Read Negative User Reviews for The Post

3

CinemaCrushFeb 10, 2018

Another revenue hungry Speilberg throwaway. The promo cover says it all. With HANKS & STREEP in mega large font at the very top, and the actual title of the film in very small font at the bottom. "Look, two names we know an love!... oh,Another revenue hungry Speilberg throwaway. The promo cover says it all. With HANKS & STREEP in mega large font at the very top, and the actual title of the film in very small font at the bottom. "Look, two names we know an love!... oh, and it's called The Post". Pathetic tactic. Totally unoriginal, banal and just plain boring. The shame lies in the fact that the true story is an amazing one. You've seen this film a million times over. It was called 'All the Presidents Men' the first time. Cookie cutter political big name bait at it's finest. I advise leaving this movie for the birds and watching 'All the Presidents Men', followed by a Pentagon Papers documentary of your choice. There are many great ones. In ten years this film will be hardly remembered, regardless of hollow accolades.… Expand

3 of 3 users found this helpful30

All this user's reviews

3

SineQuaNonFeb 3, 2018

A slow-paced, marginally interesting, Hollywood propaganda project that is clearly intended to try and dissuade the public from believing much of today's news is in fact "fake."

p.s. It didn't work!

3 of 4 users found this helpful31

All this user's reviews

1

TVBugJan 29, 2018

Tedious, ponderous, overrated, dishonest. This is all I have to say about this film.

2 of 4 users found this helpful22

All this user's reviews

2

JPG127Jan 13, 2018

If you want a good drama. Go see Darkest Hour. You want a whitewash of how the Media sabotaged the U.S. and our South Vietnamese allies, go see this.

8 of 18 users found this helpful810

All this user's reviews

0

dave89791Dec 29, 2017

Perhaps a bit harsh in my score but the film, while clearly well produced/directed/acted, just wasn't very interesting/emotionally affecting

10 of 23 users found this helpful1013

All this user's reviews

0

finnmccool1985Jan 10, 2018

A film which avoids the real truth, the truth that, much more often than not, the mass media, NYT and Washington Post included, are complicit collaborators with corporate backed politicians. The intervals where they are not only serve as lastA film which avoids the real truth, the truth that, much more often than not, the mass media, NYT and Washington Post included, are complicit collaborators with corporate backed politicians. The intervals where they are not only serve as last ditch counter arguments to this dilemma, ie if they protest the establishment, how could they support it? The true answer is, they are funded by, owned by, and advertise for, who they are being pictured to oppose. Period. End of the actual story.… Expand

12 of 29 users found this helpful1217

All this user's reviews

0

tambanJan 13, 2018

Partisan propaganda film for democratic party acolytes. If you are partisan left you will likely love it. If you are moderate or right leaning you probably won't. I wasn't alive in the 70's but I doubt news organizations were that much lessPartisan propaganda film for democratic party acolytes. If you are partisan left you will likely love it. If you are moderate or right leaning you probably won't. I wasn't alive in the 70's but I doubt news organizations were that much less corrupt than they are now. Political parties and media corps have been in bed together since the country's inception after all. Look up Tammany Hall for an example from 1790. Also remember that we have been at war continuously for about a decade and a half now... Where was the "heroism" of the 2012 "The Post"? If that doesn't matter to you put on your horse blinders and prepare to be "inspired" by this Bezos funded prop piece.… Expand

11 of 27 users found this helpful1116

All this user's reviews

1

BergerbitsMar 10, 2018

Not applicable to news reporting today. Now we get biased news so didn’t Enjoy only for that reason.

2 of 5 users found this helpful23

All this user's reviews

1

EludiumQ36Jan 15, 2018

Positioned by the Hollywood elite (anti-Trump, anti-US, Far Left Globalists) to take advantage of the long Cmas holiday break, their impotent little effort at supporting the MSM perspective was the biggest FAIL of the season! Limping to aPositioned by the Hollywood elite (anti-Trump, anti-US, Far Left Globalists) to take advantage of the long Cmas holiday break, their impotent little effort at supporting the MSM perspective was the biggest FAIL of the season! Limping to a measly $27M which won't even pay for the principal cast let alone full production. Way to go America for ignoring political hate messaging!… Expand

6 of 18 users found this helpful612

All this user's reviews

0

Lambo442Feb 2, 2018

Don't even think of going into this movie without a basic knowledge of journalist jargon and the controversy surrounding the pentagon papers. It's like Spielberg is assuming we all have this understanding and refuses to put anything inDon't even think of going into this movie without a basic knowledge of journalist jargon and the controversy surrounding the pentagon papers. It's like Spielberg is assuming we all have this understanding and refuses to put anything in layman's terms. Maybe even a short paragraph at the beginning to introduce the story or setting would have been nice. It was so boring that I left the cinema after half an hour
and I'm a trained journalist with an interest in politics. Where's the drama? Where's the excitement? Is this what cinema has come to? Intellectual masturbation? Surely we go to the cinema to be entertained as well as informed. It's not so much the way the story is told as it probably couldn't be told any other way, its the fact that this subject has been made into a movie at all. I'm not saying I just want to see super heros pounding each other, but let's at least keep to the spirit of entertainment encapsulated within the birth of cinema.… Expand

4 of 12 users found this helpful48

All this user's reviews

3

foxgroveJan 21, 2018

Directed with a heavy hand, this is a very dull and boring political drama rescued only by Meryl Streep giving another of her signature performances in an undeserving film.

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

1

ProteusDec 25, 2017

Prediction - this movie tanks a the Box Office. Streep has no energy, nothing whatsoever here. Not sure why she even gets parts. Hanks talent is wasted. He adds nothing either. Actually a boring movie. Oh wow 40 years ago a paper helpedPrediction - this movie tanks a the Box Office. Streep has no energy, nothing whatsoever here. Not sure why she even gets parts. Hanks talent is wasted. He adds nothing either. Actually a boring movie. Oh wow 40 years ago a paper helped expose Nixon....yeah we knew that.

What about now? The Post, the NYT, nearly every big paper in the USA is ultra liberal and living in the past. Clueless and out of touch with America these papers are preaching to their choir of liberal urbanites. Lets see a film about that? About the implosion of liberal media. This whole movie is stale. Save your money.… Expand

11 of 34 users found this helpful1123

All this user's reviews

2

namelessDec 27, 2017

Since I wrote my first review I went back to see what others thought, making sure I wasn't swayed too much because of the politics in the film. The most interesting discovery was that the NYT and the Washington Post gave it 100% since it wasSince I wrote my first review I went back to see what others thought, making sure I wasn't swayed too much because of the politics in the film. The most interesting discovery was that the NYT and the Washington Post gave it 100% since it was about them. If that isn't disingenuous, I don't know what is. No wonder we have lost trust in the media. You have to remember this movie is fiction, it is based on non-fiction events but like Stone's JFK, it uses partial truths to infuse the narrative.… Expand

9 of 29 users found this helpful920

All this user's reviews

2

UNCLEPAULIEJan 26, 2018

This film is an attempt to brainwash people into thinking we need CNN and other fake news outlets . Streep is an apologist for child rapist Roman Polanski and should be forced out of public view forever but the Hollywood elite have no shameThis film is an attempt to brainwash people into thinking we need CNN and other fake news outlets . Streep is an apologist for child rapist Roman Polanski and should be forced out of public view forever but the Hollywood elite have no shame in anything that goes on there, remember Harvey Weinstein was God to this woman as well .… Expand

2 of 8 users found this helpful26

All this user's reviews

1

chrisvbJan 4, 2018

what a self indulgent piece of garbage. This is the newspaper industry sending itself a love letter. I went into this movie expecting a little bit of that, but was blown away by just how bad it was. Unless you currently work for thewhat a self indulgent piece of garbage. This is the newspaper industry sending itself a love letter. I went into this movie expecting a little bit of that, but was blown away by just how bad it was. Unless you currently work for the media, really think you're the most important thing in the world, and need some reassurance, I wouldn't watch it.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

0

BroyaxOct 11, 2020

Décidément, le père Spielberg continue de démouler ses étrons avec application et une grande régularité…. Cette fois, il veut dénoncer les mensonges du gouvernement américain sur la guerre du Vietnam en 1971 via des journaleux qui sont allésDécidément, le père Spielberg continue de démouler ses étrons avec application et une grande régularité…. Cette fois, il veut dénoncer les mensonges du gouvernement américain sur la guerre du Vietnam en 1971 via des journaleux qui sont allés fouiller la merde après qu’un « lanceur d’alerte » ait donné… l’alerte « on vous ment, on vous spolie patati patata… patatrac ! »

Ce sont donc Hank et Streep qui s’y collent sur près de deux plombes de bavardages interminables et assommants… Spielberg n’a pas réussi en effet à rendre ce merdier digne d’intérêt, bien au contraire : c’est à dormir debout à cloche-pied ou sur les mains tellement on se fait chier pour pas un rond !

J’ai remarqué en tout cas pour l’anecdote avant d’arrêter bien avant la fin et entre deux avances rapides la présence de deux acteurs fort convaincants de séries télévisées à succès, chacun dans un petit rôle ici : le gars qui joue dans « The Americans » et l’inénarrable Saul Goodman de Breaking Bad et Better call Saul !

Pour le reste, eh bien ces « Papers » peuvent servir tout juste à se torcher le cul si on manque de papier, bien évidemment.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

3

Slovenly_MuseAug 14, 2018

Off the bat, this movie makes the puzzling decision to tell the story of the Post deciding to publish someone else's reporting, rather than telling the (one imagines) more fascinating and compelling story of the Times' hard and dangerous workOff the bat, this movie makes the puzzling decision to tell the story of the Post deciding to publish someone else's reporting, rather than telling the (one imagines) more fascinating and compelling story of the Times' hard and dangerous work of obtaining the Pentagon Papers in the first place. Then, in telling the story it chose, this film has nothing to say about it. It seems to want to make a point about sexism, but confines all sexism safely to the boardroom and does not interrogate AT ALL the real experiences of female employees of the Post during that era. Sarah Paulson is wasted as the supportive wife who makes sandwiches for her husband's work friends, and Carrie Coon is similarly squandered as seemingly the only female reporter at the Times, who has nothing to do story-wise, but whose easy presence seems designed to reassure the audience that sexism didn't (and doesn't) REALLY exist at the Post, despite the earlier boardroom scenes. The film seems to want to be a biopic of Kathryn Graham, but it only covers one thing that happened in her life, and even then it barely scratches the surface. She could be wholly excised from the movie and it would hardly make a difference, so little of it is about her. And while I can see the occasional black secretary answering phones in the background, would it have killed this film to give a non-white person something meaningful to do? The monochromatic speaking cast would be galling in a film that's NOT ostensibly about an underdog hero overcoming prejudice in the workplace.

Most review-trolls are calling this film "liberal propaganda," but I found its point of view so conservative as to be insulting. Nothing about this film is interesting or challenging, and everything it strives for, it seems afraid to actually achieve. I wasn't just bored or disappointed by this film, I was actually angered by how cowardly it was. Spielberg assembles an all-star cast, only to timidly put them to work serving up tepid mashed potatoes.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

3

wesseldjJul 15, 2023

Movie started of slow and sloppy. Actor roles were cliché and at times overacted by majorly Meryl Streep and Tom Hanks. Artistic style of the movie was at times authentic 1960s feel to it, but at times it was Full HD crisp, which threw you aMovie started of slow and sloppy. Actor roles were cliché and at times overacted by majorly Meryl Streep and Tom Hanks. Artistic style of the movie was at times authentic 1960s feel to it, but at times it was Full HD crisp, which threw you a bit off the vibe of the time period that it was designated. All the more the topic of the movie is a very relevant one. Both the prominent newspapers mentioned in the movie (New York Times and Washington Post) are depicted to have high sense of morality and wanted to do good for the public. It is all the more sad to say these 2 prominent newpapers of today are full of fake news and its topic politically charged leaning towards a specific political spectrum in geopolitical reporting. In todays setting american newspapers aren't lacking press freedom, they abuse press freedom to the point of manipulating the masses and accommodating aggressive foreign politics of their government. In current times these newspapers should look carefully at their policies if they are really unbiased and subjective in their news reporting, and should remember to do their predecessors justice in keep reporting righteously and should refrain from bias.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews