Munich (2005) -vs- Catch Me If You Can (2002)

Here's the rationale for this Smackdown: two films directed by Steven Spielberg, both concerned with a hunter stalking his prey, both based on true stories. In his new film, Munich, the hunter is Avner (Eric Bana), a former bodyguard to Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meier back in the 70s, and he's out to avenge the Palestinian massacre of Israel's Olympic athletes by assassinating those responsible. In the earlier, Catch Me If You Can, the hunter is FBI agent Carl Hanratty (Tom Hanks) out to track down and bring to justice Frank Abagnale Jr. (Leonardo DiCaprio), a 19-year-old imposter of airline pilots, doctors and lawyers.

Based on the "weight" standard about the stature of the film, this is no contest, especially from a Hollywood awards POV. Munich is an important film that raises important questions about terrorism and our response to it. Catch Me If You Can is slight material and whether or not Hanks catches DiCaprio, the world will go on as it has. And yet...

There is absolutely no doubt that Munich is a finely-crafted film with Spielberg at the top of his game. It's an excellent thriller. But without being a pawn of Fox News or anything, I was troubled by the moral equivalency angle as it played out. It does seem to me that if terrorists target innocent athletes or, for that matter, buildings full of innocent victims, that the civilized world has every right to strike back. In fact, I think we have to strike back. History certainly shows that doing nothing is no answer. So, I admire Spielberg's latest work, but I do not agree with its central premise. And I can't bring myself to declare its victory here just because it takes on important issues when I think it lands on the wrong side of them.

Catch Me If You Can. Because it, too, is a great film but manages to land on the right side of things in the end.