I just realized that though I watched Munich back in January, I still haven't figured out what the movie was about.

Some people said it was just to show how its done (which it is)

Some people said that it showed how bad Israel is.

Others said how "an eye for an eye leaves everyone dead."

I really didn't see an overall point Spielberg was making. I felt like it was simply a really really really accurate and well done portrayal of how the Isarelis go about killing the terrorists. That the Israelis do the same to the terrorists as the terrorists do to the Israelis.

But, some said that it was morally wrong what he showed.

Granted this is old news.....

The film traces the corrosive effect of revenge by paralleling the central character and his decline against a backdrop of societal violence. Krauthammer gets it... and hates the idea.

kind of reminded me of an old 70's spy thriller in the vein of Day of the Jackal. Spielberg adds his spin (or the script writers do) by showing what happens in Munich at the very end of the movie after the revenge, but still enjoyable. It shows that sometimes revenge is more than just that and is instead used as a tool to send the message that we won't sit still, we won't tolerate your terrorism.

__________________
All you need to know about the energy crisis:
ANWR Exploration Republicans: 91% Supported. Democrats: 86% Opposed.
Coal-to-liquid R's: 90% YES. D's: 78% NO.
Oil Shale Exploration R's: 90% YES. D's: 86% NO.
Outer Continental Shelf Exploration R's: 81% YES. D's: 83% NO.
Increased Refinery Capacity R's: 97% YES. D's: 96% NO

SUMMARY: 91% of House Republicans have historically voted to increase the production of America’s own oil and gas. 86% of House Democrats have historically voted against.

It's just too bad that Hollywood doesn't seem to see the "corrosive effect of revenge" when it comes to al Qaeda, terrorists, or Palestinian homicide bombers. INSTEAD....in all these movies, they seek to portray these people as "sympathetic" characters who deserve our understanding. Syriana is all about the big, bad, corrupt CIA; the big, bad U.S. oil companies; the big, bad fat Texas oil men, and the horrible U.S policy that causes these terrorists to do what they do. You know........just the exact same kind of thing we hear on this political board daily from the left....and the exact thing we here from MOST Democrats and liberals.

That's why I will NOT support these movies.

__________________
"This is a time for a national imperative not to fail in Iraq." Condoleeza Rice, January 11, 2007

convinced me that the reviews were complete politics because that was the one of the most dry and boring movies in the history of American cinema. I will guess that in Boston, yes liberal Boston, about 1/3 of the people walked out of the movie. This brought to you by the entity that nominated Paradise Now, a movie that glorifies suicide bombers, for an Academy Award. They also gave an award to a song about how hard it is to be a pimp.

__________________
All you need to know about the energy crisis:
ANWR Exploration Republicans: 91% Supported. Democrats: 86% Opposed.
Coal-to-liquid R's: 90% YES. D's: 78% NO.
Oil Shale Exploration R's: 90% YES. D's: 86% NO.
Outer Continental Shelf Exploration R's: 81% YES. D's: 83% NO.
Increased Refinery Capacity R's: 97% YES. D's: 96% NO

SUMMARY: 91% of House Republicans have historically voted to increase the production of America’s own oil and gas. 86% of House Democrats have historically voted against.

I think you're paranoid, JP5. Its just a movie.

Concerning Paradise Now. WHat do you mean by glorifying suicide bombers. In the movie, at the end, they do realize that they're wrong and don't go ahead with it.

Just a movie....yes. But several of these movies are "message" movies. I don't care about being sympathetic to a suicide bomber. I don't care to know their reasons for revenge. Because if it's not one thing....it'll be something else. And strapping on bombs and going to blow up innocent citizens who are shopping, at a restaurant, or at a mall....is flat wrong no matter what their reasons. I also think in this time of world-wide terrorism, sending out a message that the CIA and the U.S. are the evil ones, is a dangerous thing to be doing.



That wasn't me. I said nothing about that one.

__________________
"This is a time for a national imperative not to fail in Iraq." Condoleeza Rice, January 11, 2007

I don't really think any of these movies are pro-terrorism or anti us fighting terrorism. Even Syriana, thats just another in a long line of crazy outlandish American political thrillers.

To be quite honest, if there ever is a movie that talks about how great terrorism is, if its a really good movie then I'll still go see it.

I mean, Triumph of the Will's subject matter was terrible, but it still remains one of the greatest films ever.

As I wrote earlier, I don't watch modern films, and Munich is no exception. From what I've read on the Internet, though, this film is factually inaccurate and strongly anti-Israel. However, the strongest attacks on the film resorted to some very immature remarks about Spielberg and Tony Kushner, so I'll stop short of believing the very worst reviews.

__________________
"I am a Tory Anarchist. I should like every one to go about doing just as he pleased- short of altering any of the things to which I have grown accustomed." (Max Beerbohm)

While I can't comprehend why you wouldnt want to watch modern films, I can tell you Munich wasnt anti-Israeli. Though, it was innacurate as to what happened, it was accurate in the sense of that's how the Israelis go about killing terrorists.