Y'all are a bunch of wankers!


This is why Spielberg is a great director.

Not A.I. This.
Permalink Send private email Flasher T 
January 29th, 2006 11:23am
Permalink xava! 
January 29th, 2006 2:04pm
His treatment of actual events but fictionalising them to the point of sterility?

Caveat, I haven't seen it.
Permalink Send private email Simon Lucy 
January 29th, 2006 4:01pm
http://www.killfrog.com/01/neps.html (flash animation)

Be patient through the intro - it's on topic for the thread.

Permalink Send private email Philo 
January 29th, 2006 4:33pm
Hollywood history? Don't want to see it at all.

Might go see IJ4 when it emerges. More credible.
Permalink trollop 
January 29th, 2006 6:28pm
The best thing people will remember about the movie A.I. was that it was the first movie in history where "the website was better than the movie."
Permalink Aithemovie Warnerbros 
January 29th, 2006 6:43pm
Oh, it was anything but sterile, Simon.
Permalink Send private email Flasher T 
January 30th, 2006 2:09am
Am I the only one who didn't love this movie? First off: way too long. Was it necessary to show details of all 7(or however many there were) assasinations? Wouldn't a nice montage have sufficed?

Bitching about details:

What was up with that awfully misguided sex scene near the end? There's probably a really "deep" message hidden in there, but I just can't find it.

Particularly stupid were Louis and his father, the old resistance fighter and catholic who proved the last bastion of morality to be family and money. They were immensely likable and would have been great for a spy-action-Indiana Jones type movie, but too shallow for the movie-with-a-message genre.

And how come Avner needed to be blindfolded for the drive to their huge, recognizable country estate within a stones throw of Paris, with hundreds of children running around freely, and not even rudimentary efforts made to keep the place inconspicuous? It shouldn't really be too difficult for a well connected international top terrorist/covert agent to find the place .

Couldn't the gang have used poisoned spiders or sharks with friggin laserbeams instead of inanely complicated bicycle-pump guns to eliminate the woman assasin who killed Hans?

Then there's the ending where Avner and his Mossad contact discuss what the world will come to if the only response we can find to violence is more violence, finally panning to a beautiful Manhattan panorama featuring the WTC... 'And the  Oscar for "Most Corny Final Scene" goes to...'

Look to "Catch me if you can", "Jurassic Park" or "Indiana Jones" for reasons why Spielberg is a superb director. I think Spielberg couldn't decide if he wanted to do a morality piece or a spy movie, so Munich ended up with no sense of direction.

Don't get me wrong, I thought the movie was ok, I'm sure it will win "Best Picture", but I think it's entirely overrated.

Permalink Send private email a2800276 
January 30th, 2006 6:01am
It was not first and foremost a spy movie - that was what got people into the theaters, but not the point of making the film.

The blindfolding thing is for the same reason as people having caller ID block: yes, you can be found if needed, but not being entirely in the open stops people from having ideas. The point of Louis and Papa was to show that *anyone* can be found.

The reason they used bombs and guns is that they were not working with the full support of Mossad, they used what they could get from Louis, and in 1970s Europe guns and explosives were much more widely available than poisoned spiders. Besides, for their purposes it was useful to have the assasinations actually looking like assasinations, not random inexplicable deaths.

The bicycle pumps had the fortunate side effect of not being noisy, although I agree that it was slightly strange.
Permalink Send private email Flasher T 
January 30th, 2006 6:39am
>It was not first and foremost a spy movie

I guess my point in a nutshell is, Spielberg should have made a spy movie, that's what he's good at. The moral aspect was banal and made you feel bad about enjoying the spy movie aspects.
Permalink Send private email a2800276 
January 30th, 2006 8:05am
By the way, flasher, this bit of trivia might interest you: the guy who plays Hans in the movie is the real-life translator of Derrida (into German).
Permalink Send private email a2800276 
January 30th, 2006 8:07am
Just because I'm a linguist doesn't mean I read Derrida :P
Permalink Send private email Flasher T 
January 30th, 2006 8:26am
Don't you work as a translator? Thought you might enjoy it as a bit of translator-lore. By the way, noone reads Derrida, just the first couple of pages.
Permalink Send private email a2800276 
January 30th, 2006 9:41am
OK, it's a useful bit of trivia. Thanks. :)
Permalink Send private email Flasher T 
January 30th, 2006 10:47am

This topic is archived. No further replies will be accepted.

Other topics: January, 2006 Other topics: January, 2006 Recent topics Recent topics