Munich

6

TyranianOct 21, 2019

Has some great scenes and is well-acted but parts of the story don't really come together.

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

amheretojudgeApr 24, 2018

who can say when it falls..

Munich Another one of Speilberg's factual feature where the audience feels like encountering series of news and information delivered to them for more than 160 minutes with few high pitched dramatic and actionwho can say when it falls..

Munich

Another one of Speilberg's factual feature where the audience feels like encountering series of news and information delivered to them for more than 160 minutes with few high pitched dramatic and action sequences installed to hold the audience in this overlong journey. Steven Speilberg delivers without a doubt some good drama and dinner table conversations that speaks a lot about the character's bonding than the journey itself does. Eric Bana is convincingly good (especially the first time when he talks to his daughter on phone) and is supported with a great cast like Daniel Craig and Ciaran Hinds. Munich is an essential one but certainly isn't an entertaining one for the timeline and the subjective part of it overpowers the drama and the characters involved in it.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

akshatmahajanOct 18, 2020

Munich was a wasted opportunity. The plot was great but the way of execution was not great. The pacing was a big problem, there were so many unnecessary scenes. Acting was good, loved them all. The script was good, adaptation was also good.Munich was a wasted opportunity. The plot was great but the way of execution was not great. The pacing was a big problem, there were so many unnecessary scenes. Acting was good, loved them all. The script was good, adaptation was also good. The only problem I think was with movie was it's running time and the pace. Overall, it's different experience and you should give it a try. But I shall tell you that you may not want to watch it more than once.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

G.SaundersMay 30, 2006

Pedantic. A modest 90 minute tale crammed in to 160 minutes.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

RichardM.Feb 16, 2006

Spielberg attempts to convey the futility of tit-for-tat killing by sujecting his audience to a mind-numbing and unemotional two and a half hours of graphic and gory tit-for-tat killing. Superbly filmed (as always with Spielberg) but offers Spielberg attempts to convey the futility of tit-for-tat killing by sujecting his audience to a mind-numbing and unemotional two and a half hours of graphic and gory tit-for-tat killing. Superbly filmed (as always with Spielberg) but offers no helpful ideas on the film's topic.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

DamianP.May 12, 2006

Well made, but fairly boring.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

DanB.Dec 24, 2005

It's pretty silly, as any sort of commentary. It's like what Syriana would have been if it wasn't smart and didn't do its research. The acting is great (but Bana seems to always be good no matter what he's in?), and It's pretty silly, as any sort of commentary. It's like what Syriana would have been if it wasn't smart and didn't do its research. The acting is great (but Bana seems to always be good no matter what he's in?), and as a film it's not bad. But it's just a bunch of make believe. Which would be ok except that its purporting to be *real*, but all it's got is a bunch of Hollywood pathos. I mean come on--the scene near the end with the main character doing his wife, intercut with memories of the murder in Munich? Gag me. I don't think it portrays either the Israelis or the Arabs particularly well.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

5

beingryanjudeSep 3, 2014

The events surrounding the 1972 Olympics in Munich, Germany are terrifying real-life acts of terrorism--prime for a cinematic take. Unfortunately, Spielberg loses focus somewhere along the way.

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

4

RadioLadyDec 20, 2005

[***SPOILERS***] Disappointing story which "re-imagines" 1972 history. The movie is long and poorly plotted. It was hard to follow due to jumping around from one country to another. They had to concoct odd ways of killing these people, not[***SPOILERS***] Disappointing story which "re-imagines" 1972 history. The movie is long and poorly plotted. It was hard to follow due to jumping around from one country to another. They had to concoct odd ways of killing these people, not simply SHOOTING THEM. And then we find out some were NOT EVEN THE TRUE PLO MURDERERS themselves, but other people the Israel group deemed were also bad people. (Really? Why show us eleven pictures and then move to others seemingly not directly involved?) Motivations were blunted and there was so much that was make-believe that it ended up seeming like farce. (People pointing guns at the enemy, while all holed up at a "safe house," one Israeli bombmaker doing things with toys.) I dunno. I'm a big Spielberg fan, but this was not his finest work, and I surely don't see the film as the best of 2005. Postscript: This film opens on 12/23/05 here in Portland, Oregon. All I could think of was it's a kind of a weird pre-Chanukah gift. It does not make me, an American Jew, feel better about the state of Israel and the way it may have acted either now or in the past. 4/10… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

ElliottJan 8, 2006

Okay... I left the theater certainly feeling deeply affected, though I was definitely skeptical of this emotional feeling, and also felt that I had been manipulated in some way... Furthermore, the last act of the film or so was a little Okay... I left the theater certainly feeling deeply affected, though I was definitely skeptical of this emotional feeling, and also felt that I had been manipulated in some way... Furthermore, the last act of the film or so was a little disorienting and I thought that the film set itself up just fine, and then gradually lost its way more and more as the film went on. Also, the Dallas Observer review is absolutely DEAD-ON. It's impeccably written and encpasulates all of my qualms with the film. Thus, I am giving the film a 4, much like metacritic awarded the film a 4 (40) based on Mr. Wilonsky's review.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

DaveA.Jul 2, 2006

Goddard once said that "cinema is truth 24 frames a second." If that is true, then speilberg's cinema is the antithesis of that quote. Spilberg's films are lies 24 frmaes a second, every cut is the truth.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

LanceSep 4, 2006

This is not a film about Munich, its a film about Sept 11 and how should a civalised society response to terrorist attacks. Unforunently it spends too much time on school boy moralising over the rights or wrongs of assinations and yet misses This is not a film about Munich, its a film about Sept 11 and how should a civalised society response to terrorist attacks. Unforunently it spends too much time on school boy moralising over the rights or wrongs of assinations and yet misses a key moral point of the whole Munich story. The Isreali assasins killed an innocent man after mistaking him for a terrorist.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

ColmBJun 14, 2009

Too long, shot in constant darkness and not something I'd recommend.

0 of 1 users found this helpful

4

LindaL.Feb 4, 2006

Spielberg knows how to make a movie; the performances held my attention despite the film's length. But I'm really disturbed by the way he twists the truth, here. There are major efforts to humanize the Palestinian terrorists, while Spielberg knows how to make a movie; the performances held my attention despite the film's length. But I'm really disturbed by the way he twists the truth, here. There are major efforts to humanize the Palestinian terrorists, while we don't get more than a glimpse of the Israeli athletes who were slaughtered. Yeah, we know this is a conflict in which lots of people suffer and die. No news flash there. But the clear implication that this is what led to 9/11 is ridiculous. All violence is not morally equivalent! Why not conjure your own (fictional) film rather than fabricate one around real events you claim "inspired" your movie?… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

T.M.Mar 16, 2007

I recall that this film was nominated for best picture in the 2006 Oscar season. It was only nominated only because Spielberg can do no wrong in Hollywood, because this film is NOT best picture material at all. Repetitive, manipulative, I recall that this film was nominated for best picture in the 2006 Oscar season. It was only nominated only because Spielberg can do no wrong in Hollywood, because this film is NOT best picture material at all. Repetitive, manipulative, overlong, hard to follow, muddled, unpleasant, sickening, and just not good at all. BTW, Lance (the person who loved the death scene of the female assassin), you are a real sicko. That was probably the most tasteless scene in a movie full of tasteless scenes. Did you revel in the image of her descrated body after the older guy pulled off the cover Eric Bana's character had draped over her? You have truly become desensitized by movies like this, if that's the case. Spielberg has lost it with this one.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

JonathanF.Dec 23, 2005

"No doubt what happened at Munich was a black eye for humanity..but so was the way Spielberg "dialed in" this one. And I'm a big fan..trust me on that. What a poor script and weak presentation. The scenes were ridiculous, the acting was "No doubt what happened at Munich was a black eye for humanity..but so was the way Spielberg "dialed in" this one. And I'm a big fan..trust me on that. What a poor script and weak presentation. The scenes were ridiculous, the acting was not at all believable and the storyline seems like it was thrown together just to get the thing finished. I couldn't wait for it to be over. And just my luck, it was close to 3hrs long. I can't believe Spielberg signed off on this one. I would have loved to have been a fly on the wall when the studio screened this one..He's lucky that for one, he is Spielberg and secondly, most reviewers/reviews get lost in the emotional aspects of what happened at the Munich Olympics. No doubt a sad and mournful tale. However, that aside, this movie is just terribly done..bottom line!"… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

billys.Dec 30, 2005

Oh, now I get it... Palestinians are evil doers who kill Jews and feel nothing. Jews are good people who can kill Palestinians for revenge, but they're still good because they will suffer terrible guilt for doing it. Speilberg says the Oh, now I get it... Palestinians are evil doers who kill Jews and feel nothing. Jews are good people who can kill Palestinians for revenge, but they're still good because they will suffer terrible guilt for doing it. Speilberg says the film shows both sides fairly but the closing shot sure tells you which way He's leaning! The fall from my anticipation high for this film might be critical!… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

4

MarcK.Dec 29, 2005

[***Possible Spoilers] I had a real problem with the politics of this movie. Additionally, Spielberg uses a lot of typical Hollywood film cliches...the worst one being at the end when he's cross-cutting between the shooting of the [***Possible Spoilers] I had a real problem with the politics of this movie. Additionally, Spielberg uses a lot of typical Hollywood film cliches...the worst one being at the end when he's cross-cutting between the shooting of the Isreali athletes in Munich and the lead character making love to his wife. Oh yeah...this film was very, very long.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

DavidA.Jan 14, 2006

I liked "Sword of Gideon" much better!

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

ErikFeb 13, 2006

pretentious, way too long, pointless like the killing in the movie - in short: a typical spielberg.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

3

DullDullerDec 29, 2005

1 point for the art direction and costumes. 1 point for the cinematography. 1 point for all the exotic locales. The rest is dull, pointless, uninteresting and totally unmoving. I didn't identify nor care about any of the characters 1 point for the art direction and costumes. 1 point for the cinematography. 1 point for all the exotic locales. The rest is dull, pointless, uninteresting and totally unmoving. I didn't identify nor care about any of the characters especially the main lead played by Bana. What I found particularly offensive is how Spielberg kept trying to emotionally connect the main character to the events in Munich - all of which felt extremely forced as it was constantly crammed down the audience's throat. I nearly laughed when I saw a sweat-covered Bana making love to his wife whilst having "nightmares" about the hostages. There was absolutely no emotional connection whatsoever between the story and any of the players. I have a feeling that this work would've been better served by being two films - one for bonding all the characters to the event and the other for the ten little indians routine.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

I.P.Jan 2, 2006

Pretty disapointing movie. I understand Spielberg feeling some Middle Eastern version of "white man's burden" and trying to make good but it just doesn't work. The movie is not about a historical event, it is not about the Pretty disapointing movie. I understand Spielberg feeling some Middle Eastern version of "white man's burden" and trying to make good but it just doesn't work. The movie is not about a historical event, it is not about the historical events dyring the 1970's that took place following the Munich massacre. It is about how the group of agents sent out to kill those responsible makes contacts, finds the targets, and builds faulty bombs. They go along, one by one, killing targets and along the way develop a dislike for what they're doing. They wonder whether it's worth it. Wow, as though no one has ever thought that before. If it was meant to be a historical movie, it should have included the actual story as opposed to a made-up story about contacts and ineptitude. If it was meant to be a introspective look and an attempt to get people thinking peace in the Middle East, there are a million better stories to do that with.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

MollyOJan 6, 2006

Long and Boring!!! I have a knowledge and interest in the subject, but geez, it was like watching paint dry. I"m convinced critics who gave it a 10, did so because it was expected with a Spielberg movie. Three people near us in the theater Long and Boring!!! I have a knowledge and interest in the subject, but geez, it was like watching paint dry. I"m convinced critics who gave it a 10, did so because it was expected with a Spielberg movie. Three people near us in the theater fell asleep. Worst way I've spent 3 hours in a long time.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

JamesFeb 8, 2006

Spielbergs films have a strange mixture of sentimentality and viciousness. Sentimentality: Avners relationship with his wife, the 'cute' toymaker/bombmaker, the distinguished old antique shop owner. Vicious - the killing of the Spielbergs films have a strange mixture of sentimentality and viciousness. Sentimentality: Avners relationship with his wife, the 'cute' toymaker/bombmaker, the distinguished old antique shop owner. Vicious - the killing of the Dutch woman. As with 'Catch me if you can' Spielberg imposes his sentimental pattern of the world onto a far more interesting reality. The most intersting aspects were the set dressing for the 1970's European capitals... the cars, the shirts, the dresses, the hairstyles and the smoking. Two marks that.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

MSwittJan 28, 2006

Best movie I've seen in years.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

2

tinah.Dec 22, 2005

It was like a really expensive James Bond movie or a Middle_eastern 10 Little INdians. I did not feel involved with the characters. If the writer had involved me more in the event at Munich initially, I might have felt more involved with the It was like a really expensive James Bond movie or a Middle_eastern 10 Little INdians. I did not feel involved with the characters. If the writer had involved me more in the event at Munich initially, I might have felt more involved with the hunting down of the kilers. As it was I didn't even know who they were. It was just one uninteresting killing after another.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

1

HappyHapJan 8, 2006

I saw it and think that if Spielberg wants to make political statements he should go into politics - not use movies as a propaganda to enforce his leftist liberal ideaology. The attack by the terrorists on the Isreali athelets really I saw it and think that if Spielberg wants to make political statements he should go into politics - not use movies as a propaganda to enforce his leftist liberal ideaology. The attack by the terrorists on the Isreali athelets really happened. What follows is Spielberg's fantasy that the retaliation was as bad as the terrorists. He is a fool.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

1

LeftyJan 9, 2006

Speilberg is a fool if he thinks you can negotiate peaceful resolutions with animals.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

1

DeanM.Jan 15, 2006

The Movie STUNK... Hired assassins don't second guess themselves, They would never have been chosen in the first place if they did... Do you think a Navy Seal would break down in agony doing his duty... Do you think that Killing a The Movie STUNK... Hired assassins don't second guess themselves, They would never have been chosen in the first place if they did... Do you think a Navy Seal would break down in agony doing his duty... Do you think that Killing a Terroist Of Innocence would cause them any reflection of note... Do you think that an organization that chooses to Kill Innocent athletes would EVER stop. Tit for Tat, Let's open the prison doors, surely all those people if we as a society just said Sorry, would instantly become model citizens... more murders on the streets, we just need to be more UNDERSTANDING... In our society if someone breaks the posted speed limit he pays a penatly, yet Speilburg wants me to believe if you kill 11 innocent athletes you should turn the other cheel and Understand them, Maybe he'll pay my next traffic ticket too.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

1

PyeJan 28, 2006

Very dull. I did not feel emotionally connected at all to the characters. This movie was lifeless. I thought about walking out halfway through. Not recommended.

0 of 0 users found this helpful

1

HowardJan 6, 2006

It's time for Mr. Spielberg after WOW and this effort to retire and go into politics. His ideaology is expressed and not the view of the real world. For example, terrorists do not value human life, ours or theirs and thus they are It's time for Mr. Spielberg after WOW and this effort to retire and go into politics. His ideaology is expressed and not the view of the real world. For example, terrorists do not value human life, ours or theirs and thus they are terrorists. An eye for an eye is written in the Bible. If someone who does not value life at all does a heinour crime to my family I am getting revenge. Not breaking bread with the terrorist. Spielberg belives in turning the other cheek and resolving issues through peaceful negotiation. Message to Speilberg. You can't negotiate with terrorists. When will all of you liberals understand this?… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

1

GavinM.Dec 30, 2005

This is a very reckless piece of film making. In many ways it is morally corrupt, and is the more distasteful because of its "based on true events", post 9/11, moviemaker of his generation, mainstream movie credentials. It attempts to make This is a very reckless piece of film making. In many ways it is morally corrupt, and is the more distasteful because of its "based on true events", post 9/11, moviemaker of his generation, mainstream movie credentials. It attempts to make an emotional connection between the "good" killers and the viewer, but it ends up being just an ugly manipulative, and sometimes pornographic work. The twin towers analogy, with its Shindlers List - lite soundtrack is insulting in content and predictability, and the sex/violence montage near the end is pathetic. The worst scene morally includes the murder and disrobing on a woman, and is equal in its "lust" to portray the killers depravity as any of the Nazi killings in Spielbergs Schindlers List. If this was the film makers point then he hit it, but the joy displayed in this "kill" as opposed to the horror in the previous film, is disturbing. Beyond that, Spielberg continues to make shiny, but emotionless movies - excepting SL and perhaps Saving Private Ryan. Eric Bana does a creditable job, as does Cairan Hinds, but characters are painted in such broad stripes that it is obvious that Spielberg hasn't lived in the real world for many many years… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

1

OrsonO.Dec 29, 2005

First, some real history: this Spielberg film claims to have been "inspired" by history - but in fact is neither. There is not enough life in the story telling for us to actually believe people so dumb actually set out to do tasks requiring First, some real history: this Spielberg film claims to have been "inspired" by history - but in fact is neither. There is not enough life in the story telling for us to actually believe people so dumb actually set out to do tasks requiring actual intelligence. For instance, could any such team get to gether and not discuss their justifications? Speilberg actually believes that eye-for-an-eye vengeance is enough. It ain't La-la land anymore, it's Lamewood! If you, like I do, actually enjoy the theme of how killing challenges poeple to remain on fthe side of the good, see HBS's "Sword of Gideon" (1986). At least several sequences were directly lifted from this superior film. But Speilberg turns the film into agit-prop for anti-nationalistic pacifism and to obscenely equate killing murderers with murder itself: the concluding scenes (fornicating to murder, and the twin towers) were truly offensive to any thinking person. Taking "Schindler's List" together with "Munich" and we have: killing Fascists in uniforms is good - but those wearing hoods and weilding AK-47s is bad; saving Jews from death by industrial means is good, but saving industrious Jews and free Arabs (1-2 milion in Israel) from further terror and Islamic slavery - that's bad! Now if that ain't offensive to you, then you're offensive to me! Anti-Israel and anti-American and self-proclaimed marxist screenwriter Tony Kushner can be thanked - or better yet, blamed - for the recurrent opulent scenes of food - to the point of complusion by our 'hero,' played by the dull Bana. The implication is that the poor dispossessed Palestinians are kept that way by evil Jews! This will comes a surprise the rising middle classes - hundresds of millions of people - in India and China each. Or pehaps Kushner's ideology blinds him to absorbing the news of globalization and direct foreign invewstment's success. At any rate, bor-ing - dated - false "Munich." In fact, contrary to "Munich's" marxist fairy tale - killing PLO assassins saved lives and dimminished terrorism. Terror attacks declined through the mid-late 70s. Not 11 (a contrivance hitting you over the head in case you don't get the "eye-for-an-eye" makes the world blind idiocy that even Ghandi rejected - because he knew Pale Jihadi's weren't the moral equals of British imperialists) were hit, but 18, and the only surviving one lives escaping justice thanks to totalitarian Baathist Syria. There were numerous Mossad teams, ot one, and in fact they didn't have to be miserly "receipt" obsessed Jews to do it. In reality, Israel did the world a favor that Germany ignominiously refused to do. Back then, the PLO found that terrorism didn't pay ans drew down its activities in Eruope because of it. (See Aaron Klein's "Striking Back" for historical details; or see "One Day in September," the Oscar winning documentary from 1999.) 9/11 put the US in Israel's position to prevent expanding evil: needing to strike out agsainst gathering threats before (now nuclear) terrorism reaches us. Now, sensible people will differ as to the best means to reach these just ends - but they cannot disagree with the goal, unless you live in Hollywierd and pray at the church of Speilberg's sophomoric IR! Pray on, loonies. To judge by the tribe of professional reviewers, Speilberg's got loads of brain-dead company.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

1

thorshammerMay 10, 2012

"Inspired by true events..." No kidding. Even if you know nothing about the historical facts in the movie, the slant is painfully obvious. The "good guys" are jovial, articulate and thoughtful - everyone "on the other side" talks heatedly"Inspired by true events..." No kidding. Even if you know nothing about the historical facts in the movie, the slant is painfully obvious. The "good guys" are jovial, articulate and thoughtful - everyone "on the other side" talks heatedly and is armed. The tragedy of Munich and the subsequent events, did not need Steven Spielberg to turn it into this painfully biased tripe. If you didn't feel him "playing" you while watching (sappy clues throughout the movie), well that's where he earned the 1 that I give this movie.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

0

TalL.Dec 31, 2005

Along with "Eraserhead", this movie is the worst I've ever seen. It's just bad kitch, very superficial, badly acted, and not only historically inaccurate (understatement) but also very far from convincing. Everything about this Along with "Eraserhead", this movie is the worst I've ever seen. It's just bad kitch, very superficial, badly acted, and not only historically inaccurate (understatement) but also very far from convincing. Everything about this movie is bad, bad, bad, except that perhaps it makes your local community college original TV productions look really good. I've got a lot of respect for Spielberg for some of his previous movies, but here it seems like some aliens have abducted the acclaimed director as retaliation for E.T. and have replaced him with a childish, superficial and intellectually-challenged monster. The resullt is not even funny - it's just sad.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

0

JonathanH.Feb 3, 2006

Just left this movie half an hour before it ended. When it's not just plain dull its indulging in little orgies of pornographic violence. I left at the moment two Israeli agents decided it would be a good moment to kill a half-naked Just left this movie half an hour before it ended. When it's not just plain dull its indulging in little orgies of pornographic violence. I left at the moment two Israeli agents decided it would be a good moment to kill a half-naked Dutch assasinette using guns disguised as bicycle pumps. Well, they were in bicycle saturated Holland after all. I didn't wait to see anyone be bludgeoned to death with a baguette in France, stabbed through the heart with a brolly in London or smothered with a pizza in Italy Spielberg reveals the same clumsy touch as Woody Allen in Matchpoint when it comes to European characters and places. How does he announce a move to Paris for all the dummies in his audience? Huge pan across the skyline with the Eiffel tower playing the lead naturally. Pathetic. And the French godfather character! Please! Invites his Israeli guest to help him cook. Wow, what an amazing juxtaposition of hardman/softman, he who does all the nasty, viscious things in order to protect and provide for his family, because of course no family could survive without millions of dollars blood money being drip-fed into their bank accounts, could they? Well that crap didn't wash in The Godfather (you don't get involved in violent crime in the first place - that's the best way to safeguard your family, and maybe you get a job... bozo!) Inbetween tedious meetings with Day of the Jackal refugees we get a lot of emotional stuff too. Wrestling with consciences and the rest, but when the story has done nothing to generate sympathy or interest in the paper thin characters its all utterly meaningless. I wouldn't dignify the politics of this film with any serious political analysis. Don't know the end but I hear 9/11 makes an appearance...oh dear, Mr Subtlety strikes again.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

0

SquallDec 15, 2005

Steven Speilberg has finally lost his mind. He now equates the sons and daughters of Isreal equal to, if not less, than the Muslim terrorists who commit all sorts of attrocities on civilization. Just wonder if Spielberg would turn the other Steven Speilberg has finally lost his mind. He now equates the sons and daughters of Isreal equal to, if not less, than the Muslim terrorists who commit all sorts of attrocities on civilization. Just wonder if Spielberg would turn the other cheek if someone he loved was brutally murdered? Somehow I just don't think so. It's sad to see a once great director become a shill for Hollywood's left wing political movement. Barbara Streisand now has a partner in turning the keys of America over to our enemies. Great job Steve as you should feel very proud of yourself? Let's see? War of The Worlds was a total joke and now this? This is typical Michael Moore trailer trash. Not worthy of your time or money.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful

0

LameDec 27, 2005

Spielberg has lost his mind if he equates the Assasins to the Terrorists. Obviously he doesn't realize that you can't negotiate with savages who have no respect for human life - ours or their own. An eye for an eye is the only Spielberg has lost his mind if he equates the Assasins to the Terrorists. Obviously he doesn't realize that you can't negotiate with savages who have no respect for human life - ours or their own. An eye for an eye is the only thing they understand.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful

Munich

User Reviews