Politically it ticks all the right boxes. Dramatically it is somewhat wanting.

Rating: 7/10 (2 February 2006)

Attacked in equal measures by some as being anti-Israeli and apologetic towards Palestinian terrorists and others as Pro-state terrorism, Munich is actually quite balanced in it's views, and despite all the controversy and hoopla it has already caused actually has a rather simple message: Acts of terrorism, on any surface, never serve a worthy cause, and will only encourage more acts of terror. Spielberg does his best to lecture us on this, but unfortunately gets lost between a standard thriller and a political lecture.
The opening of the film plays out somewhat like an unnarrated documentary, interchanging between the reconstructed hostage situation of the 1972 Olympics and old news reel footage. This actually works, but also underlines the problems with the film. Are we supposed to view this unattached or should we look at how this effects the characters, rather than the world? Most of the film appears to play out with a scene of people sitting round a table talking, then things blow up. Sit around talking, then things blow up. And so on. And yes there are very impressive set pieces, some engaging moments - the flashbacks to the 1972 hostage situation are probably the most impressive. Unfortunately the film has made some sacrifices - notably dramatic weight. Spielberg is torn between doing a glorified documentary - a la Andrew Niccol's Lord Of War - or a political thriller. And as such we never truly feel for the film, in the same way as I felt when I saw Michael Mann's The Insider (1999). What impressed me the most about that film is an incredibly convoluted story about a subject that would never lead to widespread interest actually made for a darn good thriller.
The film is too long. It does take it's time in some of it's scenes, and I was reminded of other films half the length with the same message. Once it gets going however you will be impressed. The assassination scenes are all done very well, and much like war movies show how anything involving violence can go wrong and end up accidentally killing or injuring innocent civilians. However, what bogs these scenes down is when it then cuts to other scenes of people talking about the benevolence of their actions. Sometimes it makes for interesting listening - Avnar (Bana) is talking to a Palestinian terrorist about why they fight - but other times it just feels contrived. Do assassins REALLY debate like this? And if they don't, why doesn't it help the film?
The performances are all solid. Eric Bana is particularly well cast as our protagonist. Although it did take me half the film to work out what accent Daniel Craig was actually using.
The subject of Munich is especially relevant in the wake of 9/11. It is no coincidence that the final words of the film "Have you learnt anything?" are spoken with the World Trade Centre glaring in the backdrop. Undoubtedly this is one of Spielberg's bravest films and it certainly isn't a bad one. It is an important film that everyone should see. No doubt this'll probably end up with a caboodle of awards - and whilst it does end up as an overlong - especially in it's denouement - slightly trite piece of work, you will walk away glad that you saw it. It is undoubtedly flawed, but still effecting and thought provoking.