adam
01-07-2006, 11:25 PM
Just got back from seeing this. I wasn't keen on going to see it, because I generally don't care for Senor Spielbergo's films, but I was hung over and useless so I went.
I liked it. It's well done, and Eric Banana is a better actor than I thought. I liked the way it was put together, and some of the characters are pretty neat. I often feel that characters in Spielberg's films have a kind of caricaturey two-dimensionality to them, and I would say that holds true in this movie, too, but it didn't irritate me the way it did in, say, Minority Report.
I don't know anything about the historical events, and it's interesting reading/hearing different people's take on Spielberg's stance. Some are saying it's pro-Israel, some saying anti-, and I find all that kind of bizarre. To me, (and I would like to repeat that I don't know much about the reality behind these events) it seemed to be an intelligent look at a complicated issue.
When I was leaving the theatre, a young man was talking to his parents, and they asked what he thought of it. He said, "I didn't like it. It was very idealogically motivated, and Spielberg has an agenda." I thought that was quite odd. I wanted to stop him and ask him what he thought that agenda was, because all I saw was something saying violence is morally and functionally ambiguous. Is there an omission, or, conversely, a fabrication that is part of the movie that I'm not aware of that would cast a different light on Spielberg's "agenda"?
Anyway, I liked it...though it should maybe have ended a couple of scenes earlier.
I liked it. It's well done, and Eric Banana is a better actor than I thought. I liked the way it was put together, and some of the characters are pretty neat. I often feel that characters in Spielberg's films have a kind of caricaturey two-dimensionality to them, and I would say that holds true in this movie, too, but it didn't irritate me the way it did in, say, Minority Report.
I don't know anything about the historical events, and it's interesting reading/hearing different people's take on Spielberg's stance. Some are saying it's pro-Israel, some saying anti-, and I find all that kind of bizarre. To me, (and I would like to repeat that I don't know much about the reality behind these events) it seemed to be an intelligent look at a complicated issue.
When I was leaving the theatre, a young man was talking to his parents, and they asked what he thought of it. He said, "I didn't like it. It was very idealogically motivated, and Spielberg has an agenda." I thought that was quite odd. I wanted to stop him and ask him what he thought that agenda was, because all I saw was something saying violence is morally and functionally ambiguous. Is there an omission, or, conversely, a fabrication that is part of the movie that I'm not aware of that would cast a different light on Spielberg's "agenda"?
Anyway, I liked it...though it should maybe have ended a couple of scenes earlier.