The Postman (1997) User Reviews (477)

The Postman Delivers

[Fitzy14 · 7/10 · 29 April 2021]

Listen I know that Costner has a rep. For long drawn out story lines and his movies can be on the slow side, but give this one a chance, it makes you feel proud at the end and I tell you that you will not feel like you wasted your time and if you do I will refund your money on this review, with your receipt of course.

It is Post-Apocalyptic, but don't hold that against it, it has some great twists and turns, it has action and even some romance, if you are into that sort of thing and in the end you feel better about the world in general. I enjoyed 2 bowls of Popcorn and a beer with this movie.

Who knows you may want to hug your postal carrier after this movie.

Don't listen to it's critics, see the movie for yourself and come to your own conclusions.

[sol-kay · 7/10 · 20 September 2003]

A Far better movie then it's critics make it out to be. "The Postman" is a good solid film about the end of the world and the chaos and confusion that follows with the unwitting soul that destiny choose to bring those who survived the apocalypse back to a better life and promising future.

Corny yes but in a positive and constructive sort of way. With the cast of Kevin Costner on down giving the film the sort of believability that you just don't see in most of the "End of he World" movies that have been projected on the silver screen since "Things to Come" back in 1936.

"The Postman" unlike most "End of the world" movies carries through the entire movie, which is almost three hours long, a positive and uplifting theme that you rarely get to see in these type of films. The ending of the film, call it corny it you will, was really moving without being obnoxious like it could have been had it been made by a lesser talent then Kevin Costner.

Gunfire, Cannons or Snow... The Mail Must Get Through

[gavin6942 · 7/10 · 4 September 2006]

This film is most popular among women under the age of 18. I can't really fathom why that would be, but maybe there's a whole other aspect of this that I missed.

In 2013, the United States has been destroyed for about 15 years, and only the very basic technology is available. Something like the Civil War, but with machine guns. After escaping an army and pretending to be a postman, Kevin Costner sets out to rebuild America.

The only bad thing I can say about this film is that some of the actors were really poor. Two or three of the minor roles had very hammy actors that ruined the scenes, but overall the acting was quite well done.

The plot is wonderful. Certain plot holes exist if you pay attention (I noticed for example that everyone knows the president is in Minneapolis, although the only time Costner said this was in private to the enemy) but the overall premise of rebuilding through the use of communication is somewhat realistic and a very intriguing idea if nothing else.

The woman playing Abby was great, maybe even greater than she was in "Rushmore" (though that film reigns supreme). The kid playing Ford Lincoln Mercury was a bit over the top, but it seemed to fit his character well. And Will Patton? A dazzling display of pure evil. As he himself says, great men make great men -- his evilness only serves to make Costner a greater hero.

The music was very odd ("Come and Get Your Love"?) and needed more Tom Petty. Petty himself needed a bigger role, and did great with the part that was given to him.

Some people will complain the film is too long (178 minutes). While I agree the film seemed long at first, once I became engrossed in the film, I would have been willing to watch another two hours of this world. You really don't want to say goodbye to Abby, the Postman or even to General Bethlehem. They are powerful and charismatic characters.

Could this film be even better than "Waterworld"? I am undecided, but it is certainly in the running as the best Kevin Costner film ever made.

A much better movie than the "user ratings" would indicate.

[TxMike · 21 November 1999]

I own this movie on DVD, I've seen this movie a number of times, and it is overall better than 80% of the commercial movies being released these days.

Those of you familiar with statistics and "normal" distributions, look at the "user ratings" for this movie. The "1" ratings are bogus. Look at the shape of the distribution, and you'll see that the valid rating for this movie is somewhere between 7 and 8, which are the most "common" ratings, which makes perfect sense. A 7.5 on a 10 point scale is where most people would rate it.

It has such an uplifting story of a reconstruction after a war, and banning together to fight evil, that I don't see how anyone with a heart could give it less than about 6 or 7. See it if you haven't already!

PS - My old college friend Dan von Bargen is in this as Sheriff Briscoe of Pineview, who near the end shouts "Ride Postman, ride!" Unfortunately Dan died in 2015.

Not Epic but Good

[Tweetienator · 7/10 · 19 June 2019]

The Postman got a lot of harsh and bad reviews and for that reason I didn't watch it at the cinema. After a couple of years I got it on DVD and was surprised - yes, The Postman is no masterpiece, but still a very entertaining one, if you like the post-apocalyptic genre.

All in all The Postman got some lengths here and there (no wonder, running time is 177 minutes) and the end (fight) is a little bit disappointing, but all in all, The Postman is a good watch with good production, acting and some good action.

My advice - if you like the genre and didn't already watch The Postman, just take your chances and give it a try.

A nice movie.

[sagar-iftekhar · 7/10 · 17 May 2020]

Cavin Costner is one of my favourite actors. Situation make man a hero. And heroes lead the nation. The journey to build an united nation is not easy. And the post man finally did it. Like this movie much.

Worth watching

[Mattias · 6/10 · 1 July 2008]

I have always heard that The Postman is a stinker but after 11 years I had the opportunity to see the movie for myself. I had my doubts of being able to sit through a 2h 50 min movie but the plot managed to keep my attention the whole way through. This is a post apocalyptic story but I could very easily see this as a 1950s western - set in the Wild West in 1873 with Gary Cooper playing a lone postman, Dan Duryea the leader of a gang of thugs wrecking havoc on a small town without a sheriff and perhaps Ann Blyth as the young widow who reluctantly falls for our hero.

Perhaps the patriotic themes that the film associated with the post service was a bit over the top, it looked like the movie was trying to do with the mail man profession what Backdraft did for firefighting. I'm not saying this is a very good movie and I certainly found Dances with Wolves much better but I think it's worth the time to see it.

Self Indulgent trash

[cmoyton · 1/10 · 28 July 2012]

Not until this was released on blu ray did i manage to catch The Postman.What have i been missing all these years - absolutely nothing apart from the best part of three hours i wont get back.

Its interesting watching this in light of more recent post apocalyptic flops but The Postman takes the biscuit. The script is totally overloaded with schmaltz - a pure glucose overdose. The cast seem to be taking the whole thing so seriously when they are participating in a joke. The only good thing about the movie is Will Pattons performance as the bad guy but his eyesight is failing as he cannot recognise Costner without his facial hair.

It also is annoying that Ribisi (playing a loon again) and Russo (playing a bad ass again) are offed in the first half hour as they were entertaining. But hey great looking blu ray.

See it, then decide

[tony etchells · 9/10 · 15 August 2002]

It's a depressing fact that the moviegoing public is being brainwashed by critics to hate everything involving Kevin Costner. When released in 1997 this breathtaking, thought-provoking epic was largely ignored and limped to a box office gross of $14 million, thanks to some vicious reviews.

Lest we forget, Costner made the magnificent Dances With Wolves, but that was in the days when we were told it was okay to like him. His directorial follow up is every bit as good. He knows about directing. He coaxes great performances from his casts. He has real vision and takes chances. Like Michael Cimino, his efforts are belittled and mocked while directors with clearly less talent are applauded.

So to all those people who stayed away in droves and screw their faces up at the mention of this film, I say watch it before you criticise it. Don't rely on some magazine writer to tell you who's good and who's not. Your brain is there for a reason.

First Class recorded delivery....

[FlashCallahan · 7/10 · 9 May 2016]

The Postman is one of those films that supposedly destroyed an A-listers career.

For some reason, Costner has always been a target of critics, and despite the fact that in the early nineties, he was one of the big players thanks to the like of The Bodygaurd, Robin Hood and Dances with Wolves, we all tend to remember him for Waterworld, Wyatt Earp, and this, which is unarguably nothing more than a vanity project for it's star/Director.

But i've always been a fan of Costner, and I would watch him in a film where he reads the dictionary..

Set three years ago, after war has destroyed most of USA, including the government, a lone drifter is captured by a fascist group called the Holnists led by General Bethlehem.

When he escapes, he finds a mail Jeep and uniform, and starts to travel through small cities, telling them he is a postman, a representative of the restored United States.

No one believes him at first, but soon he has followers, and they start to prepare a revolt against Holnists.......

With this being a post apocalyptic vision of the recent past/future depending on when you actually see the film, I for one was actually surprised as to just how light hearted the film was in some scenes.

What Costner has given us is nothing more than Robin Hood: Prince Of Thieves meets Mad Max: Beyond Thunderdome, as The Postman has the same traits and problems as Hood.

Now take away Patton (even though he is very good), and add Rickman, I would guarantee that this would have been better received, and more regarded today.

I wouldn't have been surprised if the late actor was sent a script, but didn't want to steal the show from Costner yet again.

So he escapes from the General, starts a movement, gets injured, spends a winter with Olivia Willaims, and fights some more, until we have a Braveheart type finale.

The film is all over the place, Costner clearly believed he had the answers to the meaning of life with this film, and was betting that he would repeat his success with Dances With Wolves.

It's not a bad film by any means, it's actually quite entertaining, and my advice is make your own decisions, you will find something to enjoy.

Even if it is for all the wrong reasons.

Extremely pretentious, extremely boring - extremely bad

[tatamata1 · 1/10 · 8 July 2007]

This is probably one of the worst films I have ever seen. It bore me to death. Three hours of pathetic "patriotism".

Everything happens by accident - an accidentally discovered mail bag inspires Costner's character to use it as mean to get a meal and a shelter. But it will, by accident, wake up some real hope, and accidentally bring to forming of a postal service (which is actually much more than just a postal service - at the time it is the only institution of the new United States, and eventually will become even some kind of it's army!).

The moral of the film is pointed out by Costner himself, near the long, long waited end - believing in the United States will make you invincible! Pathetic, at best.

If only it lasted two hours shorter, it would be entertaining as an unintentional comedy. But unfortunately, three hours of garbage at one place is not entertaining by any means.

Well... I am glad to see that I am not the only person who liked this film

[A-Ron-2 · 8/10 · 19 February 2000]

I truly do NOT understand why The Postman was attacked as viscously as it was by the film media (there films much more worthy of the Golden Raspberry Awards in 1997). I loved this film and was very impressed with the loving amount of dedication that it demonstrates on the part of the actors, writers and director. This was a GOOD movie: it had a strong and intelligent story; excellent and interesting characters; and real feel for the post-Apocalypse genre. I felt that Kevin Costner's everyman act worked beautifully in this film and created a sense of reality for the character and of his situation.

As far as the sci-fi novel by David Brin, this film exceeded it in every way possible. Where Brin had to rely on cheezy sci-fi standards (like supersoldiers) to resolve his story, this film does using only two men, both frauds, and both with radically different understandings of what constitutes a proper society. That is what made this film great (and I rarely use the term great), that this film was essentially an examination of America and what America means. It was a parable of sorts about the types of men Americans are and what they are capable of (notice that the head bad-guy had a traditional, classical education, while Costner did not; he appreciated these things but they were not at the center of his belief system... I wonder why).

While I do not agree with every aspect of this film (I am a Medievalist and a Platonist, so I don't necessarily feel the same way about the Western Canon that the film-maker may have), I still find it to be a beautiful reflection on the psyche of the American everyman. America has a tradition of rejecting the absolutist ideals of the past in favor of the pragmatic relativism of today, and I think that this film is a parable of the divorce of America from the traditions of Europe.

Overall, this is a complex and entertaining film and I highly recommend it to anyone interested in examinations of American culture and tradition, perhaps as a double feature with Citizen Cane (I am not, however, claiming that the Postman was as good a film as Citizen Cane, only that they have a similar theme... what does it mean to be an American?).

I don't know why the ratings are low?

[djfrost-46786 · 7/10 · 29 June 2018]

I would watch this movie again over Die Hard 2 or Die Hard 3. I don't get why this movie is so low in ratings n the Die hards are so high. This movie has alot of emotion with action. At some points it reminds u of I Am Legend.

"I'm clapping because you stink!"

[The_Movie_Cat · 4/10 · 26 November 2000]

WARNING: REVIEW CONTAINS SPOILERS

The Postman is a much-disparaged film, and has a lot in common with Waterworld. Like that film, it's overlong, overwrought and overpriced. Yet also like Waterworld it's really not all that bad. Nothing special, just a plainly average film paid undue attention due to its $80 million budget and panned as a result.

Its formula: initial violent clash, romance with gratuitous sex scene, conflict, love and resolution is nothing new. The murder of Olivia Williams' husband merely exists to serve the plot, and using her rape as a character motivation is deplorable. However, in its initial stages things are actually almost watchable, and while Costner isn't the world's greatest director, he's not the worst either.

Things take a dip as soon as Costner takes on the postman mantle, where every letter he delivers is a written piece of exposition. The Mad Max references are obvious, though there are some reasonable allegories in the text. And where Max itself was inspired by "man with no name" western idents, so too Costner's titular character has only "Shakespeare" as a moniker.

An oddity is the fact that the advertising billboards give us the year in which it's set as 2013, yet this is never revealed on screen. Rather odd that to discover major plot points you don't have to watch the film, but look at the marketing. Into this Costner emerges as a saviour in a post-apocalyptic America. The "back to basics" stance isn't always subtle. In one scene Costner's battered hero lets out a series of guttural groans as he discovers a cigarette lighter – a parody of the caveman discovering fire. The humour is also a little naive, with the postman falsely claiming that the president is Ringo Starr and his policies come from Sgt.Pepper lyrics. Yet Costner's unsure delivery (no pun intended) lends them a sort of feckless charm.

However, his postman guise must be effective because as soon as he dons the cap and shaves he becomes completely unrecognisable to Will Patton. Patton co-stars as a hard case villain who can beat large men in six second fights, sets fire to American flags and cuts off tongues and testicles. Of course, it's a little hard to believe that a redheaded balding beardie is so tough so most of this is revealed via dialogue. While not a bad actor, the one-note, singular dynamic of the role does start to get rather tiresome. "Take two character dimensions into the shower? Not me!" Larenz Tate, making an appearance as the token black kid in a Hollywood movie, reaches Sunset Boulevard levels of screen realism. Choke back on them crocodile tears, son. And somebody get Tom Petty some acting lessons, for God's sake!

While the first half of this film is so-so entertainment, the conclusion sees it's ultimate distillation into overearnest sentimentality. In fact, it's often so extreme it makes The Sha, er, Patriot seem underplayed. Costner talks about "beating back vomit, er, despair, and replacing it with hope" as teary-eyed, impossibly white-teethed youngsters salute and look on with patriotic pride. Silly quotes, er, soliloquies abound, with Costner being told "you give out hope like it was candy in your pocket." Just when you think you can't heave your guts up any more, Costner gets a daughter... named Hope. Mind you, he was lucky to get Olivia pregnant after just one attempt.

In fact, I dunno why I started reappraising it now, as it's rubbish, really, ain't it? The sort of mealy-mouthed, sentimental/gung-ho tripe, so saccharine it will give you the cinematic equivalent of tooth decay. And didn't you just know the film would end with a slug match between Costner and Patton? I mean, I'm soft, but I could have him, no problem. Probably the stumbling block with this review was that I made the mistake of taking down notes and thoughts at the half-way point. Every time I wrote "it's not that bad" something would happen to make me realise it really IS that bad. Still, I've seen worse. Not very often, but I have... I think... 4/10.

First of all...I liked it...I really did!

[gagliano · 13 February 2000]

First of all...I liked it...I really did! It is a film by Kevin Costner, starring Kevin Costner, surrounds Kevin Costner's character, and a movie that is simply...Kevin Costner. But if you liked Kevin Costner in such films as "Dances With Wolves", "Robin Hood", "The Bodyguard", and even slightly in "Waterworld", then you will like this film. I know it is three hours long (I got refills on both the popcorn and super-size soda and still ran out), but I didn't find it as unbearable as those less-than-perfect-movie-critics have claimed. I found the time to go by quite like you would expect three hours to go by and didn't find myself being bored or dozing off. Yes, the story line was a bit predictable and Kevin played the reluctant hero that he is known for...but I liked it. Bottom line...if you want to do something nice for your postman, tell them you are going to go see the film in their honor...because like their motto says...not rain, nor shine, nor sleet, nor nothing...not even the lack of being a country will stop the mail from getting through.

Critics missed the point, there's a gem of a movie in here

[bopdog · 7/10 · 20 August 1999]

"Bum rap" is right-- while this movie does indeed have its flaws (duh-- most do)-- it was considerably better than the Hollywood establishment allowed. In fact, it was unseemly the way those folks sought the movie out for criticism. They chased it, practically, for derision! I became a fan accidentally, innocently. I had a few friends who worked as extras in the filming, and it was filmed on location, mostly, in my home town area in Eastern Washington. Thus, I schlepped my bod over to the theater on Christmas day to see it. I was away at school, and lonesome. I felt cut-off from friends and family-- blah blah blah. Thus I sat in the dark searching the screen for my friends, feeling a bit of "old home" vibe returning as a I saw scene after scene take place in recognized locales. This is what the movie was about-- the re-connecting that takes place after a time of separation. The theme of the movie was about finding the courage it takes to crawl out of our shells, to deny the relative safety of living withdrawn and contracted. It was all about community, and the personal risks and steps necessary to reconnect and reestablish our communities. It was about the virtual death that living without community is, and the inexorable force of human nature and life itself that propels us to-- eventually-- do whatever it takes to reach back out again and find our interpersonal and social relationships. Well, my little episode of homesickness, and the reaffirming activity I was engaged in while trying to find old friends in old familiar places on screen drew me instantly into what I believe was the underlying purpose of the book, and the movie. I was stunned, awe struck, gratified, and immensely happy and comforted by the movie. Only later I was shocked to discover how much the media folks hated it, and how indifferent the movie going public seemed to be to it. A year+ later I saw the movie again, and some of the emotional impact for me had faded. I could see that the evil general and the Holnist Army thing was a bit overdrawn-- but the essential sweetness and power of the core message was intact. As humans, when we live cut off from our fellow folks, we're as good as dead; it is only through exercising and feeding our relationships that we can be human, happy, and alive. If I had a time machine, I'd go back and get Kevin Costner to cut the "army of 8" stuff WAY back. I'd also get him to NOT direct the thing-- focus on the townspeople and their "coming out" relationships and experiences a touch more. And I'd make sure he cut the length down to 135 mins or so. I'd also stick in a reference or three to the "postman" theme-- have some person or other comment on the corny nature, perhaps, of having a postman save the word-- making a knowing joke about it within the story might then have the effect of inoculating the audience against their own cynicism. To paraphrase David Denby of "The New Yorker," it seems as if Hollywood is punishing Costner for making them feel things they didn't want to feel. Over all, I gave it a 9.

Neither Snow, Nor Rain, Nor Descent to Anarchy

[rollernerd · 6/10 · 16 September 2021]

Welcome back to another edition of Adam's Reviews!! **queue in intro music**

Tonight's movie review is the epic war drama The Postman (1997), based on a fictional novel, directed and starring the likeable Kevin Costner who adapts the novel into a flick of epic proportions, both in terms of storytelling in a hefty running time of close to 3 hours.

The film is based in a dystopian world where America has been left in ruins in the wake of a doom war and how a dystopian dictatorship falls at the hands of the United States Postal Service. That's right, in this post-apocalyptic land, the land of the free is represented by postal carriers. The film is based in 2013 and the county has fallen and divided by the hands of some farmer who we never see but constantly hear of, the charismatic Nathan Holn who rose to power with his book 'Seizing the Way to Win." This bloke preaches violence, racism and brings a misogynist populist message. The collective who follows this system and lead by the example of Holn are called The Holness, a ruthless military group, led by the unforgiving vicious General Bethlehem. This militia eventually overthrow the Whitehouse and the United States Government.

We come across a loner drifter who performs Shakespeare plays just he can have food in stomach. This loner drifter is played by Costner - and his character does not have a name. The film at the get go is narrated by his daughter, so this whole story has already happened. The mystery character has his mule friend and sometimes pretends he watches Days Of Our Lives. That is until The Holness find him and attempt to turn him into one of them. After his escape, the mystery man finds a broken-down postal vehicle and steals the jacket plus the hat and starts playing off as a postman represented the Restored United States of America. He is now known as the Postman, who walks from town to town, giving letters, taking letter for his next drop and providing a spark of hope as he lies to the town of how the country is slowly trying to build it self up. This causes a young group of individuals to take up the postman oath and become the new generation of hope.

The movies plays well around the notion of a reluctant hero who is willing to take responsibility which resonates with the timeless phrase "all that is needed for evil to triumph is that good men do nothing." Will Patton's General Bethlehem portrayal may seem over the top, but he does well in reflecting how an average man arose to take the opportunity and will keep hold on power which is demonstrated with his grandiose displays of cruelty and bullying on anyone who stands in his way.

The movie explains the cycle of how different types of charismatic leadership have the capability to bring about change which can shift to turmoil or to progression. This epic softly explains how dictators have a central belief system masqueraded by traditional education and encompassed to the collective. The system itself is tweaked in order to manipulate various communities. The film does well to softly touch on this while explaining how changing the past through eliminating education from the general public will allow this manipulation to be conquered at ease. What's interesting about this film is the communication around the need for revolution to disrupt the current state of dictatorship. What's disappointing is that everything interesting it proposes it discards in favour of cliched drama. We are given a swashbuckling, slow-motion and corny scenes which are set to a thousand strings orchestra. There is a good film struggling to get out from under it all, for now 6/10.

Better Than You Would Be Led To Believe

[damianphelps · 7/10 · 6 March 2021]

This is Costner's second attempt at the 'man who will save us role' and like the first one (Waterworld) I liked it.

The Postman received a lot of criticism (as did WW) again for being a little self indulgent. Its the third film (WW and Wolves) that shows Costner has no idea how to edit. If he shoots it, its in the movie!

That issue aside, the Postman sets up a great 'world' with some nice characters as it explores the denigration of humanity. Another plus is the dealing with a post apocalyptic world without replicating anything Mad Maxish, the same challenge for movies delving in archaeology and Indiana Jones. Its hard not to be accused of being a clone and the Postman does that pretty well :)

Worst movie ever

[kjempeintens · 1/10 · 26 July 2004]

I'm sorry folks, but this movie is bound to be 3 hours wasted if you're planning to see it. The storyline is horrid; the movie is very, very long (I had to take breaks!) and the acting is at best mediocre.

The story has Kevin Costner as the heroic postman, saving the day when restoring the postal system. I'm sure postal workers like it though, as it gives their job a very flattering impression of being important. But if you're not a postal worker - stay away!

Frankly I'm tempted to purchase a copy and destroy, only to feel better about it.

Burn, burn, burn!

Suddenly very relevant again...

[sammyk762-50-470681 · 8/10 · 16 August 2020]

Nothing to add to the other reviews, other than it holds up well after 20 years, and may even be a better movie for our times than the one it was made. Is it long? Sure. So pause it every 45 minutes and pretend it's a series. It's worth your time, especially if your pandemic watch list is running short.

Not that bad of a movie.

[deltadave669 · 6/10 · 25 May 2000]

Coudl've edited out about an hour of the movie. That's what keeps this movie from even better. I don't know what Costner's deal is with making long movies. I guess he likes getting all of the details.

All in all, not bad if you don't mind the length.

The worst film ever made

[Plex Shaw · 1/10 · 2 May 1999]

I cannot believe what I am reading. This has to easily be the worst film I have ever seen and everybody seems to be in love with it. It's three hours of non-stop tedium, the acting is dreadful (Costner is the worst), the script is so lame and predictable it beggers belief. Costner is also so in love with himself in this film that he might as well have written a 3 hour love letter to himself. I cannot think of even one redeeming feature about this film. In fact I can't even be bothered to discuss it any further. It is awful, that's all you need to know about it.

24 years later I still love it

[ssra_25 · 10/10 · 13 October 2021]

I saw this first in 1998 and I loved it. I liked that the central hero was not some hot-shot soldier or special agent killing everything that moved, but an average person, who, without even wanting, started something bigger than himself.

And unlike what many of the people here think, this movie is not about the Apocalypse or about war, but about the power of hope.

Why is it three hours-long? Because the writers and the producers were not shallow. The movie does not come down just to pure action. If you want that, you might want to watch a James Bond movie. This movie also has character growth, many adventures and some witty lines as well. So a two-hours movie would have been too short, while a one-and-a-half movie would have been more of a trailer.

So if you haven't seen it yet, take some pop-corn (but not too much cause it'll spoil your focus), make yourself comfy and enjoy it.

Overlong, but entertaining.

[Mike Astill · 6/10 · 23 January 2002]

Reeling from one post-apocalyptic damp squid into another, Costner's credibility suffered again with this flick. Although Waterworld deserved the panning it received, however, this isn't too bad at all, and actually tells rather an engaging and patriotic story. It's just a shame judicious nipping and tucking didn't take place to deliver a sub-two hour story, as the bloated running time is a major setback.

Costner is as oak-like as ever, but at least he's backup up by some decent supporting players (particularly Patton and Williams) who bring some much-needed humanity to what is a fairly cringe-worthy premise.

Worst movie ever

[lestat-52 · 1/10 · 3 August 2005]

When watching the postman my mood changed from at first outrage: "How could anyone make such complete nonsense" to laughter in the end when it became apparent that some stupid Americans would watch this and think what a great country USA is.

Costner started out directing with style in Dances with wolves, scraped the bottom with the expensive waterworld and then wrote himself into history with the Postman. I've really tried to find a worse movie but i have failed - this is the lowest, crappiest, longest piece of pro-American bullshit that was ever created.

Hopefully it will stay that way....