**An Overlooked Chance: The Shortcomings of *September 5* in Realizing Its Ambitious Concept**

The thriller *September 5* seeks to depict the traumatic events of the 1972 Munich Olympics hostage situation, yet it falters in several areas. Acting as both a filmic retelling of a sorrowful historical incident and a journalistic examination of live television coverage, it ultimately does not succeed. Despite its increased relevance amidst current disturbing news from Palestine, its limited perspective — focusing almost exclusively on the real-time events in ABC’s Munich newsroom — constrains its breadth and effectiveness. The outcome is a film that provides little substantial understanding of the occurrences it aims to reflect, be it in retrospect or as they were happening.

### A Technically Skilled, Yet Emotionally Vacant Film

Swiss filmmaker Tim Fehlbaum, who shared screenplay writing duties with Moritz Binder and Alex David, brings a sharp technical execution to the film. However, this skill translates into a mechanical and uninspiring viewing experience. Its political stance appears ambiguous, wavering between awkward neutrality and conformity to the status quo. Despite being mentioned in at least one Oscars prediction list, *September 5* has not sparked significant interest since its premiere at Venice. Whether it will resonate with awards voters remains uncertain, but awarding it recognition would be a mistake. The film lacks the artistic substance and political depth to warrant such accolades.

### The Narrative of *September 5*

The storyline begins in the early hours of September 5, 1972, when eight members of the Palestinian group Black September held the Israeli Olympic team hostage, demanding the liberation of over 200 Palestinian prisoners. This tragic event, marking one of the first global news stories broadcast live, is portrayed through the perspective of ABC’s improvised newsroom. The journalists race to cover the escalating crisis, providing a glimpse into the frantic and opportunistic nature of live TV reporting. While the premise holds promise, Fehlbaum does not fully capitalize on it.

At first glance, the film’s focus on the newsroom provides a distinctive angle on the technical hurdles of live broadcasting. The tactile elements — maps, books, and telephones adapted as radio receivers to intercept German police communications — are captivating. However, the ethical dilemmas arising from quick decision-making and the media’s role in intensifying the crisis are treated superficially. For example, the film briefly addresses the real-life error of airing police strategies in real time, which enabled the perpetrators to stay ahead, but it does not adequately explore the ramifications of such oversights.

### A Superficial Take on Intricate Events

*September 5* seems obliged to follow a biopic checklist, concentrating on the logistics of “what” and “who” rather than the more emotionally compelling “how” and “why.” Even under its self-imposed limitations, the film has difficulty delivering engaging drama. Significant moments are rushed through, and the editing seldom pauses long enough to convey the emotional significance of any decision or incident. In a crucial scene, a character asserts, “It’s not about details, it’s about EMOTIONS.” Ironically, the film itself neglects this guidance.

The challenges facing *September 5* go beyond its narrative choices. Its narrow perspective leaves critical elements of the larger story unexplored, requiring the audience to bridge the gaps. John Magaro portrays Geoffrey Mason, a young producer faced with real-time editorial choices, while Peter Sarsgaard plays Roone Arledge, an executive whose pragmatic, ruthless style contrasts with Mason’s idealistic views. Ben Chaplin’s Marvin Bader provides the voice of reason, articulating the ethical dilemmas that the film only briefly touches upon. Regrettably, these conflicts remain underdeveloped, as the film hastily transitions from one event to the next without moments of contemplation.

### The Film’s Political Shortcomings

A notable flaw in the film is its failure to engage seriously with the broader political landscape of the Munich crisis. Benjamin Walker makes a brief appearance as TV journalist Peter Jennings, whose nuanced awareness of Middle Eastern politics is alluded to but never thoroughly examined. In one scene, Jennings proposes the use of terms like “guerillas” or “commandos” rather than “terrorists,” a term laden with implications. This moment of linguistic and political tension is swiftly brushed aside, and the film ultimately resorts to the term “terrorist” in its closing credits, contradicting its attempt at complexity.

By avoiding a dialogue on the larger geopolitical elements of the Israel-Palestine conflict, *September 5* loses the chance to offer a more nuanced and critical viewpoint. This exclusion is particularly striking in light of the ongoing skewed coverage of similar conflicts today, such as Israel’s recent assaults in Gaza. The film’s hesitance to confront these subjects renders its political perspective superficial at best.

### Aesthetic and Structural Deficiencies