fabulous, near perfect film...great acting...incredibly well done
First of all. Anyone who trashes or criticizes this film has insufficient information to even pass an opinion on what happened. I was 21 years old in 1971and demonstrated against the war and filed for a conscientious objection status because I knew the Vietnnam War was a big mistake. McNamara knew we could not win the war and so did Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson and Nixon. The Pentagon lied and mislead all of these presidents in order to avoid the image that we would lose the war which we did. However, Nixon was the worst. He not only lied but tried to cover up his lies, tried to discredit the press and broke many laws to hide his lies and his disgusting plot to destroy any evidence. Nixon deserved to be impeached but he also deserved to be put in jail which is exactly what will happen with Trump. Just wait and see. This film was well scripted, directed, filmed and acted. Anyone who attacks Meryl Streep or this film is, quite honestly, totally misinformed if not stupid!
MY ONLY CHOICE! 1 STAR..BEYOND TRITE, NOT ONLY THE STORY, BUT THE ACTORS
As mentioned in another review “we should have withdrawn” but it was happening in1963 and helped get a President assassinated. Bell helicopter was virtually bankrupt and see how they turned arround in ‘65-‘67. This is the story of brave people using the only option available.
Simply fabulous! Timely - historic - intellectual!
Excellent film. Spielberg is a pro and clearly he wants to champion people who do the right thing, even if it puts them in danger. Mrs. Graham was a visionary publisher! And Ben Bradlee was an astute editor. and Streep and Hanks are professionals...they make acting look easy!
Excellent historical story .
Stealing classified docs during Vietnam era is the most tension you'll get in this snoozer. The point of Vietnam was the DRAFT. The film misses that and the audience looses sympathy. Sorry. Not real good in spite of seasoned actors.
Lived through the time frame...So many friends killed...Was very painful to learn at the time that we not only should not have entered that War, but we should have withdrawn almost immediately...The acting and portrayals were spot on...
To the reviewer who recommends watching "The Paper" thank you, I will look for it at the library. To the reviewer who "liked the content of this movie" me too.
I am giving this movie a five star. I am Canadian and probably because of my age I did not know there was such a long drawn out war in Vietnam. This movie gave me some insight into what happened in this dark period of history. The US knew they could not win the war but still kept their troops there for a long time. I could debate the political issues but I won't. Just love the movie for the info and content.
Unamerican actors hoping for a flop
Would not even rate this movie. Meryl Streep trashes our president the first chance she gets. She's a discrace to our country. It's to bad because I like Tom Hanks. Would not support a movie with her in it.
I plan to see the movie soon (I had to rate the movie to submit my comment here). I worked in the newsroom (now called "information center") at the D&C. Watch "The Paper" directed by Ron Howard -- available from the library or Netflix. To me, it's a pretty good look at a newsroom in action.
The unofficial 4th branch of government both in the US and Canada is the media and the media once upon a time was suppose to be non profit, non partisan, and a checks and balances on gov't. Now media entities are either owned and controlled by gov't (CBC) or controlled by public controlled / traded stocks. Anybody that actually believes that the media reports stories without an ulterior motive or political partisan bias is gravely mistaken!!! EX: CBC - liberal gov't propaganda
Great portrayal of an important part of US history. Our current President should watch it and note that, per the Supreme Court, the press is here to serve the governed, not the governors.
So far, not many viewers have commented on this movie. I wonder if this is because for the way the movie presents itself it seems one has to know something about the times (e.g. 1963 - 1974). And one has to know some things about Ms. Kay Graham's background (some things about the woman, the person). The night that I was in the theater to watch this movie much of the crowd was an older crowd. They seemed to get what the movie was showing. This movie is about Ms. Graham being thrusted into a role that is a powerful role especially for a woman of the times when (1) she initially lacked self confidence in herself in that role, (2) at a time also when women did not hold powerful positions over a company and/or over men, and on top of that (3) it was a newspaper an organization that could be used (cultivated) to achieve political ends by the power players (the powerful men) of the times. Keeping in mind, newspaper reports could and did play a role in public perception of the Vietnam war. Even bigger, then came the Pentagon Papers, and Watergate which culminated with the Supreme Court decision that Freedom of the Press (and in regards to public figures) is a protection guaranteed under the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. The movie does not come out and say but correctly eludes to the rise in Ms. Graham's confidence growing with the rise of the gender equality movement, thus the scenes of women standing in support of Ms. Graham outside the Court after the Supreme Court decision at the end. I really liked the newspaper back office scenes depicting what it took to get a paper to press, off the press, and delivered to the public. This is a really good movie.
I love journalism. I love this movie.
This movie is trash.