the events to find out if our people will win.
I was not particularly pleased with the denominated role of the New York Times as a major player in this whole scandal. I think I may be mistaken, but still seem to be titled in this way and worshiping the important role of Kay Graham and Ben Bradley (Tom Hanks), the film is just for The Washington Post. But I also understand why the focus falls on them. Quite logical, they are the relatives of the government, after the government's attempt to block the mouths of the publishers (supposedly, legally) who dared to publish "slander" at their address (New York Times). They do not obey, despite the long, warm, progressively cooling ties with various political figures (such as Kai Graham and Robert McNamara, the hero of Bruce Greenwood). The game of honor and the attempt to remove the shirts, pointing to the one who is more guilty than the other, and so on, seems more comical than embarrassing. Whether this was dictated by the chancellor's dialogue that led the heroes, or just Spielberg did not care to draw anything more than similar scenes, talks about the flaws of the film. For music I suggest not to mention even in this paragraph because it is so insignificant and unobtrusive that if I tell you whose work it is, you will not believe me at all. Yes, John Williams, I just spit on you. And when we talk mainly about the lack of advantages, we realize that the nomination for the film of the year (without the director having one) is still a lot. Which is also a sign that the Academy is still confused and downstream. Once again, we affirm the rule that such distinctions have nothing to do with the qualities of a product. The last five minutes of the "The Post" were a sympathetic tickle, which I will not reveal in detail. All I will say is that I felt 100% Spielberg and his narrative manner, alas, coming only to the end, when it was all over and anyway that his magic was still somewhere between the dusty notes of future projects that every next venture, are increasingly moving away from the "hated" of all our word masterpiece.
However, as they fall under a common denominator, I will give as an example "Spotlight", which, compared to the unsatisfactory "The Post", raises its rating by at least one point and is approaching a masterpiece. And if you are really looking at quality cinema on this subject, you just drop "All Presidential Army" and see how Dustin Hoffman and Robert Redford, under the leadership of Alan Pakula, create a shrewd movie ... worthwhile. For the final, I should say something that will still outline all the negatives I highlighted and eventually keep your interest in this movie. "The Post", even romantic in places, clearly reflects an interesting story that is still up to date. The actor, talented or not, demonstrating the first as far as possible, full frame and thanks to the visual layout, brings us a pleasant feeling of adequate production. In saying this, I say with good conscience that I was much more pleased after watching this "student" Spielberg project than before, during and after the pursuit of another Oscar-winner, namely the brilliant role of Gary Oldman in the most boring and gloomy two hours in cinema.
