On Stephen Spielberg’s Munich and Jonathan Tobin’s Exponent.: Letters from Richard Bank, Michael Wakely and Julie Rottenberg

     Dan Rottenberg’s review of Munich had me laughing out loud and at the same time provided food for thought. You’re great, but you are also a bit of a masochist. Still reading Jonathan Tobin? I haven’t read him in years (nor anything else in the Jewish Exponent, for that matter!).
Richard Bank
Glenside
January 12, 2006

     Full points on your well chosen words on Munich— It looked like Day of the Jackal meets Black Sunday— and about the Inquirer: If they closed their doors tonight, no one would notice.  I wish you and all concerned the very best for this very good idea.
Michael Wakely
Philadelphia
Jan. 20, 2006

Where’s the conflict?

     I couldn’t agree more with you on thinking Munich was utterly disappointing.  My main problem was the feeling that I should have been moved, or feeling some kind of emotion throughout, and instead I felt nothing (and I felt bad about feeling nothing, on top of the feeling nothing, y’know?).
       In fact, about 30 minutes into the film, after they killed the second guy on their list, I thought to myself:  "My God, are they just going to go through the list and we’re going to have to wait and watch them kill all 11 guys?  I’m bored!"  I felt a big problem was that the story lacked conflict—in spite of the allegedly huge conflicts these guys were up against.  Aside from a few glitches (and a whole lot of bloodshed), it pretty much went according to plan.  Plus, no character development, no real surprises, bleh.  (And at least I had that cute main guy to distract myself with—I don’t know how you survived!)
Julie Rottenberg
Brooklyn, N.Y.
Jan. 26, 2006