The Post reviews

User avatar
Precious Doll
Tenured
Posts: 3088
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2003 2:20 am
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Re: The Post reviews

Postby Precious Doll » Tue Nov 28, 2017 2:28 am

But Streep only has to appear on screen these days and the 'critics' go ga-ga. Usually find her entertaining and sometimes very good but I could name 500 others actresses I'd rather watch on the screen.

Saw a trailer of The Post this afternoon (never watch them on-line) and thought it looked OK - certainly nothing special but very serviceable. As did to my surprise the trailer for The Darkest Hour which I had also not previously seen.
"I have no interest in all of that. I find that all tabloid stupidity" Woody Allen, The Guardian, 2014, in response to his adopted daughter's allegations.

The Original BJ
Emeritus
Posts: 4054
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 8:49 pm

Re: The Post reviews

Postby The Original BJ » Tue Nov 28, 2017 2:04 am

The embargo has been lifted and it seems general consensus is significantly more enthusiastic than my take, particularly on Streep. (Who, to be fair, is perfectly winning in her key scenes late in the film -- I just don't think it's at the level of the great star turns so many other actresses have given this year.) It can always be perplexing, of course, to know that so many others see greatness in a film you think is simply decent.

The Original BJ
Emeritus
Posts: 4054
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 8:49 pm

Re: The Post reviews

Postby The Original BJ » Mon Nov 27, 2017 11:42 am

Sabin wrote:Confirming my suspicions.

Humor me. How is the score, cinematography, editing, costumes, and production design?


None of these elements are particularly eye-catching (ear-catching?) — this is among the least technically showy films Spielberg has ever directed. (Though I don’t for a second doubt John Williams places — only a fool would bet against that track record.)

Sabin
Laureate
Posts: 7224
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: The Post reviews

Postby Sabin » Mon Nov 27, 2017 11:14 am

Confirming my suspicions.

Humor me. How is the score, cinematography, editing, costumes, and production design?
"If you are marching with white nationalists, you are by definition not a very nice person. If Malala Yousafzai had taken part in that rally, you'd have to say 'Okay, I guess Malala sucks now.'" ~ John Oliver

The Original BJ
Emeritus
Posts: 4054
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 8:49 pm

The Post reviews

Postby The Original BJ » Sun Nov 26, 2017 5:30 pm

I rate The Post about at the level of a decent TV movie -- I don't think anyone involved should be embarrassed, but I certainly had hopes that the titanic triumvirate of Spielberg/Streep/Hanks would have produced something that felt like more of an event. It's an engaging enough effort, in the vein of co-writer Josh Singer's earlier Spotlight, but far less complex thematically and not nearly as affecting emotionally.

And it feels weird to say this about the depiction of such a significant historical moment, but simply as a story, it's pretty minor. The film's central conflict -- "Is the Washington Post going to publish the information in the Pentagon Papers?" -- isn't a ton to hang a movie on, when we all know the answer to that question. I also found some of the script's dialogue to be so obviously relevant to current conversations, it felt a lot like pandering to an audience eager to have their political views flattered. There's a degree to which the film's general M.O. is just throwing shade at the Trump administration.

No one in the supporting cast is getting nominated. Hanks is fine, but nothing special, though I guess in a barren Best Actor field he could still be in the conversation. Streep has the most substantial role, but this might be a test case for just how far the default-to-Meryl awards tradition goes. I'm firmly on the record as rooting against a nomination for her -- I doubt she'll even make my top ten list of actresses this year, and when there are more than enough genuinely excellent options, I'd hate to see her take up a freebie spot. (Yet again!)

This is a harmless sit -- it moves along pretty quickly, is thoroughly proficient, and has its amusing and compelling details along the way -- but it's more mid-level a film than I'd hoped for given the pedigree involved.


Return to “2017”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest