United 93. We Stand Divided.
Last night marked the kick off of the Tribeca Film Festival in New York City. The five year old event was created in the wake of 9/11 in an attempt to rejuvenate Lower Manhattan and aid in New York's slow recovery. As part of the gala opening, America got its first look at UNITED 93, Paul Greengrass' film depicting the now legendary tale of the passengers who rose up to confront their terrorist captors.
I had heard something about this movie being made, but hadn't given it much thought. It wasn't until I was sitting in a dark theater a few weeks ago, watching the coming attractions before a film that the movie fully arrived on my pop culture radar. At first, the trailer looks like any other movie. A bunch of characters running onto a plane, something's gonna happen, yadda yadda yadda. But as the trailer continues, a sense of deja vu begins to seep in. We've been here before. By the time you finally realize what you are watching you're transfixed. You can't look away because you know what's coming. As I sat there, I thought "If the trailer is any indication, this is going to be one powerful film." Then, the person next to me muttered, under his breath:
"That's disgusting, how can they make that movie? They can count me out, that's for sure".
The response was a surprise, but not that unique. In the subsequent weeks I've had similar conversations with several people who feel the movie is coming out too soon after 9/11, or that it's wrong to try to "cash in" on the most awful tragedy to ever happen on American soil. Others question the validity of the story altogether. With just cellphone conversations and the airplane's black box to tell us what happened, how can we expect ANYONE to paint an accurate picture of what took place that day?
Accurate or not, the story has been told enough that it has attained near mythic status. On September 11, 2001, 44 people boarded United Flight 93 for San Francisco. Four of them knew that plane would never arrive at its destination. Once the flight was in the air, four terrorists took control of the plane with the intention of crashing it into an American Monument. The passengers realized what was happening and decided to take matters into their own hands. They called their loved ones. They said their good-byes. And they fought back. They died as warriors. They died as heroes.
Now obviously, EVERYONE is allowed to choose not to see a movie that they object to. And everyone is entitled to their opinion, ESPECIALLY when it comes to something as personal and emotional as 9/11. So it's not that I'm disagreeing with the people who say this movie is wrong and exploitative. I just don't get it.
Like my parents when Kennedy was shot, I will never be able to forget where I was on September 11th, 2001. I will remember the phone call from my Mom telling me to turn on the TV. I will remember staring at the television not being able to speak. I will remember driving down The 101 in the middle of the day, hearing the DJ on the radio asking all of us to turn on our headlights to show support and unity so we wouldn't feel alone and seeing every headlight in front on me instantly blaze to life.
But what I remember most is that, through all of the tragedy and the anger and the confusion, I was proud. Obviously I was proud of the police, firemen and rescue workers who showed extraordinary courage and heroism. But I was also proud when I heard the stories of people doing selfless and amazing things for complete strangers. People running back into the Tower, carrying people down the stairs who couldn't make it, giving aid, shelter or protection to people in shock on the street. September 11th showed that, when things are at their absolute worst, human beings really can be at their absolute best.
And nothing symbolizes that more for me that United Flight 93.
So I understand why people would have a desire to tell this story. It's already been told twice in TV movie format, and although I didn't see either, I can only imagine that the quality will be a good deal better in the film version. The film version also has the approval of all of the surviving family members of the Flight 93 passengers, they were in attendance at last nights premiere. 10 % of the opening weekend profits will be set aside to build a memorial for the passengers. And the ad campaign has been extremely subtle...Especially when compared to the summer blockbusters towering around it.
When I take all of that into consideration, it seems to me that the filmakers and studio have in actuality walked a very fine line in the promotion of this film. I don't feel that the movie is "exploiting" the event any more than Schindler's List, Good Morning Vietnam or Hotel Rwanda. It's a more personal story for us, sure. It's going to be alot harder to watch. But that doesn't mean that it SHOULDN'T be made. All personal opinions aside, once we start saying that certain events and subjects are out of bounds for artistic interpretation we begin to slide down the slippery slope of censorship.
This isn't a plea to change your mind and go see the movie. To be honest, I have no clue if it's good or not. It could be awful and offend me on every level. This is more of a statement that, even if this particular movie is no good, I think the stories of September 11th, 2001 are ready to be told. We need stories about heroes in the world. Especially the ones that are true. The day when we showed our greatest heroism should be held up and celebrated, not hidden behind hushed voices and silent reverence.
posted by Last Son of Krypton at 3:27 PM
17 Comments:
Great Blog,Clark.
My problem is with the medium. I don't think a "movie" of any kind can provide the catharsis necessary to justify tackling the subject matter. I think a play would have a better shot because it is, by necessity, a more sublet form based on metaphor. In the right hands, it could be a powerful film, but I don't think a straight forward, realistic re-telling of the events is going to cut it for me and I doubt this film will be anything other than that. Hopefully, I'll be proved wrong.
Well, that's getting more into a subjective discussion of what works or doesn't work for you artistically. I have no clue if the movie will work or not, I just don't quite grasp the thinking behind the people that get mad at the fact that it was made in the first place. Although tragic, I don't think Sept 11th should be held apart from every other event in history as the one thing we aren't allowed to make a movie about.
Schindler's List doesn't "work" for me. I'm not upset Spielberg made the movie.
"Schindler's List doesn't "work" for me."
That right there proves just how insane you are.
It's not just my artistic preference I'm talking about. I think people are objecting to a "movie" on this topic (at least for now). A book or a play would probably be okay but a movie is perceived as somehow cheapening the event. Probably more of an indictment of film industry than anything else -- and I can't say I disagree.
Obviously in the post above I meant to say that a play was a more subtle form. Yeh, spell check!
I saw a play about 9/11. It was a kind of cathartic experience but probably not the kind we're talking about here.
Oh....let's leave THAT play alone.
I think you're right that it's an indictment of the film industry...but, again, it gets down to people saying that a certain subject is somehow too "sacred" to be put on film.
What makes this event different from any other tragedy? That it happened to us? Would people be this upset about a Tsunami movie starring Jet Li this summer?
I'm not saying that they're wrong, this movie could very well be Hollywood trash. But there's no reason to exclude this event from that fate.
and how does Schindler's List not working for me make me insane?
I'm not one of those people that think it's too soon or someone's trying to cash in on 9/11, but I have no interest in seeing this movie because I know that the story that will be told is not real, although it's about real events. The people who were on Flight 93 were heroes, real honest-to-god heroes. But sadly, since all of them died, we don't really know what happened on that plane beyond a sketchy outline.
Now I'm interested in some of the behind the scenes stuff I hadn't thought about before: what the FAA was doing, other agencies on the ground. But I know to make this movie there has to be a whole lot of supposition about what went on up there, and to me it's disrespectful to make assumptions and sweeten it up with imagined tales of bonding and friendship.
Does that mean I think it shouldn't have been made? No. I think it's good to remind people, to get the feelings out again, to rethink where we were then and contrast it to where we are now. Am I indicting Hollywood? Not really. Like I said, I'm fine with the movie being made and I do agree that the marketing has been very subtle and respectful.
I guess I just see a big hole in the story that can't be fixed by a couple minutes' worth of phone calls.
I don't actually have an opinion about the movie itself.
(And Schindler's List didn't work for me either, Norm.)
But I do know that I am still so emotional on the subject of 9/11 that no way will I deliberately go and watch a movie about it. There's not enough tissue in the world. The preview makes me sob.
I understand what you're saying Mr. Rapp. But, by that logic, MOST movies in Hollywood that are based on real events would be films that one would choose not to see.
Any story that is "based on actual events" is just that. Based. No matter how much research is done there are always conversations, character arcs and facts that are twisted, altered or just made up to suit the story.
Take Cinderella Man. The movie depicts Jim Braddock's opponent, Max Baer, as a remorseless killer who has already killed twice in the ring and is ready to pound poor Russel Crowe into the ground. But in reality, the man was so haunted by the accidental deaths he caused in the ring that he had nightmares for years. But that doesn't make a good story so they changed it.
And that's what the tale of Flight 93 is. It's a story. The people on the plane were REALLY heroes. That's not in doubt. But like all of history's heroes, their story will be altered and changed and cleaned and polished so that they come to resemble the idealized version of a hero that people want.
That's not anything new, and I'm not saying it's necessarily good, but it's been happening long before Hollywood came along and nothing about Flight 93 is any different than any other story that is "based on actual events".
I agree with you, Clark. So I guess I'd have to say that it's too soon to twist, alter or make things up about 9/11 for me. I'd much rather watch the HBO special if I were to run myself through the ringer, because then I'd know I'm crying for the real people and the real events. They don't need embellishment in my book.
There's an amazing line in Neil Gaiman's Sandman where Dream says:
"Things don't always need to have happened to be true."
I guess that's how I feel about situations like these.
That's an excellent quote.
Well ladies and gentleman I come up on this blog very late in the process as the movie has already come out. Knowing the last son of krypton as I do, I respect his views on this subject and understand where he is coming from. However, I am one of those people who feel the movie is coming out too soon. BUT I am also one of those people who are going to see it just so I can have a more rounded opinion.
Let me explain...well first let me dismiss the notion of this film being compared to any "war" film or "holocaust" film or any of those type of films. The analogy does not work because those were instances of many battles or in the holocaust, situations that occurred for many years, and this was one instance, one attack. The only thing you can compare 9/11 to is Pearl Harbor...since that was the only other time where we were attacked on our shores in an incident that led to a battle. But even people from that time find 9/11 more harrowing because 9/11 was an attack on civilians, not a military installation, and it occurred on our mainland and not a port off the coast of Hawaii and also people of many different nations died and not just Americans. Also the geography of Hawaii gives the illusion of not being part of our MAINland (this goes for Alaska as well). That being said...
I believe that any effort to exploit the story for personal profit, and let's face it that is what this is, since only 10% is going to the families, is highly suspect. I understand a desire for the detached Hollywood people to make a movie that will exploit people's feelings on the subject as par for the course here in LA. They have been doing that for years as I seem to be in the minority here because Schindler's List DID work for me. What could have been the way around that pereception would have been for everyone to work for scale and have a studio or have a coalition of three or more studios give money to make this film. Then donate all the profits to the families and 9/11 charities. And please don't give me this "it's a business" excuse. Because if they can sink over a 100 million into something like Battlefield Earth and lose 70 million or more on the venture then they can pony up 30 million to make a film that is supposedly "important" to them. And if you still want to use the "business" excuse, then I can gurantee that a pro war government like ours could have found some loophole in the IRS for the studios to use their contributions as a write off. Please do not ever confuse studios with people who see anything other than the green dollar bill. Thats why they are only donating 10%...shit if they had gone to 50% I would have given them some credit. And for those of you who work in studios please do not take this personally unless you sit on their board or are a CEO and if you aren't then I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT YOU!
Now as for them showing it at Tribeca...I found that to be deplorable and massively manipulating. How in the world can you expect an audience to have an unbiased opinion about a movie like this when you cram the theatre full of the relatives of these people and subject the audience memebers to their very real grief??!! How can you subject people to that kind of horror...what's next make a film about all the child murderers and have every family that lost a child watch the movie right next to you? And please do not try to tell me that they did this to comfort the relatives and shed more light on the story. EVERYONE KNOWS THE STORY! They used it as a way to drum up press and publicity for the movie. And all of you know it...deep down.
Finally let me address the last son of krypton's desire to understand why people feel this film shouldn't have been made. The reason(s) is because it is still too close to our hearts and we all suffered with it for so many days that we do not need a film telling us how to feel or creating conversations and dialogue that exploit these very real people and turn them into fantasy "heroes". It's bullshit. We know they are heroes...we know the firemen are heroes and the cops were heroes and the people who went back into burning buildings were heroes. We want to remember them just as they are...see what you fail to factor in last son of krypton and other people who feel the way he does is that this is the first incident that occurred in our highly technical age where we were able to watch everything unfold on our cable TVs with not only the American side of things, but also the British side with the BBC or the Canadian side or the European side, etc etc. And not only on TV but we were also able to look it up on the internet and read all their sides again. Or read it in newspapers, both foreign and domestic, that were coming out with special editions every few hours complete with new stories. NO other incident that you can compare this to had the level of information overload that was available and used by the citizens of this country. So we were all able to make up our own minds of how we saw this thing and how it affected us. The last thing we need is a Hollywood film that will gloss over and paint with brush strokes that which we can paint so much better, richer and deeper on our own by doing a little bit of research or by watching these very well made documentaries. I mean need I bring up how people lose their minds when a Harry Potter film does not live up to the book?! And that's some fantasy child stuff. Now all that being said, I do still think they have a right to make these films and exploit this tragedy (if they make money off of it, by definition it is exploitation) because this is America and that is indirectly what all those people who died on 9/11 paid the price for believing in. Freedom. In this case...of expression. So although I have many issues with this film existing, I do not deny the filmmaker's rights to make it. That would be un-American. That being said I feel I must see this film to either support or dismiss or make me review my opinions on it's being made. That seems only fair to the people whose lives they depict and the family members who have sanctioned this movie. It is right to go for them, so they know their relatives' stories are being seen and heard in a way that is visible to them and that is by the size of the audiences who attends the showings of this film.
Although all of your reasonings for why 9/11 is different from every other even in history are accurate, it doesn't lessen the analogy. They are all REAL events. They all had a profound effect on history. They have all been made into films that are at best 1/2 factual 1/2 fictional.
All the reasons you stated are absolutely why people have such a hard time with this particular subject, but that's really the point. Once we start singling out one event as something that shouldn't be made into a movie at this time for emotional reasons then we are practicing censorship. Especially because not everyone feels the same way. Some people are saying it is too soon, some are saying it wasn't soon enough, some people think it will NEVER be ok and some people don't care.
And they are ALL right...for them. Some people will never be able to watch a movie about 9/11 just as some people can't watch a movie about Vietnam. I totally respect that.
I just feel that you can't single out 9/11 as any different than any other movie based on real events and if you are going to condemn Hollywood for making a film about 9/11, then we really need to condemn Hollywood for every "real" tragedy they've ever brogught to the screen.
Well I would not like to work in generalizations...to say we should condemn Hollywood for every film that has ever been made based on real events is a bit much. I believe you can work on a case by case basis and sweeping generalizations never work...they are tantamount to racism or bigotry. Granted Hollywood has the right to do whatever the fuck they want...but then they also must reap what they sow. If they are making a movie to exploit an event or peoples' feelings about an event then that is deplorable. If they are making a movie to shed light or to educate from the event then great! For example, if you insist on using the Vietnam analogy, let's take a look at "Apocalypse Now", "Platoon, and "Schindler's List" these were movies made to educate the world about war and the horrors of the Holocaust up front and personal. The Vietnam films exposed the day to day and lunacy of war which many people at that time had little or no clue about. They just knew their Daddies woke up screaming or that they were exposed to some horrific things that they will never be able to talk about. And "Schindler's" was probably the most accurate and moving movie I have ever seen about the Holocaust. These movies highlighted this and sought to teach us what these events can really be like. But then the flip side of the coin are films like "Missing in Action" or "Jakob the Liar" which sought to exploit our feelings about the war for either gung ho, 80s, Reagan small dick bullshit or the Holocaust to help make Robin Williams more like Tom Hanks. And in these cases, the "events" being depicted were exploited for all the wrong reasons. So I guess my point is I don't mind 9/11 films being made, but they should seek to teach us something we did not know...not just satisfy our desire to create or depict "heroes" onscreen. If people need to see a "hero", how about a real one? I suggest you take time to go to an inner city school and speak with a beloved teacher or do a ride along with an honest cop in LA (if you can find one) or even sit and speak with firemen at your firehouse. You can even visit a hospital and speak to the nurses and doctors who save lives every day. I don't need to celluloid to give me my heroes anymore, I need celluloid to entertain or educate me.
Too
Many
Words
(great blog entry, Clark...)
Wow. I wish I had a computer at my desk. But just a quick comment on the nature of history and truth. Many of the common truths we historically believe in are actually stories written about the events long after they actually happened. Such as Paul Revere's ride or the pilgrims landing at Plymouth Rock or Bush winning the election. All just popular fictions.
Post a Comment
<< Home