 |
Munich (Widescreen Edition) by Steven Spielberg
Buy this DVD movie at online store in your country
Canada
DVD detailsActor: Ciarán Hinds, Daniel Craig, Eric Bana, Marie-Josée Croze, Mathieu Kassovitz Director: Steven Spielberg Brand: NBC Universal Producer: Steven Spielberg Producer: Barry Mendel Producer: Colin Wilson Producer: Kathleen Kennedy Writer: Eric Roth Writer: George Jonas Writer: Tony Kushner DVD: Region Code 1 Audio: English (Unknown), Dolby Digital 2.0 Stereo; English (Subtitled); Spanish (Subtitled); French (Subtitled); English (Original Language), Dolby Digital 2.0 Stereo; French (Dubbed), Dolby Digital 5.1 Format: AC-3, Color, Dolby, Dubbed, DVD, NTSC, Subtitled, Widescreen Picture Format: 2.35:1 Running Time: 164 minutes DVD Release Date: 2006-05-09 Audience Rating: R (Restricted) Studio: Universal Studios
DVD Reviews of Munich (Widescreen Edition)DVD Review: Too politically correct and contemptuous of the audience's intelligence for its own good, but never less than compelling Summary: 4 Stars
"Munich" manages the difficult feat of presenting Steven Spielberg at his best, and at his worst, demonstrating his considerable gifts in the way of pacing, creating suspense, and generating a response from his audience while at the same time greatly underestimating the intelligence of his audience. For every moment that inspires awe, there is another that inspires a collective cringe, as the audience realizes it is being trusted with nothing, and has been lead around by its nose by a director that is so determined to make sure we get his message that he is willing to abandon all subtlety in order to do so.
Consider: The central character in Spielberg's "Munich" is an Israeli wet-work specialist named Avner. Avner is hired, along with several other men, to enact bloody retribution against those responsible for plotting the execution of Israeli athletes at the Olympics in the early seventies. His wife is expecting a child. In one scene, we see him coordinating the murder of a Palestinian sympathizer who has a young daughter. We know he has a young daughter because she is paraded around for several minutes, exchanges significant looks with the Israeli assassins, acts cute as a button, and is serenaded by vibrant, melodramatic music. This would be bad enough in itself-- surely, the Palestinian who is to be assassinated, an articulate, even-tempered man who seems as far from a terrorist as can possibly be imagined, is sympathetic enough on his own. But no. Spielberg not only drags in the child, and uses her as a device to create suspense when it seems like she might be in the line of fire. Not only do we get a scene where Avner is waiting in the hospital for his wife to deliver her baby, as a counterpoint to the violence he has just perpetrated.
No, Spielberg is still not convinced that we get it. So, we get a scene in which the most reluctant member of the assassination squad (a man whom the Mossad, an organization that relies on men whom it knows to be dedicated to the preservation of Israel, never would have hired for the work in question to begin with) congratulates Avner on the birth of his child. This is followed by a close up of Avner's ashen face. Avner turns to walk out the door... and is stopped by his interrogator, who congratules Avner again-- for the successful assassination of the Palestinian man with the child, who, it seems, has officially died of his wounds. Another shot of Avner's conflicted visage. End of scene.
It's a testament to Spielberg's considerable talent that his film is able to survive such embarassing lapses in judgment, which occur often, but are counterbalanced by the sheer momentum of the film he has created. For the most part, "Munich" is a lean, brutal, fast-paced work of art. The film is impeccably organized and structured. We begin with a galvanizing recreation of the Palestinian attack on the Munich games. Then, we are briefly introduced to Avner, and his wife. Then, Avner is given his mission, and the rest of the film, more or less, follows a rigid structure that would become repetitive, were it not so well-handled by Spielberg.
That pattern is as follows: First, we are introduced to Avner's contact, the man who finds the targets for the Israeli assassins. Then, we are introduced to the targets, in brief vignettes that create sympathy for them. Then, we see the Israelis at work, plotting the assassination. Then, the assassination commences, briefly and brutally. Then, the team members face the aftermath of what they have done, debate the merit of what they have achieved, wonder about whether they can trust their contacts, and view news reports about the reprisals their own mission has spurred. Intercut throughout are flashbacks of the events at Munich, as more and more of the actual violence is revealed to us.
This happens over and over again. Did I believe what I saw? Was I convinced that it happened this way? Not really. As I mentioned earlier, Mossad, the Israeli spy network, has always been an organization that takes the loyalty of its members very, very seriously. It surely would never have hired men like Karl, the reluctant, very liberal member of the team, who incessantly questions whether it is RIGHT to kill any man at all (remember, this is supposed to be an assassin!) for such a mission. Similarly, Avner, the protagonist of the film, the leader of the Israeli team, is seen to undergo a crisis of conscience as a result of his labors. I was unsurprised to learn that the real Avner has never expressed such doubts-- the book on which "Munich" is based, and Avner's own comments (he's still alive) bear this out.
Further, Spielberg is so determined not to offend any Palestinian sympathizers that we never encounter any radical Islamists-- you know, the kind that blow up buses in Jerusalem, not because they wish to liberate Palestine, but because they believe that Jews are infidels who pray to the wrong god-- indeed, we never encounter any Palestinians at all who seem more extreme than, say, Mahmoud Abbas. Avner has an extended political debate with a young Palestinian who sounds like an International Relations major from Cal-Berkeley.
But I digress. The ideas behind the film take a backseat, for the most part, to the dynamic action on the screen at almost all times. Rarely has film violence been wielded so effectively. There is blood and gore, but it is brief and far from exploitive. The aftermath of a surprisingly large explosion, which leaves a body hanging from a ceiling lamp, and a confused young couple wandering around, naked, bleeding from their eyes, and seemingly waiting to be told what to do next, is incredibly well staged. But the film's best set piece is a massive Israeli operation in Beirut, in which something like eighty Palestinians are killed by machine gun fire, doors are kicked down, and it seems like forty people are on screen at any given time-- but we never once lose track of what's going on. Lest we forget, Spielberg reminds us that he knows how to direct action masterfully.
The spiraling sense of doom that accompanies the latter half of the film, in which it becomes evident that no one can be trusted, the team starts to fall apart, and the effectiveness of the mission becomes increasingly called into question, is something to be experienced as well. There is a subplot that is jump started by Avner's encounter with a lonely woman at a bar that has the logic of a nightmare-- not the "War of the Worlds" kind, but the kind Scorcese created in "After Hours." Spielberg has never strayed this far from the mainstream, and it's something to witness.
In the end, I believe "Munich" is worth seeing. It's not the message movie that many have made it into. It's a gripping work that exploits all of the resources of the cinema-- sometimes to its detriment, where emotional manipulation is concerned-- and even the more conservative members of the audience should appreciate it without feeling like Spielberg is spoon-feeding them liberal propoganda. I don't see "Munich" as a pro-Palestinian polemic-- I see it as an suspense film that wants to enthrall its audience above all things but doesn't want to be accused of neglecting political correctness. Accordingly, it makes concessions, to Palestinians, to the liberal supporter of their cause, and, yes, to the audience's intelligence.
There is much to admire here, but I can't help but wonder what might have been, if Spielberg let the Mossad be as uncomprising and rigid as they have proved themselves, over the years, to be, and done the same with a number of the Palestinians. The reason that peace between Israel and Palestine has proved untenable is because neither side has proven willing to compromise. On the basis of Munich, you'd draw the conclusion that a long-winded discussion would settle everything, as all parties seem mutually conflicted. History has proven that this is simply not the case.
Rated R: Though there is some sexuality and language, the film's violence is what stands out above all else. "Munich" contains a great deal of violence and an extraordinarily high body count, but Spielberg deserves a medal for the taste in which he handles it. It's gruesome and messy without drawing attention to itself, as I felt "Saving Private Ryan" did, and is thus more palatable than, say, the violence in "Reservoir Dogs" or "Casino." I don't think the average audience member will have a problem with what they see.
More Munich (Widescreen Edition) reviews: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Description of Munich (Widescreen Edition)Inspired by real events, Munich reveals the intense story of the secret Israeli squad assigned to track down and assassinate the 11 Palestinians believed to have planned the 1972 Munich massacre of 11 Israeli athletes - and the personal toll this mission of revenge takes on the team and the man who led it. Hailed as "tremendously exciting" (Peter Travers, Rolling Stone), Steven Spielberg's explosive suspense thriller garnered five Academy Award nominations, including Best Picture and Best Director. Starring: Eric Bana, Geoffrey Rush, Daniel Craig, Ciaran Hinds, Mathieu Kassovitz, Hanns Zischler, Ayelet Zurer, Michael Lonsdale Directed by: Steven Spielberg At its core, Munich is a straightforward thriller. Based on the book Vengeance: The True Story of an Israeli Counter-Terrorist Team by George Jonas, it?s built on a relatively stock movie premise, the revenge plot: innocent people are killed, the bad guys got away with it, and someone has to make them pay. But director Steven Spielberg uses that as a starting point to delve into complex ethical questions about the cyclic nature of revenge and the moral price of violence. The movie starts with a rush. The opening portrays the kidnapping and murder of Israeli athletes by PLO terrorists at the 1972 Olympics with scenes as heart-stopping and terrifying as the best of any horror movie. After the tragic incident is over and several of the terrorists have gone free, the Israeli government of Golda Meir recruits Avner (Eric Bana) to lead a team of paid-off-the-book agents to hunt down those responsible throughout Europe, and eliminate them one-by-one (in reality, there were several teams). It?s physically and emotionally messy work, and conflicts between Avner and his team?s handler, Ephraim (Geoffrey Rush), over information Avner doesn?t want to provide only make things harder. Soon the work starts to take its toll on Avner, and the deeper moral questions of right and wrong come into play, especially as it becomes clear that Avner is being hunted in return, and that his family?s safety may be in jeopardy. By all rights, Munich should be an unqualified success--it has gripping subject matter relevant to current events; it was co-written by one of America?s greatest living playwrights (Tony Kushner, Angels in America) and an accomplished screenwriter (Eric Roth); it stars an appealing and likeable actor in Eric Bana; and it was helmed by Steven Spielberg, of all people. While it certainly is a great movie, it falls just short of the immense heights such talent should propel it to. This is due more to some questionable plot devices than anything else (such as the contrived use of a family of French informants to locate the terrorists). But while certain aspects ring hollow, the movie as a whole is a profound accomplishment, despite being only "inspired by true events," and not factually based on them. From the ferocious beginning to the unforgettable closing shot, Munich works on a visceral level while making a poignant plea for peace, and issuing an unmistakable warning about the destructive cycle of terror and revenge. As one of the characters intones, "There is no peace at the end of this." --Daniel Vancini
|
 |