CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Focused Film Discussion › Spielberg's THE POST pre-release
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Spielberg's THE POST pre-release - Page 2

post #51 of 260

I was looking around, wondering when they were going to drop a trailer for this, when I found that the full cast list has been updated. Zach Woods as Daniel Ellsberg has me howling
 

post #52 of 260

Bruce Greenwood as McNamara is interesting.  I wonder how many more ex-Kennedy Administration officials he could yet play, since he's already got JFK himself covered from THIRTEEN DAYS.

post #53 of 260

That cast is ridiculous. 

 

I really thought Matthew Rhys was going to play Daniel Ellsberg. That seemed like a natural fit.

 

I hope they darkened Bruce Greenwood's hair for McNamara. I always associate him with that slicked-back black hair that he parted that way. I kept seeing Guy Pearce in that role. 

 

Also, it's called The Post now. :o

post #54 of 260

So Bruce Greenwood will have played JFK AND McNamara.

post #55 of 260

Rhys is playing the managing editor of the Post during the period, which means he'll probably have a lot to do.

post #56 of 260

Yes, I've heard Rhys has a few good scenes with the likes of Bob Odenkirk and Jesse Plemons based on what was shot this summer.

post #57 of 260

Any idea when we'll get a trailer for this?

post #58 of 260
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mola Ram View Post
 

Any idea when we'll get a trailer for this?

I'd put some money (but not too much!) on the trailer for this being attached to Murder on the Orient Express, which is a 20th Century Fox release. So, in other words, in a little over two weeks.

 

Also, uh, it's The Post, moderators. Even though I like The Papers much more as a title, but, whatever, it's The Post, ha.

post #59 of 260

I saw a post (no pun intended) on reddit saying that test screenings for this film have been bad.

 

That would suck if true. But it's reddit, so it probably isn't true.

 

Edit: Same person is saying that according to The Awards Circuit Podcast, the test screening was a "disaster" and their scrambling to turn it into something decent.


Edited by Mola Ram - 11/1/17 at 9:05am
post #60 of 260
Thread Starter 
post #61 of 260

I found the link (from the Award Circuit, a fairly reliable source).

 

https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/circuit-breaker/id1120795055?mt=2

 

10/25 episode of the podcast, 46 minute mark. Apparently the test screening was really bad and that's why we haven't had a trailer yet :(

 ha
post #62 of 260
You'd think a Spielberg film would be immune to the test screening process. I am inclined to trust the Beard's storytelling instincts over the opinion of test audiences, but maybe the production was troubled and the film's got real problems.
post #63 of 260

Depends on who the audience was.  If they screened this with a bunch of Tea Party/MAGA types in the audience, I could see them responding badly to it no matter how good it was.

post #64 of 260

Podcast said regular people.

post #65 of 260
Quote:
Originally Posted by FatherDude View Post

You'd think a Spielberg film would be immune to the test screening process. I am inclined to trust the Beard's storytelling instincts over the opinion of test audiences, but maybe the production was troubled and the film's got real problems.

I seem to recall in 2004 that The Terminal got poor test screenings, and that's the reason why Spielberg re-shot the ending.

 

The Spielberg/Hanks collab hasn't let me down yet though. I really enjoyed The Terminal as well, but I would imagine The Post is probably better than that film.

post #66 of 260
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mola Ram View Post
 

Podcast said regular people.

 

Which doesn't necessarily negate my point...

post #67 of 260
WHO FRAMED ROGER RABBIT famously tested terrible in front of a teenage audience. Zemeckis did not change a frame.
post #68 of 260

It's just given the current climate of "Fake news!", a film with the Washington Post -- a popular punching bag for Immortan Don and the Right -- at its heroic center might not play well with a lot of "regular" folks.

 

Judging by the current run he's on, I have a hard time believing Spielberg is capable of producing a straight drama that's a disaster.  I'd be more inclined to believe this if it was coming from Ready Player One screenings.

post #69 of 260
You'd think that neither the studio nor Spielberg would be worried over notes that amount to "Why is this political drama so darn POLITICAL?" though.
post #70 of 260

Here for Bob & David.

post #71 of 260

but no, seriously, the cast is insanely good. a TON of comedic talent, too.

 

can't really fathom it being awful, even if they all shot it over a drunk weekend. heck, that would have probably been the ideal shooting scenario for half these players.

post #72 of 260

That podcast is describing exactly the movie I was dreading THE POST might be if taken down the wrong road.  I mean, they even fucking name-drop LIONS FOR LAMBS!  Now, I find it basically unfathomable that Spielberg could produce a drama that absurdly awful, but it's not encouraging.

 

And unless Spielberg has made a totally pandering, uber-left screed (which I highly doubt, because he's a more nuanced filmmaker than that), I wouldn't think politics are playing into the supposed bad reactions from test audiences.

 

So I'm currently baffled!  And intrigued!  But also concerned!  I want this project to prove to have been worth Spielberg's time.

post #73 of 260

If you go on the awards circuit website and look at their oscar predictions list, for The Post it says that the film is having trouble in the editing room.

 

http://www.awardscircuit.com/predictions-academy-awards-oscars-2018/best-picture/

 

Can't say I'm surprised, 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. 

 

Still, as a Spielberg fan, I'm hoping for the best. Maybe this whole rumor is BS anyway.

post #74 of 260
The fast-tracked nature of the production makes the potential for problems believable, but it would certainly be more believable with any other director. Spielberg boasts a pretty reliable track record of delivering movies under similar conditions. Still, stuff happens.
post #75 of 260

Yeah, Spielberg's no stranger to quick turnarounds on movies.  It will be interesting to see if they push back the release to work on it, or maybe more work won't really help.  Sometimes a movie is just flat or a non-starter no matter what you do with it.

post #76 of 260
Yeah, any real problems with this movie would have to be at the story level. I really hope this doesn't end up being a script that was seized because it was topical more than because it was good.

I swear if this ends up being Spielberg's ALL THE KING'S MEN, you'll never be able to put my heart back together again.
post #77 of 260
Quote:
Originally Posted by FatherDude View Post

Yeah, any real problems with this movie would have to be at the story level. I really hope this doesn't end up being a script that was seized because it was topical more than because it was good.

I swear if this ends up being Spielberg's ALL THE KING'S MEN, you'll never be able to put my heart back together again.

That's been my concern from the jump.

 

And if it's his ALL THE KING'S MEN... we might have a new contender for the "Spielberg's Worst Movie" title, because it would mean a MASSIVE amount of talent was totally wasted.  Yuck, yuck, yuck.

 

Let's hope it's not on that level!

post #78 of 260

you guys need to stop mentioning "movies" like Lions for Lambs and All the King's Men.

 

I had successfully repressed those memories.

 

that said, it's fair point. I certainly don't hold Spielberg at a level where he can't fail--I mean, for me, he's failed plenty of times. And if this was a half-baked script and rushed production... yeah, I could see it being pretty dull/bad/lazy Oscar-baity.

 

But, man, I'd hate to see this cast wasted. More than the main names, I just love the supporting cast they brought in with Bob, David, Coon, Brie, Paulson, Stuhlbarg, Whitford, Plemmons, Rhys, Woods... that kind of ensemble with Spielberg SHOULD be gold.

post #79 of 260

Bet anything David Cross is the one who causes it to stink the most.

post #80 of 260
Maybe they had to go back to the editing room because David Cross gave his entire performance as this character:

post #81 of 260
Quote:
Originally Posted by FatherDude View Post

Maybe they had to go back to the editing room because David Cross gave his entire performance as this character:
 

 

You mean they . . . fixed it in post?

post #82 of 260

Aw, I kinda liked Lions for Lambs

post #83 of 260

I still can't imagine this film being like a giant turd or anything. The script was one of the most voted on last year's Blacklist, and Spielberg is always pretty solid with his historical dramas. His weakest historical drama is probably Amistad, and even that film is pretty decent.

post #84 of 260

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.

 

A lot of those rumors were based on... I have no idea today. But taking the issue of the latter point, Munich was never intended to be "enjoyable" the way an Indiana Jones adventure's supposed to be, or even a dark sci-fi film like Minority Report was designed to be. I also recall one of the first critical blurbs online saying, "There are no tears, no one cares, it's not Million Dollar Baby..." (the comparison came because Eastwood's boxing drama was the previous year's big "late entry" into the race as Spielberg's political thriller was) and I specifically recall several people in the industry poo-pooing it, saying, "It might not even get nominated for Best Picture." 

 

To me Munich was (along with War of the Worldsthe film event of that year, along with pictures like Jim Jarmusch's Broken Flowers and others, but the point is, I wouldn't get too concerned about this.

 

Of course maybe there's actual truth to these rumors. Maybe The Post makes Amistad look subtle (I love that film in some areas but its understanding of politics is a mess). 

 

A lot of average moviegoers these days aren't really interested in films where characters spend most of their time talking. Every day online I see people call Lincoln boring, for instance, and to some extent this is true of Bridge of Spies and even The BFG as well. 

 

The Post was considered one of maybe the top-five non-produced screenplays out there a mere year or so ago, so unless it was butchered in rewrites or whatever, I find it difficult to believe it was just picked up because of its political content. 

post #85 of 260

I hope this will turn out great, but it's entirely possible they're struggling in the edit right now. This was a spec script from a first time writer and the production was rushed as hell. It doesn't help that the Blacklist has started to feel like scripts that are great to read (couldn't say, never read one to my knowledge) but for some reason don't translate to great, or even decent films. 

post #86 of 260

I've been thinking about this. I almost wonder if there's a casting issue with Hanks. The real Bradlee was, by all accounts, the "coolest guy in the room," but he was also from an old money family. He was one of Washington's swingingest dicks for decades - that's one of the things Robards gets so right about him. Hanks is a lot of things, but I don't know if Hanks, particularly now, has ever been "cool." 

post #87 of 260

Also, first official photo with a number of the principals - not just Hanks and Streep, but also Carrie Coon, Bradley Whitford, and Matthew Rhys. 

 

https://www.socialnews.xyz/wp-content/uploads/2017/10/31/the-post-movie-still-.jpg

post #88 of 260
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boone Daniels View Post

I've been thinking about this. I almost wonder if there's a casting issue with Hanks. The real Bradlee was, by all accounts, the "coolest guy in the room," but he was also from an old money family. He was one of Washington's swingingest dicks for decades - that's one of the things Robards gets so right about him. Hanks is a lot of things, but I don't know if Hanks, particularly now, has ever been "cool." 

He's already played (successfully) a character like this in Charlie Wilson's War.
post #89 of 260

Dat Kaminski backlight.

post #90 of 260

Ever present. 

 

I'm starting to think he only ever sees in two colors. 

post #91 of 260
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mola Ram View Post
 

Dat Kaminski backlight.

 


Obligatory "Everything always looks like shit in EW photos" disclaimer... but yeah.  I really wish Spielberg would dump the guy.  Imagine Roger Deakins shooting for Steven Spielberg...

 

ETA: Don't get me wrong, I think Kaminski does fine work under the right circumstances (WAR HORSE is gorgeous, for example), but his go-to style for dramas has worn really thin.

post #92 of 260
They're been working together for 24 years now. While I'd love to see Spielberg work with someone else, I doubt it will ever happen.
post #93 of 260
Kaminski's style tends to work for Spielberg's subject matters in the 21st century, ranging from A.I. to Minority Report to Munich to War Horse to Lincoln to Bridge of Spies... Heck, I even thought the cinematography was strong for The BFG.
 
But occasionally Kaminski is all wrong. Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull is the most overwhelmingly perspicuous example. It was like the world of Indiana Jones was drowned in milk and ash. 
 
Catch Me If You Can is a case where another cinematographer would probably have been the better choice but Kaminski acquitted himself. The dude's really, really good, but I must admit I agree that it would be refreshing to see Spielberg pair up with someone else.
 
Don't think it's going to happen, though. Kaminski's not even 60 years old. He's probably Spielberg's cinematographer for life at this point.
post #94 of 260

Yeah, I thought Janus' work on BRIDGE OF SPIES was appropriately chilly. 

post #95 of 260

Soooo, WHICH SPIELBERG MOVIE HAS THE BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY?

 

The prevalent answers out there are probably Saving Private Ryan or Schindler's List, and yeah, they are great in the camera department...

 

But I still gotta go with Raiders of the Lost Ark, with Jaws a close second. I love everything about how those movies are shot.

post #96 of 260
I am OK with Kaminski's style for historical dramas. Just keep it the fuck out of Indy. (Spoiler: He won't.)
post #97 of 260

Trailer Track says first trailer for THE POST is in fact attached to Orient Express: 

https://www.trailer-track.com/2017/11/06/confirmed-first-trailer-for-steven-spielbergs-the-post-this-week/

post #98 of 260
Quote:
Originally Posted by wasp View Post
 

Soooo, WHICH SPIELBERG MOVIE HAS THE BEST CINEMATOGRAPHY?

 

The prevalent answers out there are probably Saving Private Ryan or Schindler's List, and yeah, they are great in the camera department...

 

But I still gotta go with Raiders of the Lost Ark, with Jaws a close second. I love everything about how those movies are shot.

It would be a three-way toss-up between JAWS, CLOSE ENCOUNTERS, and RAIDERS for me.  The boring and obvious picks, I know, but those are not only among his best films (they are his best films for me), but among the best films ever made, and how they're shot is a huge part of that.

 

If we're talking just beautiful imagery for beautiful imagery's sake, again I go back to WAR HORSE.  That's a film packed with stunning photography.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boone Daniels View Post
 

Trailer Track says first trailer for THE POST is in fact attached to Orient Express: 

https://www.trailer-track.com/2017/11/06/confirmed-first-trailer-for-steven-spielbergs-the-post-this-week/

Perhaps we'll get a taste of John Williams' score; other than THE BFG, his last several Spielberg collaborations have debuted some of the score in the trailers.

post #99 of 260
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boone Daniels View Post
 

Trailer Track says first trailer for THE POST is in fact attached to Orient Express: 

https://www.trailer-track.com/2017/11/06/confirmed-first-trailer-for-steven-spielbergs-the-post-this-week/

Whoohoo! Thought so. :-)

 

As for wasp's question...

 

Pretty incredibly difficult to judge, say, Raiders of the Lost Ark to Minority Report or Jaws to Munich...

 

That said, I'll give some love to Empire of the Sun which I was fortunate enough to see with Allen Daviau in attendance in San Rafael, California a decade ago. The film remains jaw-droppingly gorgeous.

post #100 of 260
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoirHeaven View Post
 

That said, I'll give some love to Empire of the Sun which I was fortunate enough to see with Allen Daviau in attendance in San Rafael, California a decade ago. The film remains jaw-droppingly gorgeous.

 

I was gonna say, Empire deserves it for this sequence alone:

 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Focused Film Discussion
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Focused Film Discussion › Spielberg's THE POST pre-release