Munich

"Israel has lost her son" some Israeli leaders bitterly declared about Spielberg. What got them so riled up? Although Munich is first and foremost a suspenseful spy thriller, Spielberg is no longer just someone who has E.T. saying "Go home" and Indy wielding his whip for the audience's pleasure, now he also wants to comment on the world's ills, both historical (Schindler's List) and current ones, such as the pressing Israeli-Palestinian issue. When he says through the character of Robert: “All of this blood comes back to us,” or when Avner, in Eric Bana's convincing performance, says “Did we accomplish anything at all? Every man we killed has been replaced by worse. There's no peace at the end of this no matter what you believe.", perhaps this is Spielberg voicing his own opinion, and I believe this was hard for Israeli leaders to listen to (but to be clear, I'm on their side). Politics aside, what's left? Above all, a masterfully directed thriller that captivates with perfect filmmaking (I would highlight the precise set design with a perfect 70s atmosphere), is free of pathos, which has always been a sore point of Spielberg's serious films, and in several scenes proves that this overgrown child can shock properly (I don’t think I’ll forget the harsh naturalistic scene of the killing the Dutch murderess). Munich may not have as deep an emotional impact as Schindler's List or Amistad, but it is a piece of attractive, honest filmmaking that wants to say something, and it says that something in a highly attractive way. To miss it would be a mistake. (04/02/2006)

Munich definitely isn’t controversial (if you’re not a fanatical supporter of either side), it doesn’t say anything new, nor does it dive into the depths of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. It just scratches the surface and the characters talk about home. But that doesn’t mean that it is a bad movie. Quite the contrary, and because Spielberg chose (for him) an unusual method of expression (it actually seems that the movie is “controlled" Kaminski’s camera), it’s pretty fascinating. The authors also expect at least some basic knowledge about the topic from the viewer, therefore they don’t explain a lot of the names or acronyms, which is good, since the movie doesn’t treat you like a toddler. (02/05/2006)

Brilliant craftsmanship without a drop of emotion. The combination of such a serious subject with this director promised an emotionally charged spectacle, and yet I witnessed a disproportionately drawn-out revenge spectacle. And while it was supposed to be cold-blooded, not a single scene managed to appeal to me. Spielberg wanted to make a "political espionage" thriller that would cut through the drama with interpersonal relationships, from which the lesson was supposed to be that "violence only breeds more violence." The film contains both, but neither component works as it should. Spielberg did not restrain himself and through the excessive runtime, he tries to create a moral agitprop not only for the Jews but for all people. And yet the skeleton of the story falls apart and the viewer only gets the impression of wholeness in the purges of the Palestinian terrorists, which are just pure craft, nothing more. That actually brings me back to the beginning of my commentary. (03/24/2006)

I'm beginning to get the impression that in the last two years Spielberg has finally fully matured. The sweet happy endings have disappeared together with the sentimentality, and the family atmosphere perfumed with popcorn is definitively gone as well. However, Munich did not resonate with me as much despite all its seriousness and undeniable power. Technically, it is absolutely polished, but it is as cold as ice, and that is something I am not willing to tolerate. Eric Bana is excellent, and the screenplay is flawless, but the story is presented in such an uninteresting form that it is difficult to empathize with the characters and immerse yourself in their world of terrorists and espionage. The action is brutal, cold, and in certain aspects reminiscent of, for example, Schindler's List. Technically, it is traditionally perfect with brilliant lighting and overall arrangement of the mise-en-scène. My only criticisms relate to occasional confusion and lack of emotions, two flaws in its beauty, two stars down. (07/06/2006)

Steven Spielberg has crafted a deeply impactful drama that boasts a brilliantly polished atmosphere with immense authenticity. The topic of the 1972 terrorist attack is, in my opinion, not well known in detail by a broad audience, including myself, so I welcomed this film as it expanded my historical knowledge. The atmosphere is truly the film's standout feature. The performances are the icing on the cake, especially the flawless Eric Bana, who portrayed the Mossad agent perfectly. Some sequences are wonderfully built up (for instance, the scene with the bomb in the phone and the approaching little girl sent chills down my spine). The editing also had no noticeable flaws. I was pleasantly surprised that Spielberg wasn't afraid to present the film in a rather naturalistic way, as I honestly didn’t expect that from such a director. But that’s exactly what I liked. John Williams' music was as delightful to my ears as always. More historical films like this, please. I give it 90%. (01/26/2017)