| |
|
Saw this yesterday, just had a spirited dinnertime conversation about it with my parents.
Overall I was impressed, and enjoyed it, though by many yardsticks it's a horribly bleak and depressing film. The tension in the movie is palpable at times, especially in the buildup to each assassination, and damned if I wasn't feeling paranoid right there with Avner as he began to fear for his and his family's safety. There were a few instances where the illusion broke (the mixup with the safehouse was never explained or addressed, for instance) but nothing ruinous, and in the larger context of the film, all pretty minor.
As many reviews have pointed out, Spielberg basically doesn't take sides, though he has been criticized for focusing too much on counterterrorism, and for likening Avner's team to terrorists. I'm not sure this is a weakness; in many ways the film seems amoral, not passing judgement but rather depicting events.
Most especially, Spielberg doesn't seem to condemn- demonize or dehumanize might be a better word- any of the actual people involved, even the original Munich hostage takers. Their actions are terrible, and I think it's clear that the film condemns those actions; but I got the distinct sense that the Black September agents in the flashbacks were basically a group of frightened, desperate boys and young men. This idea- condemn the actions, not the people- is reinforced most obviously by the scenes in the safehouse which Avner and his team have been tricked into occupying with a group of PLO agents- Avner's conversation with the Palestinian in the staircase especially, but also in the more general sense of camaraderie the two groups share, such as the dude from Layer Cake bonding with a PLO agent over jazz music. They are both groups of men who are in strange places, surrounded by enemies, constantly in danger, and doing things which any sane world should never force them to do.
I think that's a lot of Spielberg's point: the actions of the kidnappers, and of Avner and his team, are made even worse not only because they are locked into an endless cycle, but because the men carrying them out would otherwise be so ordinary. Which is not a particularly original point (see every Vietnam War movie ever made not starring Chuck Norris or Sylvester Stallone), but reframing it in this context is, I think, valuable.
It's worth noting here that the movie is based on a highly dubious version of events; its tag is 'inspired by true events,' Hollywood-speak for 'we made a lot of stuff up.' I'm interested in how exactly the version of events linked above was discredited, since it seems like Israel might still have a vested interest in pretending things didn't happen the way they are portrayed in the film. Israeli officials have criticized the film, especially the agents' feelings of remorse, but Spielberg vouches for the legitimacy of his source.
Also worth noting that all the performances are excellent, Eric Bana's especially (though the slo-mo shot of him with sweat flying off his face was a little 'ummmm...'). I was mildly bothered by Geoffrey Rush's character because he looks and sounds like James Woods, and I couldn't place the actor.
That's enough for now. Anybody else seen it? Thoughts? |
|
|
