SnoBorderZero
CS! Silver
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 17,626
Likes: 3,182
Location:
Last Online Nov 24, 2024 17:07:20 GMT -5
|
Post by SnoBorderZero on Jan 17, 2018 1:49:51 GMT -5
While his contemporary films don't hold the cinematic weight and spectacle of his older works, when Steven Spielberg makes a new film everyone in the industry stops and takes a look. The master director still has a knack for large period piece productions, like with Lincoln in 2012, and still knows his way around directing a blockbuster with his upcoming film Ready Player One, but it is true that it appears the biggest and the best the filmmaker has to offer is behind us now. He dominated the cinematic blockbuster for decades, though now that torch has passed to Christopher Nolan as Spielberg has settled into, aside from exceptions like The BFG and Ready Player One, dramas that eschew special effects and large set pieces for character-driven narrative and combat by dialogue. This isn't to say that Spielberg has in any way lost his touch, racking up rave reviews for his work on his Oscar-nominated works Lincoln and Bridge of Spies. But it is a different Spielberg, an older Spielberg, who doesn't seek to dazzle the audience with sheer spectacle (though his spectacle was always the best) anymore and is far more invested in letting his actors be the centerpieces in his dramas, leaning on them to drub up the sensation instead of dinosaurs, aliens, and whip-cracking adventurers. In regards to this approach, you can't do much better than casting Meryl Streep and Tom Hanks as the leads, and the two are, to no one's surprise, fantastic at carrying the story and the weight of combatting the government for freedom of press and freedom of speech. While it's true that when people reflect on Spielberg's works the effects and incredible storylines often come to mind far before the performances of the leads, but Spielberg has always been a great craftsman of story and knowing how to get his actors to convey it. Sure, he leans on melodrama at times, but Spielberg is a massive budget director that has always exhibited an insistence on storytelling, and his move from blockbusters to talky dramas has been a seamless one as a result. Having said that, The Post is a well made drama bolstered by the performances of its two leads, but ultimately falls short of being much more than an enjoyable couple of hours. While The Post strikes the right cords in regards to telling its story with maturity and thoughtfulness, it's a movie that lacks the signature moments Spielberg is known for, and will sit comfortably in the middle tier of Spielberg's resume with other films that, while fine films, don't linger with the viewer long after they've viewed it. The Post centers on Kay Graham (Meryl Streep), who owns the Washington Post, and Ben Bradlee (Tom Hanks), who oversees the actual contents of the paper and is constantly looking for ways to get out of the shadow of the New York Times. That big break appears to happen as leaked documents about a study performed by Robert McNamara concerning his blunt assessment of the follies of the Vietnam War is sent to the press. The Nixon administration orders that the New York Times be barred from reporting on the subject, and the Washington Post sees this as an opportunity to take a stand of solidarity with the New York Times and defend the multiple freedoms that Nixon is attempting to illegally stifle. Kay, already embattled as a woman leading in a male-dominated industry, struggles with the decision to publish the documents, knowing full well that the ramifications from the White House, shareholders, and colleagues could be disastrous and possibly spell the end of the Washington Post altogether. As the deadline to publish the story approaches, Kay and Ben are faced with the difficult decision of assessing whether or not releasing these documents is worth opposing the government over, and ultimately if that opposition is worth defending the civil liberties that Nixon is attempting to block. The Post is a film that leans almost entirely on its cast, especially being the dialogue-heavy film that it is. Fortunately the cast is excellent all around, and standouts like Bob Odenkirk and Bruce Greenwood really add to the subplots that their smaller roles entail. Of course the heavy lifting is done by Streep and Hanks, both of whom are terrific, especially in the scenes they share together. Streep plays Kay with a quiet confidence; never wavered by the powerful men around her barking in her ears but always mindful of the current climate. Hanks is infectious as the gruff Ben Bradlee as he pushes for the documents to be published, and he represents an ideology that what's really best for the paper isn't playing it safe to appease shareholders but to supply the public with the information they deserve to know. He and Kay are strong leaders in the industry despite the mounting pressure bearing down on them, and their cool confidence is easy to rally behind. Still, it got tiresome seeing several characters throughout the film give monologues about the importance of what they're fighting for and getting teary eyed over it. Spielberg knows the law of diminishing returns better than anyone, but must have forgotten it here. Also another small criticism, but the look of the film never worked for me. I'm assuming Spielberg and director of photography Janus Kaminski were trying to go for a 1970s look and feel to the visuals, but the boosting of the ISO to create noticeable noise in the image gave this period film an ugly, processed look that didn't stack up with the material onscreen. I'm not a fan of boosting the ISO in general, but especially when it comes at the cost of highly visible grain, and The Post unfortunately embraces this fully. What holds The Post back from being anything special is that it mostly loses steam as it heads into its climax. The beginning of the film almost plays more like a conspiratorial film from the 1970s as the documents are stolen and leaked and then the Washington Post's reactions as to how to handle the story. We're introduced to Kay and the interesting power struggle she finds herself in, as well as Ben's crusade for the truth and the public's right to know it. From there the film mostly plays out as expected, though there are a few minor twists scattered about. The film does start to wear on tedium after awhile though, and while the audience should be wrought with anxious tension as Kay and Ben approach their deadline to publish the story or not, it felt like the most daring elements of the story are already behind us. I don't doubt that this was a momentous moment for the press, but the story doesn't play out in anything beyond straightforward fashion before ultimately catching up to the events of Watergate. The Post, while a well made film that's sure to please most of its patient viewers, just simply doesn't bring anything new to the investigative sub-genre. It doesn't have the weight of All the President's Men or Spotlight, and aside from marveling at the performances by the talented cast there's nothing here to grasp for repeated viewings. The theme though will gain a nice boost from audiences for echoing parallels between Donald Trump and his battles with the press, and it's hard not to reflect on how eerily similar the situations are. It speaks to the larger issue of what's in the public's best interest to know and what benefits are there to the government withholding secrets. The Post tackles this with great effect, but while the ideas swirling around the film are interesting ones ripe for a political thriller, it never dazzles the audience beyond the exceptional performances of its leads. Spielberg will always be known as perhaps the greatest big budget storyteller that cinema has ever seen, and even at his age is still directing with incredible vigor and confidence, but his signature flair is absent in The Post, and as a result the film is a respectful retelling of the events that it inspired and not much more. 7/10
|
|
Neverending
CS! Platinum
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 65,784
Likes: 8,648
Location:
Member is Online
|
Post by Neverending on Jan 17, 2018 2:26:26 GMT -5
1941 is more memorable than anything Spielberg has made in the last 12 years. Always is probably his worse movie though. Or maybe War Horse. So on a scale from Always to War Horse, how boring and forgettable is this movie? Bridge of Spies level boring & forgettable? Hopefully this movie doesn’t end up fucking someone over at the Oscars. Remember the BFG’s riveting performance in Bridge of Spies?
|
|
Jibbs
Administrator
Join Date: May 2000
Posts: 75,725
Likes: 1,657
Location:
Last Online Feb 20, 2024 18:06:23 GMT -5
|
Post by Jibbs on Jan 17, 2018 19:24:33 GMT -5
I was a bit bored by this movie. It picked up in the second half.
|
|
Doomsday
Administrator
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 23,303
Likes: 6,769
Location:
Member is Online
|
Post by Doomsday on Jan 17, 2018 20:19:40 GMT -5
The Post, while a well made film that's sure to please most of its patient viewers, just simply doesn't bring anything new to the investigative sub-genre. That's exactly the vibe I got when I watched the trailer. It feels like another Bridge of Spies; it's good, it's fine, it's not a movie I'll be anxious to watch again.
|
|
SnoBorderZero
CS! Silver
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 17,626
Likes: 3,182
Location:
Last Online Nov 24, 2024 17:07:20 GMT -5
|
Post by SnoBorderZero on Jan 17, 2018 23:56:03 GMT -5
1941 is more memorable than anything Spielberg has made in the last 12 years. Always is probably his worse movie though. Or maybe War Horse. So on a scale from Always to War Horse, how boring and forgettable is this movie? Bridge of Spies level boring & forgettable? Hopefully this movie doesn’t end up fucking someone over at the Oscars. Remember the BFG’s riveting performance in Bridge of Spies? I feel like this movie is going to get a significant amount of Oscar attention. It's an Academy-type of film, and Spielberg, Streep, and Hanks are at the center of it. I hope it doesn't win anything substantial, but it'll certainly be there.
|
|
Neverending
CS! Platinum
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 65,784
Likes: 8,648
Location:
Member is Online
|
Post by Neverending on Jan 18, 2018 0:39:13 GMT -5
1941 is more memorable than anything Spielberg has made in the last 12 years. Always is probably his worse movie though. Or maybe War Horse. So on a scale from Always to War Horse, how boring and forgettable is this movie? Bridge of Spies level boring & forgettable? Hopefully this movie doesn’t end up fucking someone over at the Oscars. Remember the BFG’s riveting performance in Bridge of Spies? I feel like this movie is going to get a significant amount of Oscar attention. It's an Academy-type of film, and Spielberg, Streep, and Hanks are at the center of it. I hope it doesn't win anything substantial, but it'll certainly be there.
|
|
PhantomKnight
CS! Gold
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 20,529
Likes: 3,133
Location:
Last Online Nov 25, 2024 0:56:23 GMT -5
|
Post by PhantomKnight on Jan 24, 2018 14:02:05 GMT -5
Definitely this year's Bridge of Spies. It's good/fine, but as many have pointed out, really does nothing new or all that interesting for the investigative genre. And it's certainly not as passionate as Spotlight. Just like Bridge of Spies, I thought the opening ten minutes or so were really quite great, but then the film peters out into just becoming good. It's competently directed and acted, but it doesn't do a lot to really distinguish itself or take it to that next level. Kind of like Spielberg's last couple of films, I'm glad I saw it, but I don't see myself revisiting it all that much.
|
|
PG Cooper
CS! Silver
Join Date: Feb 2009
And those who tasted the bite of his sword named him...The DOOM Slayer
Posts: 16,649
Likes: 4,066
Location:
Last Online Nov 25, 2024 7:30:38 GMT -5
|
Post by PG Cooper on Jan 28, 2018 16:47:17 GMT -5
There are a lot of people who seem to get increasingly frustrated with Spielberg's recent output of prestige dramas and yearn for the man to return the genre fare that made him famous. I certainly understand the love for the Spielberg of old, but I also get really excited when Spielberg tackles adult subject matter that interests him. That definitely seemed the case with The Post, a movie about the publishing of the Pentagon Papers that Spielberg fast-tracked into production. Given the film's relevance in an era where Trump yells "fake news: at any story he doesn't like, it was clear Spielberg has something important to say with The Post, and that is the case, even if the film isn't quite the homerun I had hoped for.
The film concerns itself with the Pentagon Papers, top-secret documents which revealed the United States government had been lying about Vietnam for decades. The story is first broke by the New York Times, who are quickly taken to court by the government. From there, the documents find themselves in the hands of the Washington Post. Editor in chief Ben Bradlee (Tom Hanks) adamantly supports publishing the story in spite of potential legal consequences, but there is more at stake for the Post's owner, Kay Graham (Meryl Streep), who has just taken the company public and faces serious doubt from her colleagues.
What's perhaps most striking about The Post is that Spielberg shoots and edits the film with the same intensity one might shoot an action movie. The camera often moves at great speed with the characters, the newsroom is always bustling with energy, and the editing jumps from scene to scene with a fast pace. This not only makes the film more exciting, but it also reflects the urgency of the story and the film's messages. That a free press is a necessity in calling truth to power and holding politicians accountable is not a particularly deep or original message, but it is an important one, and one we need right now.
Spielberg brings his high degree of skill to the proceedings, but it's his ability with actors that most shines. Top to bottom, this is an excellent cast, with each player sinking into their character very effectively. One of the film's great charms is just jumping around with these people and it's also exciting to see character actors like Bruce Greenwood and Bob Odenkirk given great parts. Tom Hanks also does rock-solid work as Ben Bradlee. Hanks brings the trust and dignity that he brings to all of his roles, but there's something a bit more gruff to Bradlee and Hanks handles this well. The film is anchored by Meryl Streep. Cliche though it can be to praise Streep, she really does excel here, creating a full character whose growth is one of the most important elements to the movie.
It's hard to be too down on The Post. The film is well-made, with an excellent cast, and works as a history lesson, a cautionary tale, a character study, and just as a piece of entertainment. At the same time, I don't think the film is all it could have been. Spielberg occasionally succumbs to his lesser, sentimental instincts that I could have done without. Certain scenes could use a little less soaring John Williams music, the film gets really preachy about its themes toward the end, and the ending stumbles similarly to Lincoln. Overall, The Post is probably closer to Bridge of Spies than it is to Munich or Lincoln, but that shouldn't suggest this movie isn't worth your time because it definitely is. Slightly lesser Spielberg is still pretty damn good, and this is indeed the kind of agreeable adult drama that still works very well as a piece of entertainment.
A-
|
|
Doomsday
Administrator
Join Date: Jan 2001
Posts: 23,303
Likes: 6,769
Location:
Member is Online
|
Post by Doomsday on Feb 3, 2018 21:43:15 GMT -5
I was tempted to write this off completely and give it an F when they opened the movie in Vietnam and of-effing-course played CCR against it. Can we make a rule please? How about if you have a movie or part of a movie set in Vietnam and you play CCR it's automatically disqualified from awards contention? I think it's fair. Not because I hate CCR mind you but because it just seems so lazy. Not just lazy, it seems like nobody cares and that everyone's sleeping at the wheel. That's what a lot of this movie felt like. It told a story, okay. It tried to show heroism and bravery among journalists in the face of the political machine trying to shut them down, Constitution be damned. That's all fine, it just doesn't bring anything new to the table. Not only that, it doesn't even try. It's a boilerplate movie on journalists trying to do their job despite the efforts of the powers that be. It's a standard, straight-forward film that hits every beat it needs to without getting too intense, too controversial and consequently doesn't become too interesting. It's passable, it's interesting but it's ultimately the type of forgettable movie that's made to round out those lower-rung Best Picture nominees (another reason to go back to 5).
I'm not quite sure what to make of Steven Spielberg nowadays. I admire filmmakers like Martin Scorsese who even in his mid-70s is still challenging himself with new and original material and filmmaking styles (refer to my Doomsday thread) and while Spielberg certainly has his place in the pantheon of great, ground-breaking filmmakers I'm not sure what he's trying to do with The Post. In fact, I'm not sure what he's trying to do nowadays in general. While he still manages to direct good if not great films like Munich and Lincoln we also have movies like Tintin, Bridge of Spies, The BFG and, well, The Post. They're movies that don't really have anything to say other than retread material that we've gone over before. He's been trying his hand at motion-capture films including next month's Ready Player One but those are eclipsed by the success of Avatar. What investigative journalism/news media movies haven't already done what The Post tried to do? Was he trying to make this year's Spotlight? Spielberg has said it's supposed to be a response to the Trump administration but at the same time there's an argument to be made that he's trying to make movies that he suspects will be successful rather than bring new, unique stories to the screen. It's been recently announced that his next movies will probably be West Side Story and Indiana Jones 5. Why? Why do we need another West Side Story? Would it be on his agenda if LaLa Land hadn't been as big of a hit as it was last year? And the last thing we need is another Indiana Jones movie. Could it be another Last Crusade? Possibly. Will it be another Crystal Skull? Probably. It just seems to me that Spielberg for the past decade has been playing catch-up rather than push his talents. His movies immediately seem dated because in a way they are. They still have the Capra-corn style melodrama (the scene where the woman reads the Supreme Court decision is groan-inducing) and many roles are just stock characters. I'm hoping I'm wrong, I'm hoping that sometime in the near future we get an original, enjoyable film that reminds us why we love Steven Spielberg. It's insane to think that he directed three of the biggest films of the 90s, Jurassic Park, Schindler's List and Saving Private Ryan. Maybe he has it in him to give us one more film that can stand with those ones, the kind of movies that change the way we make movies. Considering what's on his docket I'm not holding my breath but Spielberg has had lulls before. When he gets out of them though we're given fantastic, memorable films. This is one of those occasions where I look forward to re-reading this post and eating my words.
As for The Post, it's not a bad movie, it's just not a terribly good one. If you have Moviepass and want to round out your Oscar nominees go knock yourself out. Otherwise just sit tight for Ready Player One.
|
|