Posted on 06/28/2005 7:12:34 AM PDT by kromike
Stephen Spielberg's "Balanced" View of Terror By Debbie Schlussel FrontPageMagazine.com | June 28, 2005
Much is being made about Steven Spielberg's upcoming inaccurate, revisionist history and "balance" (code for morally equivocating Islamic terrorists with their victims) in his new film, Vengeance -- about the Israeli Mossad's tracking down of Palestinian terrorists who murdered Israeli athletes at the 1972 Munich Olympics. But anyone who knows the history of this movie, based on a George Jonas book of the same name, should not be surprised.
Jonas admits he has only one "source" for most of the information in his book and that many of the incidents could not be verified. Many of his "facts" were refuted by testimony in a Norwegian trial of Mossad agents who were caught accidentally killing a Moroccan waiter there. Spielberg has not contacted anyone in the Mossad, the Israeli government, or the agents who were involved in the operation, some of whom discredited Jonas' book.
As I wrote in a column on Spielberg's Vengeance, last summer, Spielberg halted production to avoid upsetting terrorists during the Olympics. Just out of respect and "sensitivity" for terrorists' wishes. Then, Spielberg realized this was a bad P.R. move and had his publicist claim the reason was something almost as absurd, but much less believable: that Spielberg was just too upset each day--sobbing while reading pages of the script--to continue. Right, and the sob-scenes in E.T. also made him halt production. Not.
One wonders if Spielberg's "balance" will involve visiting the family of Cleveland-based parents of David Berger, the handsome, American-born, Israeli Olympic weight-lifter, who was among the murdered athletes. Don't count on it. The film, starring the outspokenly pro-Palestinian Ben Kingsley, is bound to be no different than the "balanced" Oscar-winning documentary, "One Day in September," which -- as I wrote in another column -- showed the murder of the Israeli Olympic athletes from the victims' families' and Palestinian terrorists' points of view--as an action thriller.
Spielberg's "Vengeance," appears to be an indictment of our current War on Terror. According to Reuters, Daniel Craig, who stars in the film, told an entertainment magazine that "it's about how vengeance doesn't...work -- blood breeds blood." The one accidental assassination -- of the Moroccan waiter in Norway -- is being used to discredit the entire operation, which was a successful War on Terror. There will always be accidental deaths in fighting terror, but that does not mean there should not be a strong and swift response to it.
Don't hold your breath for real balance, such as Spielberg visiting terror-host state Syria (on the State Department's terrorist list) to interrogate and film Jamil Al-Gashey, the only surviving murderer of the Israeli Olympic athletes. He enjoys a life of safety and freedom under the protection of Syria's government, where he moved because, as he said, he didn't want his daughter to grow up without a father. No biggie that he killed the fathers of several daughters of the Israeli athletes. Don't look for any of that in "Fighting Terror is a Bad Idea, as Told by Steven Spielberg."
Question: Why did Spielberg make the Nazis look bad, and even melt to their deaths, in "Raiders by the Lost Ark"? Where was the balance then?
Don't place too much faith in the courage of spielberg. Like most people in hollywood, the spiel doesn't want to die for his art in the same way that Theo van Gogh did.
He is one of those who will eulogize dead Jews while having almost no regard for live ones. He prefers to be a pc apparatchik; a useful idiot for leftists and jihadists.
The Israelis are the good guys. Sometimes good guys make mistakes.
Can you imagine those hate-filled, violence-loving Palestinians giving compensation to an innocent Jewish victim's family, like Israel did to that Moroccan waiter's family? Of course not. All Jews are guilty and must die (or be enslaved) according to the Palestinian pig people. The Palis would just throw a party and then go on to kill more Jews.
The double standard that the liberals (and some extreme right-wingers) have against Israel is astonishing to behold. Steven Spielberg can suck eggs on this one...
"If this movie...when it is made...is sympathetic to the Palestinian terrorists I'll eat my hat. Spielberg has been to Israel numerous times."
This is a no brainer. I would gladly pay to watch a movie about terrorists being killed. Most people I talk to have a similar perspective. To portray it as anything less than justice is to ask for the movie to tank.
If Speilberg wants to lose money, he'll portray the palestinians as sympathetic characters. But, I don't think Mr. Speilberg sets out to lose money very often, (we won't mention AI).
"Snicker. The Indy Jones films show more Nazi flags than American flags."
Sooo, you're implying that the Raiders series is pro-Nazi?
Interesting theory. Insane,asinine,divorced from reality...but interesting.
I'll agree with a previous poster that the removal of guns from ET was a travesty, along the lines of Greedo shooting first.
And I have no illusions, about Spielberg's politics...he's a dyed in the wool liberal. Most "artistic" types are. Oh well, can't win 'em all. But the guy does (or at least did) make great movies.
Here's an idea: before we get all pissy about a film that no one has even SEEN yet,based on one column, let's all take a deep breath and wait for the damn thing to come out and read someone like Michael Medved's review.
And if he follows through on spinning this movie into an anti-Isreali, pro-Palestinian film, we can also accuse him of picking only on dead terrorist regimes (Nazis) and appeasing living terrorist regimes.
You got that right. Is Spielberg angling for 'kapo" status?
Hypocrite.
Nope, the films are more anti-Nazi than pro-American. I was just mocking the FReeper who was implying that the series was all-American all-the-time.
I apologize for leaving out the sarcasm tags in my post. :-)
I was speaking of his view of the world today. The Shoah was in the past, so it is safe territory for him to aid the relatively few survivors of it. What is he doing to prevent the jihadists from attemting Shaoh II?(Chas v'shalom). The answer is his "balanced" view I guess.
My assertion was based on the character of Indiana Jones himself who's clearly in the mold of American adventurers. It's not a type you see in European films. :-)
Once again we're talking about movie that doesn't exist. Schlussel is throwing darts in the air.
It's OK because they were white.
I like that explanation, Borges! It reflects reality: American heros are the only ones who have the balls to save the euro-Pansies from the Nazis. :-)
I should say it's a type the Europeans have abandoned. You used to see it in the writings of Robert Louis Stevenson and Jules Verne. No more.
I wonder was he evil when he did "Saving Private Ryan, "Band Of Brothers"?
I believe it is in what is called in the industry, pre production. Tune in..
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.