Spielberg Takes On Terror

(2 of 4)

A big, expensive movie--reported to have cost around $70 million--that dives headfirst into Middle East conflicts: Does that give, say, a studio head pause? "Yes, to be honest," says Universal chairman Stacey Snider without hesitation. "At the time when we started it, [the story] felt more quaint. But as we went through the development process, the good and bad news was that it became more relevant."

Indeed, since June, when filming began, the movie has been surrounded by rumors, criticism and suggestions that Spielberg was too pro-Israel to make a fair movie on the subject. The filmmakers responded by keeping the details of the movie very quiet. Reporters were not allowed to visit the sets in Malta, Budapest, New York and Paris, and only a few actors got the complete script--many didn't even know what the whole movie was about. The shoot took three months, a quick turnaround for a movie to be released Dec. 23. That lessened the chance of leaks, as did the fact that most of the crew members were loyal, tight-lipped veterans of past Spielberg movies. When TIME saw the movie, it had just been finished. There had been none of the usual test, press or studio-executive screenings; the movie's star, Eric Bana, had not even seen it. And there has been little advance publicity; Spielberg has done no interviews about the movie with anyone but TIME (see page 70).

"I never like to draw lessons for people," says screenwriter Tony Kushner of how his script deals with the Middle East question. "It's not an essay; it's art. But I think I can safely say the conflict between national security and ethics raised deep questions in terms of working on the film. I was surprised to discover how much the story had to do with nationality vs. family, and questions about home and being in conflict with somebody else over a territory that seems home to both people."

There is an entirely fictional scene in the movie in which Avner and his Palestinian opposite number meet and talk calmly, with the latter getting a chance to make his case for the creation of a homeland for his people. That scene means everything to Kushner and Spielberg. "The only thing that's going to solve this is rational minds, a lot of sitting down and talking until you're blue in the gills," says Spielberg. Without that exchange, "I would have been making a Charles Bronson movie--good guys vs. bad guys and Jews killing Arabs without any context. And I was never going to make that picture."

He almost did not make this picture, which he thrice denied. It was Kathleen Kennedy, his longtime friend and frequent producing partner, who acquired the book on which Munich is based, George Jonas' Vengeance, in 1998. But Spielberg shied away from it, in part, he says, because he had learned at his parents' knees that Middle East politics is such a difficult, passionately argued and unresolvable topic. "I'll leave it to somebody else," he recalls saying, "somebody braver than me." Then, in 1999, the persistent Kennedy prevailed on him to at least reconsider the matter. But two years later, 9/11 happened, and Spielberg felt the story would be perceived as exploitative. The fact that Spielberg could not get a script that in any way satisfied him--three were written--stalled him further.