Film Comparison Final 03

SAE INSTITUTE BA (Hons) Film Making Tomer Barzide Class 02 FD0209

FM204 | Cultural Perspectives Film Comparison. Shalom, Sallam, Frieden, Peace April 2009

Word count: 3390

Table of contents: 1.Introduction 1.1. Paper overview …...................1 1.2. Chosen films …....................2-3 2. Body 2.1.

Narrative elements …...4-6

2.2.

Cinematic craft …........7-16

3. Conclusion ….............................17-18 4. Bibliography …...........................19-20

ii

1. Introduction 1.1. Paper overview “You're in a pub having a schnapps with a stranger... a young art student with one testicle. Let's say his name is Adolf. Adolf at this point in his life has done no wrong. He's not bitter. He's not angry. He's committed no crime... He certainly hasn't started a world war... Do you kill him?” (Rosen, 1995) This is a quote from the film The Last Supper. At this point in the film a group of five graduate students decide that from then on they will kill anybody they think is a threat to society. Would you kill an innocent man if there was a chance that you would be saving other people’s lives? Do the Jewish people as a nation have the right to hunt down war criminal Nazis or Palestinian terrorists, at any cost? This paper will discuss the how the Jewish nation compromises its own values in order to retaliate from threat through a film comparison. First, there will be an outline of the chosen films and how the narrative elements are relevant to the topic, then it will be demonstrated how each film addresses the problem above. Another portion of this paper will compare the two films’ cinematic craft; framing, composition, lighting, sound design, special effects, performance, editing, music etc. To conclude, this essay will define what the different films have in common fundamentally when dealing with the issue above and I will give my opinion on the subject as well as on the films themselves.

1

1.2. Chosen films Steven Spielberg is one of the biggest film directors in Hollywood. He is also an American Jew. Spielberg is one of the Honorary Chair of USC Shoah Foundation Institute Board of Councillors. The foundation holds about 52,000 testimonies from Holocaust survivors available to the public in video form (USC College, 2007). Spielberg is responsible for films like Schindler’s List (1993), Saving Private Ryan (1998), Minority Report (2002) and Munich (2005) (IMDB, 2005). The films above all deal with strong political and life and death values. The films are then relevant to the questions mentioned in the Paper Overview. Therefore it will be interesting and beneficial to look at Speilberg’s work. The most specific and relevant to the political value discussed in this paper is Munich (2005). If discussing the moral right of Jews to hunt those who wish to harm them as a nation, it is almost an obligation to bring an Israeli point of view to the subject at hand. The latest Israeli cinema success, Waltz With Bashir, seems to be an appropriate choice as it raises questions about Israel’s actions in Lebanon. However, Walk On Water (Lalechet Al Hamaim) by Eytan Fox (2004) is the film chosen as it is very similar in narrative and in moral values raised in Munich. The two films compared are: Munich (Spielberg) and Walk on Water (Fox). About Munich: Munich, also known as Vengeance (the book it is based on), is a film directed by Steven Spielberg and written by Tony Kushner and Eric Roth. The cinematography is by Janusz Kaminski, A.S.C. [IMDB]. The film is inspired by true events that took place in 1972, when a Palestinian terrorist group (Black September) kidnapped and killed eleven Israeli athletes at the Olympic games in Munich, Germany. Golda Meir, then the prime-minister of Israel, decides to eliminate those 2

responsible for the assault, by assigning five Mossad agents for the mission. The hero, Avner (Eric Bana), faces many moral decisions along the way and sometimes even questions the ethics of his actions (Spielberg, 2006). Most of the film was shot in Malta and Budapest to simulate locations like London, Tel-Aviv, Beirut and Munich with an estimated cost of 75 million American Dollars (Benjamin, 2006). About Walk On Water: Walk On Water is a film by Eytan Fox (director) and Gal Uchovski (writer), shot in Israel and Berlin with budget of 1.4 million US dollars that later grew to around two million. Eyal (Ashkenazi), the main character, is a well trained, hardened Mossad agent sent undercover to find information on the hiding location of a Nazi war criminal. To do that he needs to get close with his grandchildren, Pia and Alex, Alex being a homosexual. In the process he gets too close and then needs to betray the people that he cares about, killing their grandfather. Through that emotional voyage, Fox (Director) addresses the Jewish revenge against Nazis issue and links it to the Israel-Palestine crises (Fainaru, 2004). Fox also addresses homophobia. On that token I would like to mention that the screenwriter, Gal Uchavski, is in fact a declared Homo-sexual.

3

2. Body 2.1. Characters and narrative elements. One of the things that make Israel unique is the fact that is it the only state of which the majority of the population is Jewish: 76.4 per cent, according to the Central Intelligence Agency, the CIA (2004). Israel was established in 1948 right after World War Two, and this is not a coincidence. The Jewish people had the urge to establish a state of their own, a place with Jewish identity, a place they would be able to protect. Those Jewish people, now known as Israelis, escape one problem only to find another; the Middle East crises. (Bright, 2000) “I'm always in favour of Israel responding strongly when it's threatened. At the same time, a response to a response doesn't really solve anything..” (Spielberg, 2005, quoted by Schicker, Times Magazine). The question raised in both films is: will Israel’s actions against its enemies result in the regional violence stopping? The protagonist in both cases is sent to assassinate those tagged as the enemy of Israel. At first, both Avner (Munich) and Eyal (Walk On Water) are very eager to complete their mission with a hundred per cent success. However, as the story continues, they find themselves questioning the purpose of their mission. Here are some examples of how the characters and the films’ narratives demonstrate and outline the problem above. Walk On Water tries to link what happened to the Jews in World War Two to the Middle-East crises. When Alex buys a jacket from a local Arab storeowner, Eyal makes sure that Alex will pay as little as possible, even though Alex is more than happy to pay the full amount. Alex then judges Eyal for doing that, arguing that the poor shop owner has a hard financial life already. Eyal says in return: “I forgot you Germans are so sensitive. Human misery always touched your hearts” (movie, min 52’). 4

This small dialogue demonstrates subtly the link between Nazi Germany and Israel’s behaviours towards the Arabs in their country. Munich, on the other hand, finds justification for Israel’s killing in The Bible; after the first assassination the five Mossad agents celebrate their success, until one of them asks why they are celebrating. Avner then answers that it is just like when the Egyptians drowned in the Red Sea. Just to make the point stronger and more assertive, Steve (team member) adds “Don’t fuck with the Jews” (movie, min 39’). In another scene from Munich, the filmmaker shows that the Mossad agents operate without knowing whether or not the people that they are sent to kill actually did what they are alleged to have done: Avner says: “This is the story and I believe them [Mossad case officers], don’t you?! .... Just don’t think about it!” (movie, min 47’). Walk On Water makes very good use of the characters’ background to imply that going after the Nazi is a personal revenge. When Eyal finds the Nazi he starts to plan how to kidnap and bring him to trial in Israel. However, Menachem, his case officer, reveals that this is a personal agenda and he wants the Nazi dead. He is using the Mossad resources to gain personal revenge as he is a Holocaust survivor. In order to convince Eyal to help him, he reminds him that his mother also suffered from the cruel hand of the Nazis. Menachem tells Eyal: “Nobody knows we are here... you have to do it yourself...” Eyal tries to convince him otherwise, but Menachem insists: “So maybe he is half dead, but only half. This is our chance. Go. Do the right thing, for me, for your mother.” (movie, min 90’). We can see just how deep Menachem’s mental scar is: he makes all this effort to gain revenge from the Nazi that is almost dead anyway and who he didn’t know personally. The protagonists in both films are going through a trajectory. In the beginning, Avner and Eyal are more than happy to kill in the name of their country and identity, even at great costs. Avner had to leave his expecting wife to complete his mission 5

and Eyal’s wife killed herself because she could not bear the man Eyal had become as a result of his job. In a weak moment, Eyal reveals to Alex: “Iris, my wife, she didn’t just leave you see. She killed herself, she left me a note, she said I kill anything that comes near me. I don’t want to kill anymore.” (movie. min 96’). Munich ends in a very emotional conflict between Avner and his case officer, Efraim. “You did well but you’re unhappy” says Efraim. Avner replies: “I killed seven men... Did we accomplish anything at all? Every man we killed has been replaced by worse.” Efraim then says: “You killed them for the sake of a country you now choose to abandon... you killed them for the future, for peace” Avner insists: “There’s no peace at the end of this, no matter what you believe.” (movie, min 148’). It is clear that Avner has changed a lot during the operation. He has now come to realize that the killing does not help but only makes it worse. Moreover he had to pay a personal price in the process. Efraim’s opinion is different: he believes that Israel will eventually win this ongoing war with determination. He says: “why cut your finger nails? they will grow back.” (movie, min 146’). Through various examples from both films, the opinion of both Fox and Spielberg are clear; violence does not solve violence and everything has a consequence. However, they do not offer an alternative which means that for the time being there is no real solution. “Every country finds it necessary to compromise with it’s own values” (Golda Meir, Munich. min 12’).

6

2.2. Cinematic craft Symbolism: Spielberg uses symbolism to communicate ideas. For example, Munich begins with a recreation of the terror attack in the Olympic games in Munich. One of the shots in that scene has a poster on the wall that reads “Metzada” [see fig. 01]. Metzada is a famous historic Jewish story in which a whole village was under attack by the Romans and evidently all the residents died (National Parks of Israel). By showing that Spielberg juxtaposes Metzada with the killing in Munich communicates that Jewish people have been under attack throughout history.

Fig. 01. Film, Munich (2005) screenshot I n Walk On Water’s first scene we see Eyal assassinating an Arab in Turkey. Just before he attacks his target we see the target’s son running, holding a red balloon [see fig 02]. In art, red can represent intensity, danger and aggressiveness. It seems as if the child is warning us of a danger. (Kress, 2002)

7

Fig. 02. Film, Walk On Water (2004) screenshot Both Fox and Spielberg use children to symbolize and represent the innocent who suffer from the heroes' actions. In Walk on Water, after Eyal assassinates his target in Turkey, we see the target’s child crying [see fig. 03]. In Munich, when the bomb-maker is gathering intelligence in the target's house, there is an intimate moment between him and the target’s daughter [see fig. 04, 05]. The bomb-maker then realizes that by planting a bomb in the target’s phone he might actually harm this lovely, little innocent girl.

Fig. 03. Film, Walk On Water (2004) screenshoot 8

Fig. 04. Film, Munich (2005) screenshot

Fig. 05. Film, Munich (2005) screenshot Aspect ratio, framing and composition: Munich’s aspect ratio is 2.35:1, which is a very wide frame as opposed to Walk On Water which has a smaller aspect ratio of 1.85:1. As Munich is a period film (1970’s), it was important for the director to show the landscapes and the special sets. He chose a wide frame which emphasizes landscapes. “Different aspect ratios call for different approaches to compositing your shot..” (Ascher and Pincus, 2008). In one of the scenes in Walk On Water, Alex and Eyal are visiting the Kineret, the place that according to the New Testament, Jesus walked on water.

Alex’s character is very pure, balanced and whole. Alex

explains to Eyal that in order to walk on water like Jesus, you need to 9

be purified. In fig 06 Alex attempts to walk on water. The shot is very symmetrical and balanced and in the horizon there are two symmetrically composed hills. Alex is standing right in the middle appearing symmetric as well, with his arms in the shape of a cross. The water in this case also represents purity.

Fig. 06. Film, Walk On Water (2004) screenshot The hero in Munich has identity problems from the moment he starts the assassinations. After his partner is killed he is in a poor emotional state and he does not know himself any more. In fig. 07 we can see the use of reflection in the composition to subliminally reflect on his emotional state. Mirrors are often used in Munich when the Mossad agents are in surveillance [see fig. 08 and 09] of a target and this communicates they are hiding their identity.

10

Fig. 07. Film, Munich (2005) screenshot

Fig. 08. Film, Munich (2005) screenshot

Fig. 09. Film, Munich (2005) screenshot

11

Lighting: The lighting’ role in Munich is often used to reflect on the emotional state of the characters. When the bomb-maker tells Avner he doesn’t want to kill any more, the characters are back-lit which forms a silhouette. [see fig. 10]. The audience cannot see any facial details. This shows how the bomb-maker does not want to be what he became; his identity is false. In the same scene the script also exposes this emotional state of the bomb-maker when he tells Avner: “We are Jews Avner, Jews don’t do wrong because our enemies do wrong... and now I’m losing it..” (Movie, min 116’).

Fig. 10. Film, Munich (2005) screenshot Walk On Water mostly uses natural light and the subjects are normally evenly lit. In contrast to Munich, Walk On Water has a more realistic edge to it. In my opinion the lighting has much to do with it; when it is clear to the viewer that no special lighting was added to the shot it looks more real, almost like a documentary [see fig.11]. We can also see some similarity to The Idiots by Lars Von Trier who is well known for his realistic approach in his films. [see fig. 12]

12

Fig. 11. Film, Walk On Water (2004) screenshot

Fig. 12. Film, Idiots (1998) screenshot. Editing: “The juxtaposition could create a new reality, greater than that of each individual shot” (Dancuger, 2006). Munich uses juxtaposition in the editing to show the Israeli government's reasons for revenge. In the scene where the television news is announcing the names of the Israeli victims, the editor inter-cuts with the names of the Terrorists the Mossad listed as a targets for assassination. [see fig. 13]

13

Fig. 13. Film, Munich (2005) screenshot When the five Mossad agents are in Athens planning their next assassination, a group of arabs come to stay in the same hiding, but Avner and his group do not know this. As both groups are armed and constantly fear for their lives because of the nature of their jobs, the situation is very tense. Everyone draws their weapons aiming at each other threatening to kill, but after a short exchange of words the weapons are put down and the atmosphere is relaxed again. The editing pace correlates with the intensity of the scene. In the graph below [see fig. 14] I have pin pointed every cut on the time line from the beginning of the scene to the end of it. The result shows exactly where the guns are, when someone’s life is at stake, and when the characters put their guns down, the danger gone.

Fig. 14

14

This method of editing really puts the audience in the action as if we are in the room with the characters. In my opinion this method helps the viewer to engage more with the film. In the last scene in Walk On Water, Eyal writes an e-mail to Alex describing a dream that he had about him. The dream sequence does not have a different colour grade or have a vignette around the frame which are common techniques to communicate dream sequences. Instead it is edited with slow-paced cuts, slow motion and dissolves which subtly convey that we are viewing a dream. Sound design and music: Ben Burtt is one of the most respected sound designers in the industry. With films like Star Wars, Wall-E and Indiana Jones in his resume, along with two Oscar wins and 24 other nominations in his field [IMDB], Burtt had a lot to contribute from his experience to Munich (2005). For example, when Avner, together with his team, tries to kill a target for the first time with a telephone bomb, the agent that rings the target suddenly realizes that the daughter of the target answers the phone. At that point from the agent's perspective everything stops and they must inform the bomb-maker not to press the lethal button. In the same moment the sound changes completely: everything is muted except the sound of a key inserted into the bomb trigger. [see clip No. 01]. It creates a suspense effect: will they blow up the little girl? The only thing that separates the girl from life and death is that key switch. Hence, that key switch is the only thing we hear in the sound mix for that sequence. Walk on Water, the same as Munich, is set in several countries. Walk On Water outlines the cultural difference between Israel and Germany and it does this partly through the soundtrack. We can find songs in English, Hebrew and German. The music in Walk On Water often communicates more then just a nice tune in the 15

background. For example, Eyal and Alex are driving after visiting the dead sea and the radio plays a famous love song in Hebrew. Alex asks Eyal to translate to him the lyrics [see clip 02]. As Eyal translates there is a strong sense that Eyal is missing his loved one (earlier in the film his wife killed herself). It is communicated through the music and the performance. In my opinion that was a very clever way to show the emotional state of our protagonist in this case. It makes us identify with the character more, as most of us will admit that when our romantic life is not at its best, we hear love songs and we feel lonely. Credibility: A film’s credibility is very important as when the viewer feels that what he sees could not be true, it takes away the ability to connect and care for the characters.

Munich has characters from many different

countries, hence the many different languages. The filmmaker decides though that the characters will all speak English, except for on a few occasions. For example, Avner, who is an Israeli Sabra (term for born and raised in Israel), has a scene with his mother who is also Israeli and the dialogue is completely in English except one word ‘Ima’ - which is Hebrew for mother. There are many more examples like this throughout the whole film. In my opinion it takes away from the credibility of the film. As Aristotle said: “Great poetry mimics real life” (Heath, 1996). On the other hand, Walk On Water is very strict in regards to language use: whenever a German talks to a German they speak in German, when an Israeli speaks to an Israeli they speak in Hebrew, and when they are in mixed national they speak in English so one can understand another, just like in real life.

16

3. Conclusion The scope of this paper does not allow me to elaborate more on the subject, therefore this paper includes only the key, interesting and important features of the topic and leaves behind elements like budget, production value, wider history introduction, performance, use of irony, influence etc. Coming back to the film The Last Supper, in the last scene the five invite to dinner the man that has appearing on television throughout the whole film. This man's beliefs, as portrayed on TV in the film, are the absolute opposite to the five graduate students' beliefs. Before they carry out their plan to kill him they ask him whether or not he would kill Hitler in the past, knowing he would turn out to be the Hitler we know from history. He replies: “I’d try to show him the error of his ways to the best of my ability. Challenge his ideas. Exchange thoughts. Provoke change by intelligent debate.”(1995). Unfortunately it is easier said then done. The reality we live in sometimes does not allow this kind of solution for varies reasons, from political to life and death matters. In my opinion what is important to remember is that responding with violence might have short term success but in the long term is has consequences, sometimes heavy ones. I have watched two films that discuss the value above, one was a big scale Hollywood production with an impressive, well known cast and crew, and the other is a small Israeli production, although in Israel terms this this a ‘big budget’ film. The filmmakers come from different backgrounds on one hand, and on the other they share a common religion. Both, however, have more or less the same critical opinion even though they communicated their ideas in different ways which are expressed in the script, camera, lighting, symbols, editing, sound and all of the ingredients that form together a worthy film. In my opinion both films are interesting and important as one. Fox and Spielberg voiced their political and cultural opinion by using what they know best: film. Hence, film has an important role in any culture and from a filmmaker 17

perspective it is important to understand that and use this knowledge in the future. As a final word for this paper I would like to quote Steven Spielberg as cited in a Roger Ebert article regarding Munich: “What I believe, is that there will be peace between Israelis and Palestinians in our lifetimes." (2005)

Word count: 3390

18

Bibliography: Ascher S. & Pincus E.(2008) The Filmmaker Handbook. Published by Penguin Group, USA, pp 87. Benjamin B. (2006)

'The Price of Revenge' , American Cinematographer.

February, pp 32-43. Bright J. (2000). A History of Israel. Published by Westminster John Knox Press, pp 57. Central Intelligence Agency (2004) 'Israel' The World Factbook. [online] Database. Available at: https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/ is.html#People Accessed: 18.04.2009 Dancyge K. (2006) The technique of film and video editing Edition: 4, Published by Focal Press, pp 4. Fainaru D. (2004) Walk On Water, Screen International. February 13, pp 23. Heath M. (1996). Introduction to Poetics (Aristotle). Penguin Books, pp xix. Kress G.(2002) 'Colour as a semiotic mode: notes for a grammar of colour' Available at: http://visculture.files.wordpress.com/2007/02/c-o-l-o-u-r-a-s-a-se-m-i-o-t-i-c-m-o-d-e.pdf. Accessed: 20.04.2009 Munich (2005) Directed by Steven Spielberg [DVD]. Universal Studios.

19

National Parks of Israel (N\A) 'Massada National Park' [online] Available at: http://www.parks.org.il/ParksENG/company_card.php3? NewNameMade=46&from=116&CNumber=853401 Accessed: 20.04.2009 USC College (2007) About us [online] Available at: http://college.usc.edu/vhi/instituteataglance.php Accessed: 14.04.2009 Schickel R. (2005) 'Spielberg Takes On Terror' Times Magazine online. [online].

Available

at:

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1137679,00.html Accessed: 14.04.2009 Spielberg S. (2005). 'A telephone call with Spielberg' RogerEbert.com.[online] Available at: http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article? AID=/20051225/PEOPLE/512250311 Accessed: 20.04.2009 Spielberg S.

(2006) 'Munich - Spielberg speaks about movie' YouTube.

[online]. Available at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gw8sDJtGaqI Accessed: 15.04.2009 The Last Supper (1995) Directed by Stancy title [DVD]. Columbia Pictures, Sony Pictures. Walk On Water (2004) Directed by Eytan Fox [DVD]. Lama Films.

20