Munich begins at the Munich Olympics, 1972, where 11 Israelis are taken hostage and killed by Arab terrorists. The violence of the sequence is shown in flashback after the audience was introduced to an Israeli, Avner (played by Eric Bana, Hulk), who with several other countrymen (a fine cast) will hunt down the suspected killers one-by-one in European locales.  

This movie could comment on the Middle Eastern situation or take sides but it is more than about the conflict over land although that is important here. It is about what killing and terrorism does to the soul.

By placing the graphic sequence of the Arab’s killings at Munich further on and not at the beginning of the film the audience see what Avner, the central Israeli in retaliation against the Arabs, is facing and thinking. The movie is sympathetic to him. We have got to know that Avner is a family man and that he has been assigned by his government because Israel has been morally offended. We therefore see the graphic images of his countrymen’s murders through his eyes as disturbing, that revenge is justifiable, and director Steven Spielberg carefully and skilfully evokes the sombre mood as he does with all the violence in the movie.

But after the flashback, Avner removes his marriage ring and puts it in his pocket while board a plane en route to eliminate the perpetrators. The revenge Avner is undertaking is cold headed business in the name of national pride. By taking the ring off, a symbol of love and union, he reveals an uneasy conscience with one way of life – terrorism – and the other, his family life. He is living a lie. The juxtaposition of the violent flashback, a figment of Avner’s imagination, and the removal of the ring, symbolising unity and love, reveal a double mindedness over money and nationalism and purity which will haunt him through the movie until he is forced to make a decision about these conflicting voices. The climatic image of his psychological dilemma is told in a powerful and moving montage, which is similar to Platoon’s casting of strong characterisation and imagery of sates of mind and thematic preoccupations. 

A child’s point of view is notably present, a touch familiar in Spielberg films such as E.T. and The Color Purple. Children are innocents and victims in Munich, at the mercy of the adults. Sub textually, Munich is about innocents dying because the government goes to war against those who hurt it. This resonates in contemporary politics: the Israelis in the movie disguise their identities by using American cover-ups. The subtleties make cohesive sense: could Munich also be about how innocents die at the hands of U.S. interventionalism bringing 1972 right up to date with contemporary Western politics and the mood against war in Hollywood?  

2005s War of the Worlds reminded audiences old enough of how Spielberg got famous with his apocalyptic images of outer space (aka Close Encounters of the Third Kind) and fantasy/adventure storylines, his staple fare during the 70s and 80s. After directing the straight laced The Terminal and Catch Me if You Can he came back to form. Yet War of the Worlds isn’t only a blockbuster sci-fi adventure when through images of extraterrestrial threats it indelibly comments on the threat of terrorism post September 11 and Munich in its own way does too. It also tells a universal credo about terror and war’s cycle of incessant and mindless anti-life forces.  

Spielberg and his collaborators, including maestro editing by Michael Kahn, have made a suspenseful, artistic, layered and satisfying thriller and a film with depth and power, Steven Spielberg’s best film since Saving Private Ryan. It is a reminder of the director’s skill as movies he made after 1998 compare inferiorly to Munich’s production and powerful storytelling quality. It has been worth the wait.