Munich, 12/20.

In a piece for Salon called "The War on Munich," Michelle Goldberg follows the debate so far. And the movie hasn't even opened: "Political critics are berating the movie for suggesting that the violence wracking the Middle East is a cycle that both sides have a part in perpetuating. Spielberg, ironically, is accused of being insufficiently Manichaean, and the charge threatens to ossify into conventional wisdom before the movie's audience can get to theaters to see how misguided it is."

Patrick Goldstein tackles a different angle for the Los Angeles Times, starting with the mum vs "Boom!" PR campaign: "Bloggers have attacked Universal and [publicist Martin] Levy for saying one thing and doing another, while criticizing Time for assigning the story to [Richard] Schickel, who, as the magazine disclosed in its story, made a documentary that Spielberg produced and financed through DreamWorks." Then, "The real mistake Spielberg's team made by putting a veil of secrecy around the film was creating unrealistically high expectations."

J Hoberman has no fewer than three Munich-related or at least semi-related pieces in the Village Voice this week. In his actual review, he writes, "The film is sluggish and repetitive, yet it exerts a certain clinical fascination.... More than politics, it's predicated on Spielberg's faith in the redemptive nature of Hollywood entertainment." And then there's this: "Munich's final shot of the New York skyline makes it abundantly clear that, once more, Steven Spielberg is pondering 9-11." And so are other filmmakers, as Hoberman points out in another quick note.

Also, in case you missed it below, an online listening tip. David Edelstein chats for about 20 minutes about the year in movies and unveils his top ten, with Munich in the #1 slot.

Posted by dwhudson at December 20, 2005 2:03 PM