Comments | realsickgirl: Response to Cat's question about 9/11 movies

realsickgirl

Response to Cat's question about 9/11 movies

Aug 20, 2006 06:14

Why did we make movies about Pearl Harbor, or Vietnam, or WWII, or the Holocaust, or Desert Storm? Why did Munich ever get made, or Schindler's List, or The Pianist, or Three Kings, or Slaughterhouse-5, or Casablanca for that matter ( Read more... )

Comments 8

hafuch_bshemesh August 20 2006, 15:48:12 UTC

I certainly understand the value of this movie (WTC) when it comes to making people feel better--but the thing is, when the movie's based on truth, the fact that it is rife with errors is terrifying. it shows the power of film to make people believe just about anything. for instance (i heard this from dani, who i think may have heard this from cat?), when the police officers are being rescued from the rubble by firemen, there was a major casting error. the firemen who was doing the rescuing was black in real life, but was cast as a white man. they never consulted the real guy when telling his story ( ... )

realsickgirl August 20 2006, 23:51:06 UTC

I understand the flaws with it - there's flaws in every movie, and yeah, these are substantial. But the question was, why was it made at all? And I think there are good reasons for movies of this sort to exist.

realsickgirl August 20 2006, 23:51:43 UTC

oh, and yes. what happened to meteorology?

hafuch_bshemesh August 21 2006, 02:37:24 UTC

i do acknowledge that the feelings a movie instills are often as, or more important than the plot and such. i just dislike this particular movie because of the power it has and how that power has been either ignored or been used unwisely.

and i ditched meteorology after my first semester--an entire semester of 2 meteo classes, chem, and calc will make you hate the maths and sciences. i thought i wanted to do music ed, so i transfered from Iowa State to the University of Iowa (whose music program is outstanding). I spent my first semester here with an undeclared major, taking gen eds and such, one of which included a women's studies course. so now i'm majoring in women's studies, american studies, and sexuality studies. oy.

i_am_going_home August 21 2006, 19:52:48 UTC

When I said we move on, I did NOT mean that we forget it. I'm very very aware that I live in a country that has been ripped apart by terrorism. Having said that, there is absolutely NO point in dwelling on this kind of thing. It doesn't fix it, it doesn't make it not happen. Yes, I KNOW that Manchester was blown up a few years back, how could I not know that? But should a film be made about it? I don't think so.

You saying that films will be made about the IRA bombings in my lifetime...I doubt it. Brits have a very differnet reaction to this sort of thing, I think, our entire culture is so vastly different that the idea of a film being made about it is faintly rediculous.

I can't think of anything else to say, other than that I strongly disagree with your assertation that these films are necessary. But because I very much doubt that I can come up with an acceptable argument, I think we'll have to agree to disagree on this point.

realsickgirl August 22 2006, 04:36:14 UTC

I've exceeded the character limit again. Check my journal.

i_am_going_home August 21 2006, 21:32:57 UTC

Oh, also, I strongly disagree with saying that America being the "strongest" country in the world makes those terrorist attacks any different (or any worse, for that matter) from any other, but that's simply my opinion and you're welcome to (and clearly going to!) disagree.

hafuch_bshemesh August 21 2006, 23:40:44 UTC

yeah, i agree that the US lost its "strongest country" title a few years back, and the assumption that it still is the strongest country turns movies like WTC from pseudo-histoical films into just more evidence of american exceptionalism (which was bullshit even when we were most powerful, but just pathetic now that we've lost the good sides of our diplomatic, political, and social reputations worldwide).