Friday, February 23, 2018

5Q Movie Review: The Post

This semi-regular feature returns with a look at a movie I actually saw in a theater! Hey, it's a big deal for me since the last time I saw a film on the big screen, D.W. Griffith wasn't even problematic.

With the 5Q Movie Review, I try to get the essence of what a movie is about by asking and answering the truly important questions about a film.

Q: Does Meryl Streep turn directly to the camera and say, "Get it, current administration?" and then pause for audience applause?
A: I'm not saying that Streep, who plays former Post publisher Katharine Graham, does do this, but I'm not saying she doesn't. Stick through the ending credits!

Q: Does Tom Hanks play former Post editorial head honcho guy with a rascally twinkle in his eye?
A: He sure does. Unfortunately, I don't think there is one scene of Hanks pecking at a typewriter while holding a pen or a cigar with his teeth. Not one! What a ripoff.

Hanks and Streep are entertaining, and while Streep gets the kudos, we need to salute Hanks, too, because Ben Bradlee was some kind of demigod according to the way people  talk about him.

Q: Is that--is that David Cross along with Bob Odenkirk? Does Ronnie Dobbs make an appearance?
A: I'm aware that this is an unfair question, but I must be honest. As soon as I heard Cross' voice, I chuckled that he was in the film. Odenkirk has "crossed over" in my mind; Cross hasn't. The casting of the movie in general was a little distracting, actually.

No, Ronnie Dobbs isn't in The Post.

Q: What is the history like? Is it accurate?
A: I'm no expert, but many have criticized the movie for lionizing The Washington Post and downplaying the major role played in the release of the Pentagon Papers--perhaps by far the most important role--by The New York Times.  Of course, many of those critics are people who worked for The New York Times.

Q: Are newspapers still the best?
A: Most of the actual newspapers still around are not the best, but newspapers as a thing are still the best, and it's tempting to say that I would trade the Internet to have newspapers around, thriving, and affordable. That would mean the end of this blog, though--an existential dilemma I choose not to ponder.

I am all in favor of Hollywood making a big prestige movie about newspapers every single year.

Overall, I thought the movie was a nice crowd pleaser, but I was disappointed. I am a fan of media history but thought that Steven Spielberg sacrificed some narrative power in order to serve an agenda. I don't say that from a liberal vs. conservative angle, either. I enjoyed The Post, and it made me want to read more about the time period and the events depicted, but I can't picture myself seeing it again.

No comments: