|
Munich,
based on the book Vengence by George
Jonas, is a new kind of film for Steven
Spielberg - one much more graphic and ambitious
than anything he has ever done before. While
we are used to getting straightforward stories
from him with a clear perspective of who
is good and who is evil, this film seems
to blur the two together and lets the audience
decide which side to take, if any.
This
film starts out with a very violent depiction
of the Palestinian terrorists kidnapping
and murdering the Israeli athletes at
the 1972 Munich Olympics. But the majority
of the film focuses on the five Israeli
assassins who were assigned to hunt down
and kill the members of "Black September,"
the group responsible for the murders.
The
people assigned
to this mission are picked by Israeli
Prime Minister Golda Meir (Lynn Cohen)
and her cabinet members. All of them must
be paid under the table, and any record
of their existence has to be erased. Avner
(Eric Bana), who was Meir's former bodyguard,
is assigned leadership of this group.
What is odd
is that while everyone in the group has
skills that are helpful for the mission
(one of them can forge documents, another
can build bombs, another is talented at
removing evidence, and the last knows
a lot about cars), ultimately none of
them really fit the normal assassin profile.
Avner, for example, is a family man at
the time of this assignment, who wants
to be with his pregnant wife more than
anything else. Sure, he was a bodyguard,
but not a murderer. The rest of the group
consists of either old farts, or individuals
with somewhat timid personalities that
assassins cannot afford to have. The purpose
for selecting this peculiar group of men
is because they are not recognizable as
assassins, and yet possess skills that
are vital for getting the job done. Seeing
how this strange group of people goes
about this mission is one of the most
interesting elements the film has to offer.
It is not your usual action film with
action stars. It is average people taking
on a task that normally would be beyond
what they could handle.
The
other interesting element is what was
briefly addressed in the first paragraph.
Being Jewish himself, Spielberg is obviously
not on the side of Black September (nor
would any other decent person be). But
he directs the film in such a way where
the Israeli assassins assigned to kill
them are depicted as being just as violent
and brutal as the terrorists, which is
not what one would expect from a Jewish
director. What is more is that Palestinians
in the film offer various reasons for
the terrorism that almost seem valid.
Who is in the right? That is just one
of the questions Spielberg raises in this
film, which is an interesting one, but
one that makes it difficult to pick someone
to root for.
But the
biggest question comes out in the open
at the end of the movie. After shooting
Black September members in cold blood,
or blowing them up, Avner points out to
his mission handler, Ephraim (Geoffrey
Rush), that even though they assassinated
most of the terrorists, they got replaced
by other terrorists. Why even bother,
when the violence just continues without
end on both sides, appearing as though
nothing gets accomplished? But, as Ephraim
points out, "Why cut my fingernails?
They'll just grow back." Both sides
have excellent points, and Spielberg leaves
it up to the viewer to make up one’s
own mind about what one thinks about the
whole thing. But not before he ends the
film with a shot of New York City in the
distance with the World Trade Center twin
towers in view. The film reminds us that
while it may be right to hunt down the
terrorists, ultimately terrorism will
always exist and persist, and the violence
will continue no matter what.
Keep in
mind that this film falls under the "shock
and awe" category. The film is very
graphic, both in violence and sexuality.
One scene consists of a woman who gets
murdered in the nude, with blood gushing
out of her body and running all over.
Another shows someone putting a bullet
through someone's face, and it does not
hold back in showing us everything. This
type of violence happens throughout the
entire film. Sure,
it is not as violent as Saving Private
Ryan, or as violating as Schindler's
List. But the audience may be more
disturbed by this film, not just because
of the violence, but also because much
of the violence is committed by the "good
guys."
It is a hard film to watch, and in some
places it may have gone too far. For me,
I do not think this is the type of movie
that I could watch again. I do not regret
seeing this film, as it realistically
emphasizes the price paid for doing what
many consider to be the right thing, and
delivers in the area of great film-making.
But while realism may have been its intent,
I felt quite depressed and disturbed after
watching it, and it is a kind of feeling
that makes a repeat viewing of this film
seem unbearable. In the end, while I think
the film is well-made, I cannot say that
I actually "enjoyed" it.

|