THE POST - FILM Thread

[Bor Gullet 7]

According to The Awards Circuit (a pretty reliable site), the test screening for this film was a "disaster" and their scrambling to turn it into something decent. That's why we haven't had a trailer yet

 

Link: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/circuit-breaker/id1120795055?mt=2
 
10/25 episode of the podcast, 46 minute mark.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Not Mr. Big 4,639]

2 minutes ago, Bor Gullet said:

According to The Awards Circuit (a pretty reliable site), the test screening for this film was a "disaster" and their scrambling to turn it into something decent. That's why we haven't had a trailer yet

 

Link: https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/circuit-breaker/id1120795055?mt=2
 
10/25 episode of the podcast, 46 minute mark.

Makes sense.  Bad vibes from the beginning.  The negative review of the script, the last minute "have to stay relevant" manner Spielberg took it on, the fact that nothing about the premise sounds cinematically interesting or suited to Spielberg's talents. 

[mstrox 6,637]

You know what we haven't seen in a Spielberg movie recently?  Flying bicycles.  Maybe he can add that.

[Disco Stu 15,495]

I listened to the section of the podcast.  It was apparently a secret screening for invitees only at the Middleburg Film Festival here in Virginia.  It was quite gossipy, the podcast host heard from a friend who had heard from a friend who was at the screening that it was bad.  It would be unfortunate if it started having bad buzz around it, but that hardly means it will for sure be a bad film.   I have found that outlets/people who only care about films insofar as following awards season like a sport are often terrible predictors of if I'll like a movie or not.

 

I hope I like it, whether it gets nominated for Oscars or not!

 

(I do however agree with the podcast people that Spielberg should just push back the release if it helps him make the movie better.  A good movie is more important than awards)

[Bor Gullet 7]

To be fair though, Spielberg's historical dramas are always solid. His weakest historical drama is probably Amistad, and even that's pretty decent. If this was about Ready Player One (which does look cool by the way), I'd be more inclined to believe it.

 

And the Spielberg/Hanks collab has never let me down yet. Even The Terminal, which is the weakest of the four Spielberg/Hanks films, is still a very enjoyable movie. Speaking of which, if I remember correctly poor test screenings of that film also caused Spielberg to re-shoot the ending.

 

 

59 minutes ago, Not Mr. Big said:

Makes sense.  Bad vibes from the beginning.  The negative review of the script, the last minute "have to stay relevant" manner Spielberg took it on, the fact that nothing about the premise sounds cinematically interesting or suited to Spielberg's talents. 

 

What negative script review? It was on The Black List.

[Nick1Ø66 4,687]

Interesting that the early buzz on this is so bad. Given how rushed this thing was, the shameless way that it's Oscar bait designed specifically as a response to current events, and the fact that it appears to have been made for political, not artistic reasons (always a bad sign), I'm not surprised. 

 

Spielberg hasn't had an outright, no holds barred critical+commercial flop for a while.  Even BFG got somewhat decent reviews.

[Bor Gullet 7]

I mean, going by Rotten Tomatoes Spielberg hasn't made a rotten film since The Lost World.

 

The BFG flopped but got positive reviews.

 

12 minutes ago, Nick1066 said:

Interesting that the early buzz on this is so bad. Given how rushed this thing was, the shameless way that it's Oscar bait designed specifically as a response to current events, and the fact that it appears to have been made for political, not artistic reasons (always a bad sign), I'm not surprised. 

 

Spielberg hasn't had an outright, no holds barred critical+commercial flop for a while.  Even BFG got somewhat decent reviews.

 

Spielberg rushing a movie isn't a bad thing necessarily. The faster he works, the better his films usually are. Look at his 2001-2005 output. Spielberg was firing on all cylinders and pumping out good/great films at a very fast rate (A.I., Minority Report, Catch me if You Can, War of the Worlds, and Munich). He filmed Raiders very quickly, and ended up with one of the best films of his career.

[TheUlyssesian 2,473]

If trump were not president, this film wouldn't have been green lit, wouldn't land Speilberg, wouldn't have stared Meryl Streep, wouldn't be coming out this year, and wouldn't be the Oscar favorite.

 

It has been made for the express purpose of peddling trump hate in exchange of Oscars and dollars.

 

It was very transparent from the beginning.

[Nick1Ø66 4,687]

2 hours ago, Bor Gullet said:

Spielberg rushing a movie isn't a bad thing necessarily. The faster he works, the better his films usually are. Look at his 2001-2005 output. Spielberg was firing on all cylinders and pumping out good/great films at a very fast rate (A.I., Minority Report, Catch me if You Can, War of the Worlds, and Munich). He filmed Raiders very quickly, and ended up with one of the best films of his career.

 

Yeah, but script to screen in a year?  I don't know if he's ever done that (well, maybe Amblin').

[Disco Stu 15,495]

29 minutes ago, TheUlyssesian said:

peddling trump hate

 

This is not how I would put it.  It’s a very serious thing when a world leader is actively undermining the credibility of a free press.  I think it’s applaudable to make art that shows the importance of a press that pushes back against government power, whether it results in a good movie or not is a separate matter.

 

The non-dumbasses on all points of the political spectrum have denounced his attacks on the press.

[publicist 4,643]

The whole thing sounds fucking boring and that's what it probably is.

[Tom 4,630]

Not to mention that Hollywood has lost whatever moral high ground it thought it had to morally criticize anyone else.  

[Richard Penna 3,662]

I never thought it had any in the first place - it's why I hate 'message movies'. The idea of a machine as unethical and brutal as the filmmaking world preaching to the rest of us is laughably hypocritical. Especially now.

[Romão 2,274]

Just do the Montezuma/Cortez movie already!

[mrbellamy 6,270]

2 hours ago, Nick1066 said:

Yeah, but script to screen in a year?  I don't know if he's ever done that (well, maybe Amblin').

 

I don't remember when he came onto Munich and how far along the script was at that point, but he started shooting that in like July and it was out by December. 

[crumbs 14,287]

Well these rumours don't surprise me. Wasn't the script meant to be an awful mess desperately in need of another writing pass? That he rushed into it half-baked might have done the film a real disservice.

 

That said, they're already scoring so they're pushing ahead with a December release, hell or high water. Maybe all the film's missing is some syrupy John Williams indulgence... but even he might not be able to save the world's most boring screenplay.

[Disco Stu 15,495]

4 hours ago, Tom said:

Not to mention that Hollywood has lost whatever moral high ground it thought it had to morally criticize anyone else.  

 

4 hours ago, Richard Penna said:

I never thought it had any in the first place - it's why I hate 'message movies'. The idea of a machine as unethical and brutal as the filmmaking world preaching to the rest of us is laughably hypocritical. Especially now.

 

This is all very generalized and hypothetical.  I'm sure I agree with you on some specific films but not others.  The idea that no filmmakers should have a POV about anything is ridiculous.  I firmly believe that all art is political.  In concept, The Post does not seem preachy at all.  We'll see if it is or not.  But this is a true, interesting story in 20th century history that I think legitimately could be an important reflection for modern audiences.

 

Also, the idea that every artist who works in Hollywood is some morally corrupt lothario is silly.  By your logic, nobody should ever be able to criticize anyone for anything.

 

And yes, I do think it's important to criticize this president in particular.  A contemptible person if there ever was one.  So sue me.

[Bor Gullet 7]

1 hour ago, crumbs said:

Well these rumours don't surprise me. Wasn't the script meant to be an awful mess desperately in need of another writing pass? That he rushed into it half-baked might have done the film a real disservice.

 

That said, they're already scoring so they're pushing ahead with a December release, hell or high water. Maybe all the film's missing is some syrupy John Williams indulgence... but even he might not be able to save the world's most boring screenplay.

 

Where did you hear that? The script was in the black list.

[TheUlyssesian 2,473]

16 hours ago, Disco Stu said:

 

This is not how I would put it.  It’s a very serious thing when a world leader is actively undermining the credibility of a free press.  I think it’s applaudable to make art that shows the importance of a press that pushes back against government power, whether it results in a good movie or not is a separate matter.

 

The non-dumbasses on all points of the political spectrum have denounced his attacks on the press.

 

The media in America is a shit stain on the once noble profession of journalism. It is so ridiculously biased and has so gone off the deep end that you cannot take the media seriously at all. Their agenda is extremely obvious and the cavalier way in which they flagrantly conflate opinions and news is worrying to say the least.

 

The media's approval rating is often as low as the president or even lower. I don't think the American media has any right to claim any sort of high moral ground or ethics or integrity. Those days are long gone. Today's media is a business and deserves every last bit of attack it gets. 

 

The American media is in the gutter and it will be long before it can climb back out of it. 

[Disco Stu 15,495]

Not all media is created equal and I'm not crazy enough to think they're all heroic crusaders.  But they still perform a vital function as an independent press.

 

The stain on American journalism is not bias, it is their pathological need to pretend that they aren't biased!  The ridiculous balancing act where they have to act like there are always two valid points of view and it's up to the viewer/reader to decide which is right.  He said/she said bothsidesism.  The truth is what is most important!  Reality is biased.

 

Anyway, Fox News' ugly, hateful propaganda is worse than any crime committed by more mainstream outlets.

[Nick1Ø66 4,687]

12 hours ago, Disco Stu said:

And yes, I do think it's important to criticize this president in particular.  A contemptible person if there ever was one.  So sue me.

 

Better be careful, Trump may do just that!

[crumbs 14,287]

11 hours ago, Bor Gullet said:

 

Where did you hear that? The script was in the black list.

Extensive review of the screenplay was published months ago, before shooting even started. It sounds heavily flawed and lacking focus, with too much attention paid to completely irrelevant details that don't advance the story. This actually leads credence to the rumours about disastrous test screenings and Spielberg madly rushing to re-edit the film (which has now come from multiple industry sources).

 

Quote

The biggest problem with The Post though is how Inside Baseball it is. If I went to the casual sports fan and said, did you know Kris Bryant of the Cubs has a WAR (Wins Above Replacement) of 7.7? Chances are they’d stare at me like I had 16 heads. More tellingly, they wouldn’t give a shit. They just enjoy watching Kris Bryant play.

 

All this stuff in The Post about how the paper is run, with the editor, the CEO, the president, the owner — I didn’t care about any of it. But worse, it prevented me from enjoying the goddamn story (aka watching Kris Bryant play).

 

One of the keys to writing a great script is to identify the main story points then build a plot around them, stripping away everything else. The main story points in The Post are the conflict-laden relationship between Kay and Bradlee, the conflict-of-interest in Kay’s friendships with the government, finding the Times’s source who had the papers, and, finally, the decision of whether to print the papers or not. Whenever the script stayed with one of those points, it was good. When it drifted into the tiniest details of The Post and its reporters, it lost me. And I realize there’s a fine line. You do want detail in your story. But it’s your job to know when the details start to interfere with the drama. And that happened too many times here.

 

Another issue I had was Kay herself. Her backstory was wonderful. She’s a woman whose husband was beloved by all, who then shot himself, leaving her as the reluctant owner of the paper. Here’s the thing though. Kay doesn’t want anything to do with the paper. So she doesn’t really care about the Pentagon Papers. To her, they’re more an annoyance than anything. “Annoying” isn’t dramatic. One of the reasons we’re so invested in Bradlee’s plight to print the papers is because he actually gives a shit. A character who doesn’t give a shit either way isn’t a very interesting character.

 

http://scriptshadow.net/screenplay-review-the-post/

 

Seems like they needed to do an extra pass or two to focus the script before shooting, but in the rush to bring everyone together they didn't have time. Pity.

 

From reading that review though, I reckon we can expect some JFK-esque conspirators music.

[TheUlyssesian 2,473]

37 minutes ago, Disco Stu said:

Not all media is created equal and I'm not crazy enough to think they're all heroic crusaders.  But they still perform a vital function as an independent press.

 

The stain on American journalism is not bias, it is their pathological need to pretend that they aren't biased!  The ridiculous balancing act where they have to act like there are always two valid points of view and it's up to the viewer/reader to decide which is right.  He said/she said bothsidesism.  The truth is what is most important!  Reality is biased.

 

Anyway, Fox News' ugly, hateful propaganda is worse than any crime committed by more mainstream outlets.

 

Fox News is maybe one of the 1 or 2 major outlets that one side has. The rest of the media is in bed with the other side. How's that for balance and bias.

 

ALL news outlets have bias in America. ALL. Therefore all are terrible. But they are terrible for other reasons too, not just for their dishonesty and transparent agenda.

 

They violate the first edict of journalism. Opinions are not news. But there is literally no broadcast or print outlet that wouldn't pass off opinions as news. They do not even indicate that it is opinion ( read or watch CNN for example). And something even more insidious happens, the way opinion is subtly weaved throughout an article or story that on the face seems like is factual reporting. NYT does this the best. The article posits to be just reporting but subtly weaves opinion throughout thus biasing the viewer.

 

There are no heroes in the media. There is honor among thieves. None amongst the media.

 

(Note: Unlike you, I think ALL media is bad. But you seem to think only media which is disagreeable to you is bad, which might itself be bias).

[mstrox 6,637]

All news has bias.  It's impossible not to.  You can present facts, but the way you present them, and the stories you choose to report on, is always biased.  The idea of completely unbiased journalism is a fallacy.  However, just because something is biased doesn't mean that it must be propagandized, and we do see that a lot across the spectrum here.

 

Opinion shows and personality shows are the pits.  There is zero reason to have a 24-hour news network.

[Disco Stu 15,495]

7 minutes ago, TheUlyssesian said:

 

Fox News is maybe one of the 1 or 2 major outlets that one side. The rest of the media is in bed with the other side. How's that for balance and bias.

 

ALL news outlets have bias in America. ALL. Therefore all are terrible. But they are terrible for other reasons too, not just for their dishonesty and transparent agenda.

 

They violate the first edict of journalism. Opinions are not news. But there is literally no broadcast or print outlet that wouldn't pass off opinions as news. They do not even indicate that it is opinion ( read or watch CNN for example). And something even more insidious happens, the way opinion is subtly weaved throughout an article or story that on the face seems like is factual reporting. NYT does this the best. The article posits to be just reporting but subtly weaves opinion throughout thus biasing the viewer.

 

There are no heroes in the media. There is honor among thieves. None amongst the media.

 

(Note: Unlike you, I think ALL media is bad. But you seem to think only media which is disagreeable to you is bad, which might itself be bias).

 

I just think you're denying the important work that does happen in journalism amongst all the horrible noise.  The important investigative work that is good for the country. I think you'd rather just say "everything is all bad" and not have to actually research enough to have a more nuanced opinion.

 

But yeah, nobody should watch TV news channels of any stripe, they are of no value.

 

I happily subscribe to three good newspapers, a national one, a state one, and a local one.

[TheUlyssesian 2,473]

2 minutes ago, mstrox said:

All news has bias.  It's impossible not to.  You can present facts, but the way you present them, and the stories you choose to report on, is always biased.  The idea of completely unbiased journalism is a fallacy.  However, just because something is biased doesn't mean that it must be propagandized, and we do see that a lot across the spectrum here.

 

Opinion shows and personality shows are the pits.  There is zero reason to have a 24-hour news network.

 

I agree. The act of editorializing or picking which stories to run itself will bring in bias. So media outlets claiming a holier than thou attitude should stop the hypocrisy.

 

Their sanctimonious tone is doubly irritating when you realize they cannot not be biased.

[mstrox 6,637]

I subscribe to the New York Times Crossword.  It's the only news I need.

[TheUlyssesian 2,473]

3 minutes ago, Disco Stu said:

 

I just think you're denying the important work that does happen in journalism amongst all the horrible noise.  The important investigative work that is good for the country. I think you'd rather just say "everything is all bad" and not have to actually research enough to have a more nuanced opinion.

 

But yeah, nobody should watch TV news channels of any stripe, they are of no value.

 

I happily subscribe to three good newspapers, a national one, a state one, and a local one.

 

Of course the media is not without value. But just saying, it deserves all the hate the it gets and any attack it gets. 

 

Just like the government is not without value and does do some decent things. Same way, media does do some decent things but it is not above attacks in any shape or form.

 

It's almost that syndome of who watches the watchers? The media should be called out as often as possible because they are not the pious unbiased observer that many presume them to be, they are agenda driven participants with a horse in the race.

[nightscape94 965]

13 hours ago, Disco Stu said:

I firmly believe that all art is political. 

 

Beyond that, art is a reflection and expression of the times we live in, and how environment influences us.  If a movie like The Post is going to exist at all, then now is a completely appropriate time.

[crumbs 14,287]

Also, the comparison to Lions for Lambs is pretty disturbing because that film is incredibly preachy, and subtle as a sledgehammer with its message. Surely Spielberg's experienced enough to pick up problems like this during production and not 3 weeks out from release? First SAG screening is late November I believe.

[Tom 4,630]

25 minutes ago, nightscape94 said:

 

Beyond that, art is a reflection and expression of the times we live in, and how environment influences us.  If a movie like The Post is going to exist at all, then now is a completely appropriate time.

It is a reflection in more ways than one.  Notice that Spielberg is not rushing ahead with a movie on the rampant misogyny in Hollywood.  

[Bor Gullet 7]

Word to the wise: I personally recall rumors swirling around in early November 2005 that Munich was something resembling a mess and that Spielberg and Friends were struggling to put it all together as both a coherent and enjoyable film in the editing room.
 
The time span between the start of production to the release date in December 22, 2005 was less than six months. The first trailer came out November 7.

 

It's possible we could get a trailer for The Post sometime this week.

 

Taken from the Munich IMDB page: The film crews called the shooting of the movie as a "race against the clock". In order to have the film ready by Christmas for Academy Awards consideration, Steven Spielberg and Editor Michael Kahn devised an editing schedule in which: 1) All of the scenes in Malta and Hungary shot in twelve weeks were edited on the spot. Each day, Spielberg would review an edited scene shot two days earlier. 2) Two copies of the edited scene were sent out, one to John Williams for music and the other to Ben Burtt for sound effects. 3) The Paris and New York City scenes were edited two weeks after photography, and the final cut was readied after another two weeks.

[Nick1Ø66 4,687]

Munich was a bit of a mess, and remains IMO one of Spielberg's most overrated movies (though it hardly received universal acclaim).

 

And that's to say nothing of that film's historical revisionism. 

[A. A. Ron 1,736]

10 hours ago, TheUlyssesian said:

The media in America is a shit stain on the once noble profession of journalism.

 

I think being a journalist is rather like being a cop or a knight. Some are noble, many are not. Those who are manage to be through years of hard work and a conscious effort to make the "right decisions." This myth that journalists or cops or any group were heroes once but aren't now is ridiculous. There were no good old days.

[TheUlyssesian 2,473]

2 hours ago, Muldoon said:

 

I think being a journalist is rather like being a cop or a knight. Some are noble, many are not. Those who are manage to be through years of hard work and a conscious effort to make the "right decisions." This myth that journalists or cops or any group were heroes once but aren't now is ridiculous. There were no good old days.

 

I am not very old but old enough to remember a time when a 60 minute news program had about that much amount of news. These days the split is 2 minutes of news and 58 minutes of opinion. 3 minutes of news if you are lucky.

 

The clickbait culture has torpedoed American journalism to depths it hadn't previously achieved. It's one big ridiculous melodrama now filled with extremely conceited dishonest and delusional people.

 

Standards of what passes as journalism have bottomed out.

[mrbellamy 6,270]

[crumbs 14,287]

Kaminski doing Kaminski. Nothing new there!

 

Looks just like Bridge of Spies.

[Muad'Dib 1,800]

Please no Americana, please no Americana.....

[crumbs 14,287]

I fear the score will be for Lincoln what The BFG was to Hook; an 'unused ideas from another movie' score.

[Fancyarcher 350]

Well that shot was to be expected. Still it looks like some beautiful cinematography as per usual. 

[TheUlyssesian 2,473]

It looks overlit like the typical Kaminski look but I still sure will be more palatable in context.

[Richard Penna 3,662]

On 11/2/2017 at 7:27 PM, Nick1066 said:

Munich was a bit of a mess, and remains IMO one of Spielberg's most overrated movies (though it hardly received universal acclaim).

 

And that's to say nothing of that film's historical revisionism. 

 

I never liked it. Also felt JW's score was one of his least original and pedestrian efforts.

 

I can certainly believe these reports - if a film is rushed into completion before the script was ready, you're asking for a mess. Just look at Quantum of Solace, which apparently started filming without any 'real' script and ended up an incomprehensible piece of rubbish.

[Gruesome Son of a Bitch 6,488]

The only way The BFG got good reviews was that Disney likely owns the critics.

[TheUlyssesian 2,473]

Ah Disney checks!

 

 

That's the only way so many poor critics have pools on their estates.

[Tom 4,630]

9 hours ago, crumbs said:

I fear the score will be for Lincoln what The BFG was to Hook; an 'unused ideas from another movie' score.

Maybe Williams had some ideas for BoS that he will employ here (as the scene above looks straight out of it). Hell, maybe he worked up some themes for RPO that he can randomly throw in just for fun.  If the movie sucks anyway, why not.  

[crumbs 14,287]

He generally writes better scores for crappy movies anyway! 

[Bor Gullet 7]

On 11/4/2017 at 4:52 PM, The Doctor said:

The only way The BFG got good reviews was that Disney likely owns the critics.

 

I really hope you're being sarcastic.

[Amer 2,077]

I'd love Williams to revisit the JFK sound ala 'Garrison's Obsession'  and 'The Conspirators'

[mrbellamy 6,270]

On October 31, 2017 at 5:30 PM, Fancyarcher said:

I'm assuming the first trailer for this is playing at Murder On The Orient Express. 

 

Looks like you were right!