A film isn't of philosophical worth by premise alone, though, and as far as the finished product goes, I found Munich seriously lacking.

I disagree, too, that the film "has nothing to do with politics". All art is political, of course, but here Spielberg is trying to abandon his commercialised image and make a more adult film. (Interestingly, Godard said once that Schindler's List was black and white in order to look more more mature and serious. ;D As it is, those "poetic" moments of the red dress are silly.) He's making the conscious decision to fictionalise a very political event that really happened.

Vengeance is a very politically loaded word, especially when it's used in this context. And by "politically numb" I perhaps gave the wrong impression; I meant it to mean cold, detached - and not in a positive, deliberate way, but in a frightened-to-commit way. Spielberg's not very ambitious, nor is he all that daring.

If Spielberg is more interested in the humane side of things (I don't know how this is exclusive from the political side), he's shooting himself in the foot by making a film on those events; and no character in the film is human - they're cardboard cut-outs, they could be anybody.

You don't agree Spielberg turns violence into a gimmick? I think he does; and I definitely think he renders philosophically, morally and politically promising questions into mundane, painting-by-numbers clichés.

I'd like to see it again so that I could give more of a refreshed critique.