The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Spielberg's 'Munich' - everything but the truth > Comments

Spielberg's 'Munich' - everything but the truth : Comments

By Ted Lapkin, published 16/2/2006

Steven Spielberg's new film 'Munich' jumbles truth to obscure the realities of terrorism.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. All
I've wondered why Spielberg decided to do a picture on 'Munich' at this point in time. The actual movie as pointed out by the writer was designed as a testosterone appeaser but factually was a little more like Mission Impossible or James Bond than anything the mossad might put together.

The Entebbe raid for example would have made a far better movie- aside from the fact that the IDF sayeret involved pulled off one of the greatest special forces operations ever, it was also a raid in which Yonni Netanyahu, Benjamin's brother was killed and former prime minister Ehud Barak was involved. In addition it was in Uganda! Surely all these factors would have made for an action packed political statement of far more varacity than 'Munich'.

I think Spielberg has deliberately tried to market a film as a documentary-he's intersted in making money with the 'based on true events line' more than making a political statement. With all due respects to the author of the article-lighten up.
Posted by wre, Thursday, 16 February 2006 11:32:08 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I have watched the fil, and i thought it was brilliant.

"""There was ... never a single hit team designed to handle them."""

Had the author of the article CONCENTRATED on the film, he would have noticed that in the last scenes the Head Israeli states that there were INDEED other teams in the field!!

"""The dominant theme that pervades is that all forms of violence are morally equivalent. It preaches that those who fight against armed terrorists are the same as those who murder defenceless civilians."""

The film DOES NOT do this!! The film has 'flashbacks' to the terrorists murdering the Israelis - and the assasinations ARE NOT expressed as "morally equivalent" - it is Eric's character who is traumatised by what he knows happened at munich and he also is stressed about his family's safety - he losses it pretty mush and wonders whatitrs all about and IF THE ASSASINATIONS WILL SOLVE THE PROBLEM AS MORE RADICAL EXTREMISTS ARE COMING UP THE RANKS TO FILL THE POSITIONS IN THE TERRORIST ORGANISATION - the film DOES NOT critisize Isreal, but attacks the Us CIA for funding the terrorists in exchange for them not targeting US officials.

As a "non-jew" and a christian, i did not feel the film was attcking Isreal and saying that the assasinations of terrorists are as bad as the terrorist murders of Isralis.

I think you as a Jew are OVER-SENSITIVE to the possibility that some leftise is attcking Isreal and saying that it is "morally equivilent". - the film was pro-Isreal, and i think it was brilliant.
Posted by Thor, Thursday, 16 February 2006 1:33:14 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I would completely agree with the article, but I don't know why the writer is bothering to complain. From "Mutiny on the Bounty" in 1935, and "Braveheart" in 1995, the movie industry in thousands of cases has never let the facts get in the way of a good movie. This applies to the industry all around the world, not just Hollywood. My personal opinion is that movies are primarily made to make money, and secondarily to make some political point desired by the director. With the current catastrophic level of general history education, the level of knowledge by the general public of the history of the last few hundred years must be quite bizarre.
Posted by plerdsus, Thursday, 16 February 2006 3:32:47 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Its a film. It tells a story. Some people might not like the story, or think some things were ommitted or think some things were incorrect. So what, if you don't like the story do your own film.
Posted by rossco, Thursday, 16 February 2006 5:04:10 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Mr Lapkin has a tendency to go into attack mode if anyone critizes Israel in any way,your being anti-semitic
Posted by j5o6hn, Thursday, 16 February 2006 10:37:02 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yes Mr. Lapkin, as you quite rightly point out,

"By aggressively attacking the Palestinian terrorist command and control structure and through the construction of its defensive barrier along the West Bank, the Israelis have cut armed incursions to a mere trickle. While Israel suffered 37 suicide attacks in 2002, this past year only three bombers successfully made it to their civilian targets".

Unfortunately what you fail to mention is that because of that same wall and those same agressive policies, you now have 87 bombers who just got elected and control the government!
Posted by Taiwan Teacher, Thursday, 16 February 2006 11:02:51 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy