Spielberg wrestles with moral ambiguity

Rating: 8/10 (27 January 2006)

The Olympic village, Munich, 1972. Eleven Israeli athletes are taken hostage and murdered by a group of Palestinian terrorists known as the Black September group. The Mossad strikes back by launching a team of Israelis led by Avner (Eric Bana) to hunt down and kill those responsible...
Before anyone starts asking if Steven Spielberg's Munich really is better than his "crowning achievement", Schindler's List, I think I'd better get to the far more important question - is the film a valuable artistic experience? To that, my answer is an emphatic "Yes".
From the moment you are transported back to Munich, you are "in the moment". That, to me, has always been the key to Spielberg's success. When his methods succeed, you are genuinely immersed in the experience. He can even handle sentimentality better than any other director. Unfortunately, when it goes wrong for him, it really turns nauseating; consider, if you like, the endings of A.I. and War Of The Worlds as examples.
Consistency isn't one of Steve's greatest strengths either. How many times have you seen him try to force an over-emotional moment into a dark film, even if it does work? (Key example: Schindler's List.) However, there are times when he manages to reign in the emotion successfully, resulting in more consistent works like the underrated Empire Of The Sun and Catch Me If You Can. Munich is worthy of inclusion on that list of works.
Yes, there is sentiment and "shocking moments" (which he is especially good at) but he carefully sprinkles them throughout, never letting them get in the way of the story. Rather, they assist the story brilliantly. In fact, remove them and the all-too-recognisable (if admittedly superb) camera-work of Janusz Kaminski and you'd find it hard to tell that Munich was a Spielberg film. It is a remarkably controlled, brilliantly staged and very well acted work. Of course, it helps that he has (once again) chosen a talented multi-national cast  Eric Bana, Mathieu Kassovitz, Ciaran Hinds and future 007 Daniel Craig all stand out. Bana especially; there is nothing remotely exaggerated or forced about his performance.
Perhaps most striking of all is Munich's moral ambiguity. Spielberg has been constantly under attack over the years for his "black and white" view of the world. (The way he treats the Nazis in his films, with the possible exception of Amon Goeth, is concrete evidence of this.) Avner doubts the rationality of the revenge mission early on and the rest of his team soon follow suit  unfortunately, some of them don't find out what is really going on until it's too late. The tables are eventually turned on Avner and the group. Once hunters, they become the hunted. They realise what it is like to be the "enemy" and wonder why they weren't more opposed to the movement he joined in the first place. A Spielberg detractor once said that the director could never make a film that showed that "potentially, we are (the bad guys)"...well, he may not quite have made it, but with Munich, he's come as close as you ever can expect him to. The scenes that show the dying "targets" are deeply affecting.
The only serious problem with the film is the length. For all of its strengths, it just isn't taut enough for me to regard it as a masterpiece. That, my friends, is what prevents it from reaching the heights of Schindler's List. But that is irrelevant. Since when was Munich about topping the earlier film anyway? With Munich, Steven Spielberg has given us a thought-provoking history lesson that may, eventually, have more valuable historical impact than any of his previous serious films.