REVIEW: The Post

Directed by Steven Spielberg
1 hr 56 mins
2017 Historical Drama
From 20th Century Fox

Starring
Meryl Streep
Tom Hanks
Sarah Paulson
Bob Odenkirk
Tracy Letts
Bradley Whitford
Bruce Greenwood
Matthew Rhys
Alison Brie
Carrie Coon
Michael Stuhlbarg
Jesse Plemons


Steven Spielberg was about to begin another film and when things fell apart on that one, he came across this script.  He has acknowledged that he rushed The Post into production because it mirrors in a number of ways Washington D.C. of today and the capital's fragmented relationship with the press.  Without a doubt while watching it one cannot help thinking of the sorry mess we're in today countless times.

The film centers on the Washington Post's agonizing turmoil in the early 1970's to print the Pentagon Papers, a classified document showing that top government officials determined the Vietnam war was unwinnable even as they continued sending soldiers to fight and die.

Daniel Ellsberg, the Edward Snowden of his day, had been to Vietnam and heard first-hand that politicians regarded the war as not winnable.  Appalled, he later snatched The Pentagon Papers and turned over some of the information to the New York Times which published it on the front page.  It wasn't much more than a quick whetting of the public's appetite but the government threw an injunction on the Times and there went that idea.  (The Times, by the way, felt the film diminished its contribution to the whole slimy affair and if that is true, you couldn't prove it by me.)

Ben Bradlee, editor of The Washington Post, got wind of the story and wanted his paper to publish it (first, of course) since the injunction didn't include them.  He wanted to get a hold of the actual copies of the Pentagon Papers and publish them, knowing the action would cause a sensation and certainly may involve a liability for the Post, possible prison sentences for some, public hysteria and elevated distrust and a shakeup at the highest levels of government.

But first he had to convince the Post's first woman owner, Katharine Graham to go along with his plan.  She wants to but she has more to lose than Bradlee does... her newspaper, her fortune, her reputation and her chummy friendships with politicians.

Graham's father bought the paper in an auction years earlier and he died, he left it to Graham's husband.  Well, it remained in the family... but still.  Though not addressed in the movie, the Grahams were not getting along and he had a mistress.  However, he killed himself and it was then she inherited the paper.  She felt she didn't originally get it because she was a woman and it was because she was a woman that she wanted to make the paper shine as it never had.  

The relationship between Graham and Bradlee was very warm.  She knew that it was his skill as a newspaperman that was at the heart of the paper's success and he didn't want to disappoint her because she believed in him.

Nixon is seen in long shots through the windows of the Oval Office and we get glimpses into his treachery, dishonesty, pig-headedness, vengeance and corruption.  Young adults, overwhelmed or under-schooled in matters of today's Washington, would be wise to take in this film and use it as a primer course to digging deeper and getting involved. 

Streep and Hanks, two deans of acting, are both wonderful... why wouldn't they be?  They carved out thoughtful portrayals of Graham and Bradlee.  Once said, portraying real people usually feels more like impersonation, albeit splendid, than calling on all of one's acting chops to nail a role.  I can't imagine why either would be Oscar-nominated but I trust they will be.  The entire cast, with special attention to Odenkirk as the main reporter on the beat, was energetic.

These true political thrillers, if you will, rarely are my favorite movies of the awards season. I suppose, because I would not especially say I find them entertaining, per se.  I find them at some level fascinating, they hold my interest and I am always curious to find out what I don't know.  If I recall the true event, then there's no real dramatic conclusion to look particularly forward to... I already know it.  The pacing of these films, trying to achieve that thriller aspect, is always a little too frenetic for my tastes. 

That pace is always in the editorial rooms of newspapers, that I could never forget, and the film nailed that one.  I loved the scenes, the many varied scenes, of getting the paper out, especially when everyone is tripping the light fantastic.    

If my rating system allowed for three and a half stars, I would bestow that designation.  I would, however, give it four stars as a history lesson.  I'd give it even more for the breadth and depth of its timeliness.  


Next posting (tomorrow):
Another movie review