Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

The Mysteries of Munich

By Nikki Finke, LA Weekly. Posted December 5, 2005.


Steven Spielberg isn't talking about his upcoming film, 'Munich.' But the movie may create a big fanfare all on its own, given its controversial subject matter.

Share and save this post:
Digg iconDelicious iconReddit iconFark iconYahoo! iconNewsvine! iconFacebook iconNewsTrust icon

More stories by Nikki Finke

Get AlterNet in
your mailbox!

 
Advertisement

There will be no press junket, no premiere and, most importantly, no blowout Oscar marketing campaign for Steven Spielberg's certain-to-be-controversial movie, Munich.

Given the immensity of today's spin-or-be-spun promotions to land Golden Boy nods, the decision to have little traditional publicity for the film before and even after it opens December 23 is dicey -- yet it is the director's decision alone. Right now, Spielberg doesn't intend to give press or broadcast interviews -- not even to the usual suspects, like The New York Times, Los Angeles Times and 60 Minutes. But the movie may create a big fanfare all on its own -- perhaps even international protests -- given its controversial subject matter.

"The official strategy is for the movie to speak for itself," an insider told me last week. "All they're going to do is just show the movie to people. You have to be Steven Spielberg to get away with that."

But competitors mutter that's because Spielberg's Munich may have snagged the coveted cover of Time magazine. (I'm told a final decision is pending.)

For months now, Munich has been touted as the Oscar front-runner, even when no one had seen the film.

The secret Mossad hit squad that over a period of years assassinated the Palestinian terrorists who directly or even indirectly carried out the massacre of Israeli athletes at the 1972 Olympics in Munich is the movie's subject matter and its political minefield. Specifically, it all comes down to how the film portrays its principal characters: Will the Israelis be seen as too bloodthirsty? Will the Palestinians be seen as too stereotypical? Insiders say Spielberg and his screenwriters, Tony Kushner and Eric Roth, worked hard to create multidimensional characters. But will that play in Peoria?

Hollywood has long been loath to portray any Arabs as villains, much less Muslim extremists, mostly because its movies make a lot of money in the Middle East. Needless to say, this has not gone unnoticed. Already I've been inundated with e-mails from civilians predicting Spielberg will "produce a watered-down, politically correct piece of propaganda that gives the Palestinian Olympic killers credibility" or "depict both the Israelis and the terrorists as morally equivalent. This will be done to hide the fact that the Israelis were totally justified and the terrorists were, well, terrorists (that is to say, bloodthirsty savages)."

As one messager put it: "Hollywood (including Spielberg) doesn't have the balls to tell the truth. Hollywood will give aid and comfort to the enemy, and they'll get rich doing it."

Spielberg has assembled a team of pro advisers to confront the protestations that are sure to occur.

The team consists of Dennis Ross, a well-known U.S. diplomat who played a leading role in shaping Middle East policy in the George H.W. Bush and Bill Clinton administrations and is now the Washington Institute's counselor and Ziegler distinguished fellow; Mike McCurry, President Clinton's White House spokesman, now a for-hire political strategist; and Allan Mayer, a crisis PR specialist with Los Angeles-based Sitrick and Company who has advised Spielberg for several years.

The director has been deliberately vague as to the origin of the much-disputed facts conveyed in his movie. He has said it comes from multiple sources, and not just from "Vengeance," the controversial book by George Jonas. (HBO adapted that book in 1986.)

Both Palestinian terrorist Abu Daoud and Israel's former Mossad spy chief Zvi Zamir have gone public with their anger about not being consulted beforehand by Spielberg about the film. During the summer, Spielberg issued this carefully worded statement to an Israeli paper, an Arab TV station and The New York Times:

"Viewing Israel's response to Munich through the eyes of the men who were sent to avenge that tragedy adds a human dimension to a horrific episode that we usually think about only in political or military terms. By experiencing how the implacable resolve of these men to succeed in their mission slowly gave way to troubling doubts about what they were doing, I think we can learn something important about the tragic standoff we find ourselves in today."

Digg!

Contact Nikki Finke at nikkifinke@deadlinehollywood.com.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from AlterNet! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
I am going to see it. I think this is different than Passion!
Posted by: Pepper on Dec 5, 2005 5:15 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Or other such films in that its about a part of history that was tramatic for most of us during that period. I can't be sure, but I believe this was the first "terrorist" attack that I ever remember. We were new to it and it shocked the world. I believe we all knew about the mossad later and what they had done and we supported it at the time.

Looking back now, I would say that it would be lowering yourself to their level and counterproductive. But I really don't know what they should have done? This would be a good movie to see how he handles that issue. P

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Passion of Christ
Posted by: bigart on Dec 5, 2005 8:47 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Just to explain why Mel Gibson's Passion of Christ did not win the Oscar last year; it was obscenely brutal. This picture was filled with the kind of violence that Jesus of Nasareth urged people to put behind them

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

"It Worked for Harry Potter"
Posted by: monkeywrench on Dec 5, 2005 9:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Steven Spielberg may be craftier than anyone thinks: remember the old stage axiom: "if you want to get attention on stage, don't shout – whisper."

Also remember that the world-wide phenomenon of Harry Potter started with kids who told other kids who told their moms who told other moms, and on and on. The most powerful advertising in the world is word-of-mouth – and much of the world is tired of the usual hype that surrounds most movie releases.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

More Bullshit, More Bullshit
Posted by: Greatdentini on Dec 5, 2005 10:01 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Hollywood has long been loath to portray any Arabs as villains..."

Oh, what bullshit. Hollywood, especially Spielberg, has been Zionistic from the get-go. As for the "long" Israeli-Palestinian conflict, it's about half a century long -- since the incursion of Israel. That's not that long.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Very hard to care, subject matter notwithstanding.
Posted by: pdmorgan on Dec 5, 2005 12:04 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm not sure what to make of the Munich flap thus far. For now, it just seems to be an issue about Mr. Spielberg's movie-making status vs. his chosen subject this time. If it seems hard for me to care, it's only because I'm trying to square this new film up against everything else he has ever made as a director. And as much as I realize how passionately people will get once this film is in theatres, it will be hard for me to care: Mr. Spielberg may be a technical pro behind the camera, but that doesn't put him in the same class with Peter Watkins.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

THERE ARE NONE SO BLIND AS THOSE...
Posted by: Greatdentini on Dec 5, 2005 1:00 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
... who will not see. It's hard to argue something that's so obvious, it's like trying to convince someone that there's air around us. Norman Finkelstein did a casual study on it, which is somewhere that I'm too lazy to find. Of course, Hollywood is Zionistic. Obvious. Here's another link:

http://www.ihr.org/jhr/v17/v17n5p-2_Sindi.html

And you wonder why they hate us.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Lemme tell ya about bad Arabs...
Posted by: shadiahm on Dec 6, 2005 12:55 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Hollywood has long been loath to portray any Arabs as villains, much less Muslim extremists, mostly because its movies make a lot of money in the Middle East."

I had to re-read that a couple of times to make sure she really said what she said. Has she ever watched anything out of Hollywood? Lordy, there are so many examples of Arabs as villains you've got whole books about it, some of the most notable being by Jack Shaheen (Reel Bad Arabs) or Melanie McAllister (Epic Encounters).

Seriously. I can't remember the last time I've heard such a remarkably uninformed comment. Well, except maybe from an Israeli Jewish fundamentalist...

What the hell is up AlterNet? Why would you even put this on your site or bother putting it in the email newsletter?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The preview alone will sell it
Posted by: smuney on Dec 6, 2005 6:04 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I just saw the preview for "Munich" (at a showing of "Walk the Line,) and not only did it get me to want to see it, but I'm sure the preview alone, with its emphasis on shoot-em-up action, will attract the target male-12-30 audience almost any film needs. By the way, I'm a senior female, & remember the tragedy of the Munich games. The target audience won't.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Arabs portrayed as bad ??
Posted by: jolo on Dec 8, 2005 11:29 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I was thinking, how many Israeli terrorist attacks have there been on the World Trade Center ? How many attacks on the WTC have their been 100% Arab sponsored and participated attacks ?

How many planes have been high jacked by Israeli's or Jews and how many have been sponsored and participated in by Arab's.

How many Mosques in the United States, England and France have been blown up, particularly when their were children inside of them by Jews and sponsored by Israel.

How many Temple's in Israel, England, France and the United States have been bombed by Israeli sponsored Jews. ?

How many olympians from Arab countries have been kidnapped and murdered by Jews and sponsored by Israel.

How many kidnappings and murders have their been on Israeli athletes at Olympic Games that have been sponsored and participated in by Arabs.


Are there riots going on in France in areas where Jews live? Are their riots going on in areas where Arab Muslims now live in France ?

What is the cost to the world for Arab terrorist activities ? One of the things I never have understood is that if I was born into a Arab heritage, I would be absolutely moritifed the actions of the terrorists, nations still ruled by kings and queens, holy wars ? and all that nonsense done to people and their own "in the name of the Koran".

I would want to gather together with my other Arab counterparts and publically organize and express my outrage for those aggresive actions and name, names of those who are leading the cause.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Bad Arabs?
Posted by: nader on Dec 10, 2005 8:50 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Hollywood has long been loath to portray any Arabs as villains, much less Muslim extremists...."

I have to agree that this comment takes some credibility away from the author. Nikki Finke may want to pick up a copy of "Reel Bad Arabs: How Hollywood Vilifies a People" by Jack Shaheen and get up to speed on the plethora of films that portray Arabs as villains. Mr. Spielberg himself adds to the negative portrails in his "Raiders of the Lost Ark" film.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

terror
Posted by: diamondvajra on Dec 10, 2005 11:01 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
i've heard all the comments, "one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter". parsing definitions that one is. killing unarmed civilians and then calling it an act of patriotism is just so much bogus bull shit. in that case i guess we could call all the troops in iraq targeting civilians freedom fighters. relativity sucks in this world of killing fields. so really, i don't want to hear any more about it. terror does nothing but frighten people, wear them down and injure those it's trying to speak for. enough is enough

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

f it
Posted by: diamondvajra on Dec 10, 2005 11:07 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"they" hate us...well too bad. where are "they" to speak up when innocents have their throats cut on tv. where is the indignation with fundamentalists spouting some of the most obscene filth? where is the money to help victims of the earthquake in pakistan, the tsunami in asia. where is the arab world with their vast wealth and supply of oil? covering their own asses and assuring that their maleable children will be taught the most aggressive form of jihad, justifying the killing of women and children, even muslims, if they don't share in the "values" of these self proclaimed defenders of the the faith. astagfurah il allah.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]