In terms of storytelling, it is the counterpart
Narrative
During the 1972 Summer Olympics in Munich, an American sports broadcast team must prepare to report live on the taking of Israeli athletes hostage by a terrorist group. Movie title: September 5th Director: Tim Fehlbaum Screenplay: Moritz Binder Tim Fehlbaum Alex David Production companies: BerghausWöbke Filmproduktion, Projected Picture Works, Constantin Film, Edgar Reitz Filmstiftung Theatrical release (US, wide): December 13, 2024 Capone’s rating: 4⭐ out of 5⭐ This is difficult to describe, because I’m sure this is one of the reasons (among many) why the film’s script and production was difficult. One cannot avoid the association this film will have with Spielberg’s Munich (2005). In Spielberg’s film, we get a brief summary of the farce of September 5, 1972, and then the detailed and lengthy aftermath — the hunt for the perpetrators. In Fehlbaum’s film, we are immersed in the news of the day — quite literally, as the film tells the story of the hostage crisis from the perspective of the ABC film crew trying to cover it effectively.
The film deserves its own treatment and respect
Knowing so much about the context of the films, I’m going to put the 2005 film aside and focus on the new film with its new take on this horrific event. Let’s start with all the things the film has to offer. Reminiscent of 12 Angry Men (1957), the film was almost a one-room film. All of the action in the film takes place in the ABC studio, where one looks at the outside world through a television camera or (for extremely brief moments) from the patio outside. Once we get going, at no point does the narrative lens switch to a wide shot of the studio building, to flyovers of the city, or offer any perspective other than that which can be gained from and with the crew manning the station on a day at the 1972 Munich Olympics.
These decisions had a strong and clear impact on this viewer
Everything takes place in a few rooms: the control center, the film lab, the subtitling room, the playback and film editing room, and perhaps one other place in the building. Eighty percent of the action probably takes place in that control room. (Even 12 Angry Men has courtroom scenes.) The effect of this choice alone is to place the audience exactly where the production crew sits, from the perspective of what is familiar and recognizable. This ratchets up the tension—but not as a plot device—but as an emotionally effective portrayal of the reality of these circumstances. Combine this with the handheld camerawork and the fact that we can’t hear the other end of calls that aren’t transmitted into the room, along with other directing and editing decisions, and we get a very limited scope of what we, the audience, can understand about the world outside of that television studio.
Next up: Two complaints
The performances in this film were overall top notch. I appreciated the music, most but not all of the handheld camera vs. Steadicam decisions, and the positioning of the camera in relation to the actors and the action. These elements of directing and acting gave an undeniable strength to the script, which shone through as a powerful and thought-provoking (not just provocative) story in its own right. Sort of.
Call them «missed opportunities» One
There is an explicit examination of the optics and their real collective emotional impact on a country and its people who failed to protect Jewish visitors, at a time when international camaraderie is the watchword of the hour and the possibility of making «reparations» exists (though, as any German or Jew will tell you, making reparations for the Holocaust is not possible), through an interaction between the former oppressor and the fugitive visitor. Things move pretty quickly in the film, and there is not enough time to explore the impossible questions on the subject in depth.
Комментарии