Read all about it: Streep, Hanks deliver in ‘The Post’
Spielberg drama is urgent, timely
President Donald Trump and his administration may be on the attack when it comes to real journalism, but we’ve got Steven Spielberg on our side. ❚ Don’t laugh. Spielberg is not an inconsiderable ally, based on the evidence he provides with “The Post,” a terrific film that depicts events that took place more than 45 years ago yet pack an urgency that’s never been more crucial. ❚ For that reason alone you should see it. But it’s not a history lecture. It’s also a riveting drama packed with great performances, including those of Meryl Streep, Tom Hanks and, holding his own with the heavyweights of this generation, Bob Odenkirk. Tracy Letts is pretty swell, too.
“The Post,” written by Liz Hannah and Josh Singer, is also a story of the evolution of female empowerment personified by Katharine Graham (Streep), publisher of the Washington Post, who finds her footing and her voice during the course of the film — a voice that rises in defense of the First Amendment, of speaking truth to power, of never letting the bad guys bully you out of telling the real story.
The story begins with Daniel Ellsberg (Matthew Rhys), a veteran working as a military analyst, stealing and copying a classified report that lays out the real cost and lack of success in Vietnam and Southeast Asia, dating back to World War II. The report would come to be known as the Pentagon Papers, and Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara (Bruce Greenwood), while fully knowledgeable of the contents, simply keeps telling the media that things are going just fine, thanks.
Ellsberg, copying small sections at a time to avoid detection, gives a copy of the report to the New York Times, which publishes excerpts. It’s a stunning scoop, which ticks off Post editor Ben Bradlee (Hanks) — and President Richard Nixon. The government accuses the
Times of violating the Espionage Act and a judge orders that the paper cease publication of the Pentagon Papers.
This was 1971, a few years before the Watergate scandal. Bradlee rightly feels like the Post is a regional paper not in the same league as the Times. Ben Bagdikian (Odenkirk), a Post editor, knows Ellsberg and manages to get a copy of the report (Spielberg is great at building the tension as Bagdikian carts the boxes around). The Times may not be able to publish, but no one is stopping the Post. Bradlee senses that this is his moment, and the paper’s.
And in Graham’s view, that moment arrives at the worst possible time. She’s about to take the Post public. Publishing could ruin the deal — a make-orbreak fiscal maneuver the Post’s allmale board doesn’t want Graham to have much to do with, anyway. Fritz Beebe (Letts), her adviser, certainly doesn’t want her to go forward with the story. The men on the Post board treat her as a rich afterthought, the widow of their former boss who committed suicide.
At first that’s how Streep portrays her. But Graham has friends in high places, as they say, including McNamara. He’s not a big fan of her publishing, either. There are three or four moments worth literally cheering in this film, and watching Graham gradually seize the power that is rightfully hers is one of them.
The movie doesn’t sugarcoat Bradlee’s cushy relationship with his late friend, President Kennedy. Bias? Sure, but bias that is addressed and acknowledged, however gruffly. (Hanks wisely doesn’t try to mimic Jason Robards’ Oscar-winning performance as Bradlee in “All the President’s Men.” Hanks is outstanding in his own right.)
There is a nostalgia factor here, of course. There are no discussions of clickbait or how many hits a story will get. But there is also no illusion that this was some mythical time when no one cared about making money — money is at the root of Graham’s decision. But so is public service. This is a story about taking risks, about putting the good of the country before your own. It sounds corny and clichéd, but even in Spielberg’s hands it doesn’t come off that way.
Instead it becomes a story that sorely needs to be told, again and again, of the necessity of real journalism — of what it was, what it can be and what it must remain if we are to remain free.