Reviewed by Colin Jacobson (February 12, 2025)
Back in 2005, Steven Spielberg made Munich, a take on the terrorist assault at the 1972 Summer Olympics. Nearly 20 years later, we get another view of those events via 2024's September 5.
Led by president Roone Arledge (Peter Sarsgaard), the ABC Sports crew covers the Summer Games in Munich, Germany, However, their mission changes in the early hours of September 5.
Palestinian terrorists attack the Israeli athletes, killing two and taking nine others hostage. Mainly at the lead of control room head Geoff Mason (John Magaro), ABC Sports immediately switches gears to become the newscasters who document these events for the world.
When I first heard about September 5, I wondered what it would do to differentiate itself from Spielberg's Munich. Not that I felt there was only one story to be told about the tragic events during the 1972 Olympics, but I still wasn't sure how much different September 5 might be.
"Very different" becomes the answer due to its perspective. Actually, Munich focused less on the events that occurred during the Olympics and more on Israeli retribution aimed at those responsible.
By contrast, September 5 keeps us firmly connected to the Olympics and what happened in Munich. However, it comes solely via the perspective of those at ABC Sports.
While that offers an unusual perspective, it comes with a price. September 5 gives us a film much less concerned with the terrorist attack and primarily focused on how the ABC journalists covered it.
Which sounds like a plausible approach to the subject matter. After all, plenty of fine films have gone after historical events from the POV of journalists.
However, those movies tend to come at their topics from an investigative perspective. We learn about the topics as the reporters dig in and reveal new information.
In the case of September 5, Arledge, Mason and all the rest exist almost entirely as passive bystanders. They don’t actually investigate the terrorist assault, as instead, they simply document it with the resources available to them.
This robs September 5 of much real drama, as the stakes remain low. The biggest conflict that befalls the ABC crew stems from ethical concerns at times related to whether or not their broadcasts might tip off the Palestinians to law enforcement activities.
These moments spark brief debate among Mason and the rest but they don’t really go anywhere. Instead, most of September 5 simply shows the hurdles the ABC folks needed to leap over to do their jobs.
Those elements offer some intrigue, especially as we revisit the relatively primitive TV world of 1972. However, as mentioned, the stakes remain intensely low for the movie’s characters because it becomes really difficult to worry about their immediate concerns.
Sorry, but fights against other networks for satellite time don’t exactly seem pulse-pounding. Again, the occasional ethical debates add some substance, but those fail to occur often enough to bring depth to the story.
Instead, this leaves us with an intensely passive movie in which the viewer most watches ABC staff as they stare at monitors. We barely feel the drama of the terrorist attacks because we view them from such a distance.
And we also just sense no real stakes for the characters we find. Whether or not they achieve their journalistic goals, it doesn’t matter. They don’t impact the more important events that they document and their lives will go on unchanged regardless of what they do in the TV control room.
All the dramatic music and urgent camerawork in the world can’t make endless shots of people who stare at monitors dynamic. While watchable and moderately interesting, September 5 simply lacks the necessary sparks to become a compelling story.
I enjoy this kind of behind the scenes historical material and really thought I’d like September 5. Unfortunately, the narrative just doesn’t become cinematic enough to make much sense as a movie.