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 store-
owner, 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-s-
e-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