Yet another dumb block-buster from Spielberg.

Rating: Null/10 (5 January 2007)

Provides little new, but the special effects remain entertaining. Degenerates into B-movie nonsense towards the end. The scene with the black girl doing a bit of gymnastics to knock out a dinosaur is one of the stupidest scenes I've seen in years. The humour appears forced. Spielberg is repeating himself, just as he has been doing in many of his other films. Again, the special-effects people have done their part well, while Spielberg shows incompetence in making a movie around all these great special effects.
Spielberg's late 80s and 90s movies have alternated between profit-oriented cash-cows and "serious" dramas. Either he is making another commercial cash-monster, or he is attempting to make another (PC) drama that will win him Oscars. He finally succeeded with "Schindler's List", which touches on a sure-fire topic that he knew would get him truck-loads of Oscars. Hollywood is Jewish, and any movie, documentary, or short film - bad or good - that deals with Jews in WWII always gets an Oscar. I haven't seen "Schindler's List" and I am unlikely to ever see it; firstly, I generally boycott Spielberg's terrible dramas (which always seem to have the worst casts imaginable), and, secondly, I think that one gets a far better impression of what sort of a hell concentration camps must have been from the numerous hard-hitting and immensely depressing documentaries made on the subject. I've seen some of those documentaries and am absolutely convinced that Spielberg's overly-polished and superficial style can never even get close to that kind of realism.
I welcome any director's attempts to bring the holocaust to the attention of a historically-challenged and ignorant American public, but I doubt that Spielberg's motives were entirely noble. He made this film-project look like some kind of a personal crusade to remind the world of the suffering of Jews in WWII, but the crusade was more about winning recognition from Hollywood and its dumb Oscar-voters than anything else. Who really needed "Schindler's List" most? Spielberg. And to prove that his search for critical recognition takes over any other interests when making a movie one need only look at the two "serious" films he made after "Schindler's List": "Amistad" and "Saving Private Ryan". "Amistad" was supposed to be for American blacks what "Schindler's List" was for Jews, and hence garner him the same kind of Oscar recognition. However, this blatantly politically-correct film must have turned out to be so bad that even the ultra-PC Hollywood decided not to "honour" Spielberg for it. (I believe it "only" got one Oscar: what a disappointment for Spielberg.) And I mean it must be a really awful film; after all, even the terrible "Gandhi" wasn't awful enough to prevent it receiving tons of Oscars. "Saving Private Ryan", with its uniquely bad cast of actors who look as out of place in WWII as Sean Connery in an gay indie movie, is another very obvious and cynical attempt by Spielberg to get more Oscars: American men fighting for America's freedom, in a three-hour spectacle. This time Spielberg's true-and-tried tactic worked. How could Hollywood say no? His interviews, his behaviour, and the statements that he made, all clearly show that awards mean more to him than anything else on this planet. He is a recognition-seeker; a true megalomaniac who lacks the "modesty" to be known "only" as a popular director; he wants unanimous critical recognition, too, and will do anything to get it. He also seems to lack the intellect to realize that awards don't prove at all that your movie is better than the others. When he receives an award Spielberg glows with joy. Obviously, everyone is happy when they win an Oscar, Golden Globe, New York's Critics Award (etc.), but Spielberg puts truly ridiculous significance on it. To prove my point, this man was actually deeply disappointed(!) that he "lost" to "Shakespeare in Love" (another dumb movie, by the way). Nevermind that Spielberg won the Best Director Oscar - this wasn't enough for him. He wanted it ALL! The man is pathetic. The after-Oscar party of "DreamWorks" was reported to have been covered in a cloud of misery! The man is an idiot.
Politically speaking, what makes Spielberg even more easy to hate are his obvious and predictable leanings to the Left. This man - this Hollywood hypocrite - who claims to champion the Jewish cause supports Clinton. Clinton's Middle East policy is clearly anti-Israeli and pro-Palestinian. (And the less said about his bitch wife, the better.) Yet this dumb, self-absorbed Hollywood Jew supports this hillbilly Arkansas moron. Like most American Jews, Spielberg shows a very disappointing lack of support for his Jewish "brothers" in Israel. I can imagine how frustrated and even angry most Israelis must get when they just think of Hollywood Jews; only a few of the latter seem to truly understand Israel and even fewer show loyalty to it. (An example: Hillary openly supports and visits Arafat, whom she considers a friend(!), yet advance polls showed that most Jews would still vote for her if she ran for a New York senate seat!) Spielberg stands as a symbol for the worst kind of American Jew: a left-leaning Hollywood hypocrite, who plays the role of a do-gooder, but whose sole interests in life are power and money. And recognition. The question isn't whether he is a hypocrite/scumbag or just an ignorant moron. He is both. And his latest film, "Munich", proves more than ever that he is as anti-Israeli and anti-Semitic as Hamas. A little exaggeration, perhaps, but only a little one.