Hague the movie critic: Go see 'The Post'

When I was encouraged seven years ago by my niece Jackie to start writing a blog, I was a little worried and extremely apprehensive that there was an audience for it.

After all, I write so much as it is that I wondered if anyone would want to read other things that don’t appear in the newspapers and wire services that I either worked for or still currently work for.

I was also a bit skeptical that anyone would want to read something that was outside of the sports world. At times, I do like to try to be humorous. I do come across matters that move me emotionally or force me to think for hours on end.

Well, one of my passions is my love for movies. Ever since I was a little boy, I’ve been a huge fan of movies of all kinds.

I think I inherited the love of movies from my father, who was a big movie fan as well. When she was around, I relied upon my mother as one of my best movie dates. My sister has always been a big fan of movies and fueled my interest as a kid, watching countless movies together over the years. I was very fortunate to have a wonderful relationship with my beloved Mary. We try to get to as many movies together as possible, probably close to 25 every year.

So Sunday morning, we made it to see “The Post,” starring Meryl Streep and Tom Hanks and directed by Steven Spielberg. I floated a blurb on Facebook, saying that it was the best movie I’ve seen in about 20 years, going back to “Field of Dreams” and “Forrest Gump,” perhaps the two best movies I’ve seen ever.

I encouraged the people who follow me on Facebook to go to the theater and see “The Post,” telling them that it was like I said, the best movie I’ve seen in 20 years or so.

And that simple idea encouraged some of my friends, like fellow Prep Class of ’79 member Dave “Ikey Boy” Isaacson and my editor-in-chief at the Hudson Reporter, famed Carrie Pilby author Caren Lissner, and once again, my niece Jackie, to tell me that I should write a full review of “The Post” on my blog. They all said that if I liked the movie that much, that I should write something here.

So here goes:

“The Post” is a precisely crafted gem, with Spielberg being a stickler to detail as he always is. Spielberg, probably the best director of this generation, re-created the old way that newspapers were run in 1971, with copy being produced on typewriters and then sent to typesetters, who had to meticulously put the plates in the proper setting, then being placed in order to have the printing presses churn out the paper. Just that process is overlooked in today’s fast-paced digital way of producing the print copy.

And like he always does, Spielberg paints a perfect picture in creating the atmosphere of the early 1970s, with the way men ruled the world and women were supposed to be the dutiful subservient to their spouses. The wardrobes, hair styles, smoke-filled newsrooms, bars and restaurants were all done to complete perfection. Spielberg wouldn’t have it any other way.

Now for the story line: If anyone doesn’t know what the movie is about, it’s about the Washington Post getting hold of the Pentagon Papers, the classified in-depth report dating back to the Truman administration that stated our top officials knew that it was a losing proposition being involved in the Vietnam War and did nothing about getting our troops home, leaving approximately 59,000 young men and women to lose their lives in the war and another 155,000 being wounded in action. The Pentagon Papers revealed that U.S. military brass knew that our troops were basically caught in a losing proposition and did nothing to prevent the gigantic loss of life that it involved.

So the movie centers on the Washington Post’s dilemma whether to print the Pentagon Papers or not. It features Streep portraying Katherine “Kay” Graham, the paper’s majority owner and publisher and Hanks portraying Ben Bradlee, the paper’s editor-in-chief.

At this point in their respective careers, there should be no doubting the talents of both Streep (recipient of three Academy Awards) and Hanks (a two-time Oscar winner). Those two (who incredibly never worked together before) could read the Manhattan phone book and get nominated for an Oscar.

They are once again brilliant in this movie, although the movie is more of a Streep vehicle as it is a movie featuring Hanks. Streep steals the movie as a woman who inherited the role of being the Post’s publisher after her husband committed suicide a few years prior. Hanks is good as Bradlee, who had a reputation of being a hard drinking, chain smoking womanizer, but was a brilliant editor who knew how to get the most out of his reporters.

The movie centers on the decision whether to publish the reports once the reporter got his hands on them. He actually flew with a box of papers first class from Boston to Washington and then went back to Bradlee’s house to weed through the 4,000 pages of reports.

And through it all, Kay Graham wrestles with the idea of whether she wants to publish the reports, because she’s personal friends with Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara and his wife. It was at a time when newspaper people and politicians mingled regularly and socialized together. In fact, Bradlee was a close personal friend of President John F. Kennedy before he ever ran for President and spent a lot of time with Kennedy in social circles.

So the drama is definitely there and it’s all so well put together by the master of film Spielberg, who hasn’t made a clunker since “1941” almost 40 years ago.

Streep will unquestionably be nominated for another Oscar for this role. The reports are that Frances McDormand’s performance in “Three Billboards” is Oscar worthy, but in my opinion, this was Streep’s best performance in ages.

Hanks will probably earn a nomination on reputation alone. He wasn’t over the top great like he was in his Oscar-winning roles in “Philadelphia” and “Forrest Gump,” but he was good enough to earn a nomination and the reason to get all dressed up in a tux come the middle of March.

And no doubt, Spielberg will get a nod for Best Director and the movie will without question earn a Best Picture nomination. Whether Hollywood decides to vote for “The Post” as Best Picture just two years after giving another newspaper flick “Spotlight” the Best Picture award remains to be seen.

But “The Post” is definitely worthy. It’s Best Picture material for certain. It’s a perfect motion picture with no flaws. It’s perfectly acted, perfectly cast, perfectly directed. Not much else left to be said.

OK, so does Gene Shalit and Rex Reed get to keep their jobs? Do I have a future as a movie critic? There are some who think I don’t have a future as a sportswriter, so to each their own.

Now, back to sports. I just had to briefly address the idea of the rising cost of admission for high school basketball games. There was a recent tournament/classic/hoop gathering where the organizers were charging $15 a head.

The Metro Holiday Classic, held at Gill St. Bernard’s in Peapack-Gladstone, put a $15 price tag on admission. Now that’s totally absurd.

The organizer, a good hearted man named Preyia Roy, said that the ticket price was for three games and the cost was to offset money spent for insurance, travel for the teams and other accommodations.

But what really bothered me was that a Jesuit priest was asked to pay full admission. Now that’s beyond ridiculous. Roy said he did not know that a priest was charged full price and has even agreed to send a donation to the school in question as a gesture of good faith.

Still, in my opinion, charging $15 for a high school sporting event is beyond wrong. The organizer disagrees. We’ll agree to disagree on this one.

I’m still struggling with what took place on the final play of the game between the Vikings and the Saints Sunday. I don’t understand how the Saints didn’t have two safeties lined up at the 15-yard line to protect against the home run Hail Mary bomb that the Vikings connected on and won the game. Because if Stefon Diggs catches the ball and turns up field and there’s a tackler waiting for him, the game is over with no chance to kick the field goal.

And what was Marcus Williams doing on that play? It looks as if he ducked as the ball was in the air, then buckled his legs as Diggs caught the ball. How can you duck? You’re a defensive back. Make the play. Defend the receiver, knock the ball down, knock Diggs down for an interference penalty, do anything but duck underneath and allow him to catch the ball and dance into the end zone.

I don’t know how Saints fans can live with themselves after that loss. I would be so furious at Williams first, then at Sean Payton for now having the proper Hail Mary defensive formation on the field.

Oh, well

I have to go now. There are more movies to watch and write reviews on. My new life as a movie critic.

You can read more of my work at www.hudsonreporter.com, www.theobserver.com and www.ap.org/jim.hague