Skip to main content

Movie Review: The Post

The Post seems like a straightforward movie. It recounts a time in US history when a whistleblower bordered on treason to expose government secrets about an unpopular war. I saw right through the facade. What I saw was a movie about historical events, that had significant relevance for the present time.

When Liz Hannah and Josh Singer wrote the screenplay focusing on the role of Washington Post Matriarch Katherine Graham, I don't know if they had in mind the recent power surge by women. But the story of Katherine Graham and the role of the press, and the cover-up by the government all captured the current zeitgeist.

On the surface, The Post is about freedom of the press. Beneath the surface, The Post reminds us that our government can be mired in subterfuge, that people in power can have questionable motives based on greed and ego, and most poignantly it shows how a woman found her voice. 

Succinctly and eloquently put by a woman who herself was behind the scenes tending to the comfort of others. It was brave for a woman when her voice is rarely ever heard, having been passed over, overlooked and dismissed. It was a brave choice for a woman to risk the future of a company her father started, and her late husband managed. Yet, when the time came, she met the challenge and said what she had to say. 

This is more than a movie explaining the events in our recent past. The Post reflects much of what we are facing today. A time of 'fake news', and propaganda instigated by foreign countries, influencing the trajectory of our own. A time when, like then, it would be wise for news agencies to put aside their competitive differences and focus on their responsibility of informing the public in a truthful, objective and ethical manner. Our press can either join a united fight to steam the divisiveness and focus on the truth. Or the press can continue to divide our country into Team Blue and Team Red, with polarizing rhetoric on the events of the day. The truth is always the truth. Our interpretation of that truth can have two sides, we can debate the consequences of the truth, but the truth - what happened, and what studies project will happen (as was the case with the Pentagon Papers)  - will always be the truth. And this little move that could, demonstrates this in a powerful way. If you haven't seen it yet, I highly recommend The Post. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

I Stand With Meryl

In the court of public opinion, you are damned if you do and damned if you don't. I am reminded of this adage as the annual Hollywood award season is now underway. Critics harp that these awards are nothing more than self-aggrandizing by an already spoiled Hollywood community. Yet, this year, when multi-award winning actress Meryl Streep gave a thank you speech for her Cecil B DeMille award at the Golden Globes, she put the spotlight on someone other than herself, yet still received criticism. Well, I applaud her. As befitting someone in a free society, she used the podium she was given to say what was on her mind. While I am not a decorated artist of any sort, I feel compelled to do the same. I have the capacity, the platform and the freedom to speak my mind. So I will use those privileges. I agree with Ms. Streep's comments, I believe "violence does incite violence" and we should all work to stem violence to create the world that many of us would like to live in. ...

Super Tuesday left me Super Afraid

Author's Note: (This was written in the early morning hours the day after Super Tuesday primaries.) I couldn’t sleep. Trump victories on Super Tuesday kept me awake worrying about the future of our country. Did that really just happen? People actually think someone who has called himself "The Donald" will make a good leader of the free world? It left many with many questions. First, how will he maintain diplomatic affairs? Part of being a super power is maintaining positive relationships with other countries. He seems to alienate (and offend) everyone. He insults anyone who disagrees with him, or challenges him. This is not diplomacy. This is bullying. Second, are we (Americans) so swayed by sound bites and hyperbole that we use our one voice to vote for someone who has not explained how he will address any of our problems? Again, I’m not talking about sound bites “we will make America great again” “build a wall”, I’m talking about HOW. How will these things be done...