Ping.
What do you think the reaction would be on the left if someone made a movie about the motives, family and human side of someone who kills gays? I mean, they're human beings too. We must understand them, right?
Spielberg has turned into one of those guys who thinks he can give it, but can't take it.
Insisting on the truth is too extreme for him.
Waiting for Spielberg's "Understanding Adolf Hitler"...
"But it does not excuse the act when you ask what the motives of the perpetrators were and show that they were also individuals with families and a history"
"Understanding Josef Stalin"?
So he admits that he crafted the film to advance his agenda, and not to be an objective retelling of the truth...
Spielberg is a Moron.
Spielberg is leaving out that the Israelis are dealing with people who only understand force. Negotiating is a sign of weakness.
"Munich" is all about moral relativism, pure and simple. The homo cowpoke movie wins out with higher share because it doesn't have to justify murder in the form of terrorism. Essentially, it's just about two queers humping each other on the range and only offers the tired question of why this can't be normal. Spielberg miscalculated against the moral black and white aspects of the 1972 events in Munich and attempted to blur the line of good vs.evil. Most people aren't buying it or a ticket to his movie. His moral compass is the one that needs calibrating.
I've got these Hollywierd leftists on a short leash, as for when I decide to and not to attend their movies. When Spielberg came out with the militarisic movies I didn't buy into it. The a.h. backed Clinton with his big donations. Is that the action of a person who revers and honors our military? I pegged his movies as a way to tap into the cash vaults of those who did rever our military.
Now his true wishy washy nature has been revealed. I was confident it would.
I guess it is extremism to want to bring just to murders.
It must also be over-simplifying to say that someone who takes civilians captives and murders them is a terrorist and you should not grant them the status of a soldier in uniform or grant them the niceties of a trial before hunting them down and killing them like the rabid dogs that they are.
Yeah we should understand what makes them tick. Not that Spielberg has the correct motivation in mind.
So the people who criticize Spielberg's film are extremists, but the terrorists who massacre Israeli athletes and cut captives' throats are not extremists. What planet is Spielberg living on...
There was an overarching attitude in that movie that portrayed the Eauropean Jews of WWII not only as helpless and passive victims, but seemed also to glory in their helplessness and passivity. I feel a desire on Spielberg's part that Jews are and should be sanctified by victimization, and any move toward righteous self-defense threatens that sanctification.
And in the closing scene, where Schindler goes off the deep end "I should have done more! I could have done more!" I couldn't help but think how Spielberg speaks so little on behalf of the defense of Israel--has that reluctant embarrassment I so often sense from "sophisticated" leftwing US Jewry. Could Spielberg do more, with his bully pulpit and his hundreds of millions, to prevent another Holocaust?
I believe this "Munich" could be as useful as the Elders of Zion for Islamist propoganda. See what their own have to say about Israel?
So not buying into Spielberg's attempt to draw a moral equivalence between terrorists who target/murder innocent civilians and a nation that kills terrorists in self-defense is now an "extremist" position in his feeble brain?
I used to enjoy visiting his mother's kosher restaurant in west L.A.
Never again!
He has no cujones. His movie should be respelled "M'eunuch'".