Directed by:
Steven SpielbergCinematography:
Janusz KaminskiComposer:
John WilliamsCast:
Eric Bana, Daniel Craig, Ciarán Hinds, Mathieu Kassovitz, Hanns Zischler, Ayelet Zurer, Geoffrey Rush, Gila Almagor, Michael Lonsdale, Mathieu Amalric (more)VOD (3)
Plots(1)
A mission to assassinate the planners of a devastating terror attack at the 1972 Olympics leads a Mossad agent into a harrowing ethical no-man's-land. (Netflix)
Videos (1)
Reviews (11)
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.
()
On the advice of a mysterious French family organization, Mossad assassins head to London in search of their target, the leader of the Palestinian Black September movement. There, however, the assassination is thwarted by undercover CIA agents guarding the leader in exchange for not attacking American diplomats. Later that evening, one of the assassins is killed by a Dutch assassin, apparently hired by the Palestine Liberation Front. God, I love the '70s! I find Munich (like Saving Private Ryan or Schindler's List) the perfect motif on which to pair Spielberg's choreography with Kaminski's experimentation. The numerous scenes and their detailed composition here create a view of a Europe riddled with agents meeting in restaurants, markets, and bars, where everyone has a purpose and takes a side. Even with this simplification and aesthetic stylization, Munich is a first-rate spy genre film (the spy team is like something out of a game) where almost every sequence is carefully crafted and has its own visual attributes. The risk of sentimental idiocy is condensed here to just one scene in which a sweaty Eric Bana has sex with a terrorist (I would have been so uncomfortable in the cinema), the rest is still Spielberg full of energy and ideas. Given the way the film looks and tells the story, it still more than anything creates the illusion that the world was the most interesting when it was the most dangerous.
()
In the case of Munich, a comparison with the recently made film The Baader Meinhof Complex is possible and even desirable. While the German film is a precise analysis of a terrorist organization and manages to fit its inception, era of greatest success, and defeat into one feature-length film in a very complex way, prioritizing the analytical perspective over the entertaining aspect, Spielberg used a well-known terrorist act as a starting point for a drama that aims to entertain the audience and take certain ethical stances. It is definitely not a credible film in terms of historical accuracy, mainly because there are no verifiable documents - secret services and terrorist organizations usually do not reveal the details of their operations to the public. The Mossad agent, who served as the inspiration for the main protagonist, also noted that the character of the actor portraying him differed significantly from his thoughts and actions, so the film is certainly not a credible account of the events. Spielberg's approach is certainly pleasing to audiences, but from my point of view, the actions of the Israeli commando are burdened by unprofessionalism and in many details, they are not trustworthy. The screenwriter drew too much inspiration from spy pop culture thrillers like Ronin; for example, it is difficult for me to imagine that the top-secret Mossad, considered along with the East German Stasi as the absolute pinnacle of secret services in the second half of the 20th century, would depend on collaboration with an unknown private organization with uncertain goals and unpredictable behavior. From an acting perspective, this is a high-quality project. The screenplay and direction are traditionally at a high level, as is customary for Spielberg. The unexpected encounter of members of the commando with a group of OOP fighters, with a series of polished dialogues and the scene of their rivalry over a radio receiver, is undoubtedly pleasing to the audience and dramatically refined. Likewise, the portrayal of individual terrorist attacks, executions, and conflicts will satisfy both traditional genre fans and viewers who are looking for more than a one-dimensional action spectacle. Overall impression: 85%.
()
"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.
()
Steven Spielberg, as a Jew, decided not to film the events that led to the killing of Israeli athletes, but rather the events that followed. Essentially, it is a Jewish revenge on people who had something to do with the terrorist action. And maybe even on people who could have been terrorists. It's a bit strange how the abduction of athletes is portrayed here because at first it seems very vivid, very interesting, but Spielberg cuts it off and presents only mechanical television news that can be viewed in archives or on the internet. Nothing revolutionary, he immediately moves on to what followed. I was a bit disappointed that he dedicated so little space to the assassination because he could have filmed it brilliantly, at least the opening scene hinted at it. But Spielberg chose the path of recording revenge, which is not a bad approach, an effort to express the motivations of the other side, their methods of work, etc. Overall, it was successful, but I still feel like the film is not as raw as it could be, but rather completely stylized, trying to play on emotions, which is due to the event itself, not Spielberg's skill. He tries to push it to the limit, giving the lives of Jews and their suffering. It's not bad, the film is well directed, but the main surprise of the whole film is the fact that Eric Bana can also act. More: http://www.filmovy-denik.cz/2012/10/prach-uspesna-pokracovani-animaku.html
()
Gallery (32)
Photo © Universal Pictures
![Munich - Lobby Cards](http://image.pmgstatic.com/cache/resized/w663/files/images/film/photos/159/356/159356240_478530.jpg)
Ads