A disingenuous film made 30 years too late

Rating: 4/10 (28 January 2008)

MUNICH is a film that was made and released 30 years too late. Back in the 1970s, gritty spy/police dramas were all the rage. Films like THE FRENCH CONNECTION, 3 DAYS OF THE CONDOR, THE YAKUZA or "Black Sunday" were popular, with moviegoers and critics. Those film were just like standard spy or police dramas of previous decades but reflected the times they were made which is really what them memorable: they were very violent, realistic and the no-nonsense use of foul language. Films became realistic in the 1970s because of shocking real life events like the Vietnam war or tragedies like what happened in Munich, or the Speck or Manson massacres. Movies had no choice but to become more violent and gritty in order to compete/reflect the then mores . Spy/police thrillers are still being made today but the style is completely different than from those in the '70s: they're not very realistic and are more flashy.
Now here comes MUNICH, directed by none other than Steven Spielberg, who, in the 1970s, was busy doing harmless blockbusters like JAWS, CLOSE ENCOUNTERS or 1941. As you know, the state of movie-making and movie-going forever changed when JAWS or STAR WARS, made by Spielberg buddy, George Lucas, became massive hits. People weren't looking for gritty violent dramas anymore but wanted escape from the cruel world out there. Fast forward 3 decades and practically every movie today is escapist in nature. Realism is far gone from movie screens. And we have Spielberg and Lucas to thank for that. Which is why I find MUNICH so bizarre and ironic. The film is well made (though typically over-directed) but it feels completely out of place in our current state of cinema. MUNICH would have made more sense if it had been made and released in the '70s not now. The whole project is a contradiction in itself. The gritty movies of the '70s became virtually extinct because of Spielberg's "sense of wonder" style of film-making, which has now become the norm, and yet 30 years later, Spielberg (who's clearly channeling John Frankenheimer or William Friedkin here) dabbles in the same type of film he helped eliminate? There's something truly disingenuous about all of it. Spielberg is either completely out of touch or this is a genuine heartfelt mea culpa of sorts.
MUNICH is not really a story or even a movie but a slavish recreation of what Spielberg thinks the 1970s were. Every shot (excellent cinematography btw) wants us to notice every little detail about the production values or about the story. For example, sex scenes. Sex scenes or nudity in movies from the 1970s were pretty common. Today, they are mostly gone because most films are rated PG-13 (nevermind those unrated version made available on DVD). So seeing those sex scenes or even the nudity in MUNICH was surprising, mainly because of what I just wrote but also because I don't think Spielberg has ever included nudity or sex scenes in ANY of his previous films. So why now? To buck the PG-13 trend he directly created? Is Spielberg finally admitting that he helped to create a stiffling monster that's taken over creativity in Hollywood? I doubt it. Just look at all the numerous cutesy projects he has line up on his IMDb profile.
Suffice it to say, aside from a few standout scenes and Daniel Craig actually giving a good performance, MUNICH should be viewed as an Oscar-bait oddity.