The Postman Review
by Mark R Leeper (leeper AT mtgbcs DOT mt DOT lucent DOT com)December 30th, 1997
THE POSTMAN
A film review by Mark R. Leeper
Capsule: After some unexplained apocalyptic
war that destroyed society, a drifter is looking
for a free meal. He pretends to be a postman from
a newly reformed US Government and unintentionally
makes himself a hero of mythic proportions. THE
POSTMAN was torpedoed by what is perhaps the most
disastrous film trailer in history. But Kevin
Costner's film's worst fault is merely that it
covers territory that has already been covered so
many times before and uses a sensibility that would have worked better in the 60s than the 90s. Still, this is *not* the bad film that people are expecting it to be. Rating: 6 (0 to 10) +1 (-4 to +4)
The plot has been done so many times in so many tiresome ways that we really did not need one more. Society has been destroyed and peaceful good guys of the world are menaced by marauding nasties. Then one hero (or perhaps a handful) stands up and saves the good guys. It is really SHANE turned into a science fiction film. NO BLADE OF GRASS, THE ROAD WARRIOR, WARRIORS OF THE WASTELAND, and any number of bad sci-fi films on cable have used the plot because it does not require fancy special effects to make a science fiction film. Of course it can still use up a big budget on the plot if the filmmaker wants. Kevin Costner's WATERWORLD is just one example. Now Costner is back and, surprise, it may be the best film on this theme ever made. But it came along too late and had a misleading trailer. Had THE POSTMAN been made in 1960--and except for having been based on a later novel it well could have been--it might have been stiff competition for THE MAGNIFICENT SEVEN. But that was almost four decades ago. Audiences might have been more receptive to the film's idealism. Today audiences might be more cynical about the film's message of the power or idealism and optimism.
It should be noted that in spite of the impression given by the trailer THE POSTMAN is not BACKDRAFT with mailmen. The film is *not* a tribute to the loyalty and service of letter carriers. That would be a cause whose banality would be second only to that of the importance of good dental hygiene. The trailer gave audiences that impression, and as such it may turn out to be the most disastrous movie trailer in cinema history. I saw this film at a Saturday matinee and there were four people in the audience, three of which were my group. This film is not STAR WARS, but it is not that bad of a film either. It is considerably better than ROBIN HOOD, PRINCE OF THIEVES.
We never do find out exactly what the war was that destroyed civilization. There was ground fighting in the United States and there was either a nuclear winter or something similar. In any case, the world of 2013 is little pockets of people trying to scratch out a subsistence living. Making that more difficult are "the Holnists," a private army, raiding small settlements. The leader of the Holnists is the fascist General Bethlehem (played with nice savagery by Will Patton). Bethlehem spouts the self-reliance rhetoric of the right wing taken to a sadistic extreme. Kevin Costner plays a drifter, a sometime Shakespeare player, who is conscripted into the Holnists, meeting their admission criteria ("if you are between fifteen and fifty and of suitable ethnic foundation...") When the drifter finds the opportunity he escapes. On the run, he finds a post office jeep with a skeleton of a postman inside. He thinks up a scam to get some food. Putting on the postman's uniform, he takes some letters to a small nearby community of Pinetree, Oregon, to deliver. He claims to be an official postman appointed by the newly reformed government and they have a responsibility to feed and house him while he performs his duty. The effect is totally unexpected. These are people desperately in need of good news and a return to the world that they knew. (There is an amusing scene earlier demonstrating that even Bethlehem's army is tired of all the violence in their lives and refuses to watch UNIVERSAL SOLDIER on a movie screen when there is THE SOUND OF MUSIC to watch.) The Postman is treated by the settlement as a romantic hero. His false story rekindles optimism. Writing a letter for the postman to deliver becomes a symbolic act signifying faith in the new government.
With a government to help protect them, people are willing to resist the Holnists. This hope and optimism is something that Bethlehem cannot allow ("morale is a dangerous thing"), but also cannot stop. Two people are especially affected by the visit of the Postman. One is Abby (Olivia Williams) who is looking for someone to impregnate her. Her husband is impotent and both have decided to find someone virile to act as biological father, especially one who will not be around much. The Postman fills the bill. The other person affected is a black teen who goes by the name Ford Lincoln Mercury (Larenz Tate). He is so inspired by the Postman, he decides on the spot that he will become a Postman also.
Playing another clean-cut hero, albeit an involuntary one, will not do much for Costner's career even if this film does find an audience. There is little in his role that Costner has not done many times before. There probably is little in the role of the idealistic savior that he could not do in his sleep. Will Patton, on the other hand, is spell-binding playing the self-indulgent and inflexible fascist leader with total conviction. He plays the part like some great but strange Civil War general. Olivia Williams is sharp and smart as Abby. Most of the cast are little known but good actors while a few of the characters are a little too cloyingly polished and pretty for their roles--specifically a child actor handing off a letter to a racing Costner. But generally Stephen F. Windon provides some terrific images of Oregon and Utah. James Newton Howard provides a stirring if not greatly original score.
This film covers thematic territory that has become too familiar from too many lesser films. And then it made the further mistake of releasing to theaters a trailer that distorted the thrust of this film. Get past those two problems and this is actually not too bad a story, even at its three-hour length. I rate it a 6 on the 0 to 10 scale and a +1 on the -4 to +4 scale.
Mark R. Leeper
[email protected]
Copyright 1997 Mark R. Leeper
Originally posted in the rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup. Copyright belongs to original author unless otherwise stated. We take no responsibilities nor do we endorse the contents of this review.
