Content area
Full Text
ABSTRACT: The title of this paper includes "A Film for Our Time" because terrorism or the fear of it is now an accepted fact of our lives, and we all have constant reminders of this threat and danger. For example, almost all who travel by air have to go through lengthy and tedious checks at the airports. Security checks have become a ubiquitous feature of our existence; hence Spielberg has tapped into our existential realities.
As Munich opens, Arab terrorists are shown to stealthily attack and capture as hostages obviously innocent Israeli athletes, while they are sleeping, and soon thereafter murder them. The film portrays this act as a harrowing one, gruesome and horrific in the barbaric way it is carried out. The story takes place during the 1972 Olympics, an international athletic event devoted to fostering peace among nations. The attack is sadistic and poignantly overwhelming. It is a carefully planned terrorist act, which leads to the murder of eleven Israeli athletes. Spielberg draws the audience into the central dilemma of this film: how do you respond to such a deed?
To begin, this paper looks at the controversy-the pros and cons of Munich. It then touches upon Spielberg as a cinematographer. Finally, it examines the psychohistorical aspects of the film.
Munich is a controversial film. Some critics have argued that Spielberg provides an unfair and inaccurate portrayal of the events at Munich and its aftermath, and are condemning of the retaliation by the Israelis, whereas others argue that the film is balanced. They contend that even the Israelis, and certainly the hero of the film, a Mossad operative by the name Avner Kaufman, eventually are wracked with doubt about their mission. He and some other Israelis are shown to have a conscience and to be humane, as they question the morality of the task of retaliating by assassinating the perpetrators.
Munich does have, at times, a moral ambiguity, and invites subjective responses. This film is extremely complex, and in the confrontation between the various protagonists, a variety of opinions are expressed-including some by extremely radical European groups. In the advertisement of the film, in The New York Times of January 8, 2006,1 numerous film critics are quoted praising the film with...