logo

There are good movies which simply prompt you to say “wow”, compel you to rate them with a 4/5 or 5/5. And then there are movies about which you want to say a lot of things. Particularly when you watch a movie knowing that it is made by a master and when you are still made to gasp in awe, you want to say a lot more about such a movie. Munich is one such movie and I am bursting with an typographical orgasm as I write these lines. To avoid this post from getting into a gibberish of sphagetti thought threads that spawned out of awe of having watched this movie, I would like to settle myself down and put bullet points of my thoughts on the movie, for once this makes me feel so small a person to write a “Review” of this movie. I really appreciate the guts people had to review this movie. The overall tomatometer rating of 76% is so underwhelming for a Spielberg movie. But thats why I find it amazing, for the director has made a movie so sincere in its aspirations, so honest in its collective thought, so non-judgemental in looking at its subject, with the best of the crafts in action, overall a perfect vehicle of thoughts and emotions on a subject that could be the trickiest to handle coming from a Jewish director who has achieved mainstream fame.

I would like to point out a few things that struck me as I was watching the movie. Again, this is not a review, justappreciative thoughts that might be of use to those who want to watch this movie enjoy it better.

1. Spielbergs style has been totally cut off - looked to me as if Sam Mendes ghost directed this movie. In terms of style, scene movement, characters movement everything reminded me of “The road to Perdition”, which strangely is also about vengeance and is again a Speilgerg production. The connection also extends to the casting with two strong characters from Road to Perdition are repeated here with Ciaran hinds playing Carl, a person in the squad who plans and verifies whether the hit is clean and ofcourse our latest Bond who played the baddie Connor Roonie in Road to Perdition. What I was made aware of was the fact that a great director stays great because he doesn’t sit on a chair doing same things over and over. He stays great because in addition to the material that he chooses to film, the craft and style also has to vary and he has probably taken Sam Mendes style and adapted to uniquely fit the subject of Munich massacre and thereafter. If I had 100 hats I would off them in salute to Spielberg.

2. In 80’s and 90’s we had revenge stories falling from sky like cats and dogs in every language and with all possible combination of actors and directors. Not to say that hollywood didn’t do such movies. They too had Arnolds and Charles bronsons handling guns to draw the mandatory litre of blood for blood. Revenge flicks are making re rentry now with Kill Bill and Road to Perdition. To classify Munich as a revenge flick might be a wrong thing to do, however there is also a substantial focus given to revenge and vengeance in this movie, in fact the terminology used by the Israeli state to motivate the assassination squads to flout international laws and settle scores with PLO and the Black September is “Righteous Anger”. It is this righteous anger that is used by the Israeli authorities to motivate their brand of terrorists unleashed on the targets that they believe plotted the Munich massacre. Such state sponsored revenge squads are motivated by the detailed account of the gory deaths of the Israeli athletes in Munich. So it is very essential to capture the gory event in full detail and Spielberg does that in a National Geographic like fashion, combining the dramatized event with that of recorded news footage for maximum impact. The whole event is recollected in a sequestered fashion as flashbacks and images indoctrinated and embedded in the minds of the squad members so much so that it is something that pervades their mind even when they are having sex (not making love) This sequence reminded me of HeyRam where Saket is reminded of his goal to assassinate Gandhi in revenge, with the only difference being the absence of CG images that are substituted by another sequestered image of the munich tragedy. Coming back to our revenge movies, there would always be a flashback scene shown in negative where the angry hero looks back at the events detailing how the mother was murdered or something like that. Classic example is “Parinda” where Anil Kapoor remembers his friends killing and flock of pigeons before he extracts his revenge person by person, piece by piece. Here the images of munich tragedy is detailed as a substitute. I thought it was a cool way of completing the impact of the whole tragedy on screen.

3. The main character - Avner played by Eric Bana is the witness and participant in this movie and we are shown how a Mossad agent expecting the arrival of his baby is pushed into a whirlpool citing munich massacre as the reason and who later degenerates into an assassin who wants to simply do away with his duties to his country, a task that was so inspiring and proud to be part of, slowly becoming something he despises later on, his mother’s brainwashing notwithstanding. I find this take to be totally radical coming from Spielberg who had created a heartwrenching saga of Jews’ plights in holocaust in Schindler’s List. It could be even taken as a pointed criticism at Israel for denying the kindness and justice to the Palestinians, something that the whole world fought with Germans in WW2 to ensure that Jews get it in the first place. However Spielberg puts this across masked in a casual conversation between Avner and the leader of a Palestinian group of assassins who draw their motivation from denial of land rights, plight of palestinians in refugee camps and constant bombing in Lebanon and Syria by Israel. Avner’s silence when faced with the same “righteous anger” could be interpreted as the makers’ own disenchantment with the way Israel has shaped up its policies with regards to palestinians post the 1967 conflict with Arab nations. In a way I felt that along with Edward Zwick’s “The Siege” this movie could become a collectors edition piece on the subject of terrorism and state response.

4. Thriller aspect of the movie is also quite satisfying with good explosion effects and gun fights. Daniel Craig as the guy waiting for action with “gun” catches the eye easily and makes his “Bond” presence felt here too.

5. Overall this is one Spielberg movie with a stalk difference and a movie in which all the crafts have been put to their best use. Another notable departure from earlier Spielberg movies is the absence of a grand score by John Williams. Here the music is understated and silence - cleverly inserted accentuate the gloomy mood of the film.

6. The overall mental defragmentation of the protagonist Avner is gradually shown in the screen with Eric Bana replacing the piercing looks in his eyes with aimless stares that clearly reveal the tortuous images of tragedy and fear continuously playing in the retinal screen. And that is the movies biggest success, in bringing out the conflict that tears apart the character from within. This is in total contrast with what happens to Lester Burham in American Beauty, a depressed soul slowly discovering himself back again and who dies a happy man. Again something that reminded me of Sam Mendes’ take on character progression in the movie.

7. Classic final sequence that freezes frame with the twin towers in the background and a cloudy day. Ironical as Avner relocated his family to Brooklyn as he thought it was safe from terrorists who are looking for revenge.

This is again a movie we can go to bed with and think about again and again only to discover new things with every viewing and every recollection - a hall mark of a classic - according to me.

2 readers recommend this post  Loading ...	Email This Post To Friends
Related Posts Lady Vengeance : Chan-woo Park’s best Random rambling