DonkSlayer
Monday, June 5th, 2006, 9:45 AM
QUOTE (KDawgCometh @ Monday, June 5th, 2006, 12:34 PM)

well, this whole thread was started with firewall getting an 8/10, that pretty much told me where it was going. I'd personally like to hear the reasoning behind saying that Munich wasn't all that good, I personally loved it and IMO was one of Speilberg's best efforts. Saying that it was long is a cop out and is an excuse that can be used behind almost any film that is longer then 2 1/2 hours. There is a difference between a film that flows(which I feel that Munich did) and a film that drags. Granted though, I don't think that it was in the top 5 films of last year(but does make my top ten of what I saw), but that is always up for debate
Easy, man.
Saying "too long" is only a cop-out if somebody with a crappy attention span can't sit through any more longer than 1.5 hours.
I said "too long" because the point was made halfway through the movie. I understood: Eric Bana = generally good guy. Violence begets violence. The point of the movie was made the first time you saw on the TV that the PLO was sending mail bombs, thus reacting to the deaths of the Olympic plotters.
So, too long.
I agree that there were some great parts, great scenes. I also though there were others that weren't amazing.
So, I said 6/10, not bad, not great. If you disagree, fine. Don't insult my intelligence though.