To see or not to see: that is the question
I'm sure by now everyone has seen some sort of advertisement for the film "United 93". This is the harrowing account of the fourth plane that crashed on September 11, not into a building like the other three, but into a field in Pennsylvania, the assholes/terrorists thwarted by the courageous actions of ordinary people. It's a compelling story. It deserves to be told. On one hand, I'm very anxious to see it, moreso after seeing this and other very positive reviews. In fact, everything I've read about the movie seem to indicate
And yet I'm bothered by it.
I don't feel, as some people apparently do, that it's "too soon". Rather, I think the thing that disturbs me is the idea of anyone profiting from the events of 9/11. I don't know what to think about the marketing of a film about a tragedy I have lived through. Is it being framed as entertainment? Not really (though as Ebert points out, the trailer does make it seem more like a conventional suspense flick).
I could wrap my head around it much more easily if I knew that all money earned on the movie would go to some sort of charitable organization: to victims' families or something. Maybe it is, but I don't know and haven't heard anything. Even though the filmmakers are taking an obvious risk here, and they seem to be driven by telling an inspiring yet human story, it's hard for me to reconcile it with the thought of people making money off tragedy.
Am I weird for thinking this way? Anyone else have thoughts on this?
Song lyric of the day:
"If I came from outer space
And you're the first thing that I see
I'd be pleased"
- People in Planes, Narcoleptic
And yet I'm bothered by it.
I don't feel, as some people apparently do, that it's "too soon". Rather, I think the thing that disturbs me is the idea of anyone profiting from the events of 9/11. I don't know what to think about the marketing of a film about a tragedy I have lived through. Is it being framed as entertainment? Not really (though as Ebert points out, the trailer does make it seem more like a conventional suspense flick).
I could wrap my head around it much more easily if I knew that all money earned on the movie would go to some sort of charitable organization: to victims' families or something. Maybe it is, but I don't know and haven't heard anything. Even though the filmmakers are taking an obvious risk here, and they seem to be driven by telling an inspiring yet human story, it's hard for me to reconcile it with the thought of people making money off tragedy.
Am I weird for thinking this way? Anyone else have thoughts on this?
Song lyric of the day:
"If I came from outer space
And you're the first thing that I see
I'd be pleased"
- People in Planes, Narcoleptic
7 Comments:
Art at its best captures life - severe tragedy included - and portrays it in a moving/innovative/interesting way. Some people do it for a living. As such, there's a difference between profiteering from tragedy and making money off of art related to tragedy. Recall that this same debate occurred when Bruce Springsteen released "The Rising," which had several songs relating to 9/11 on it. To me, Springsteen's songs were no less honest because part of the reason they were written and recorded was to put food on the table.
"The Rising," "Schindler's List," and other such artistic ventures relating to tragedy ought not to be disparaged because someone made money off them.
World Trade Center is another movie coming out.
I'll have to go read Ebert's review, but my concern about United 93 is that it's going to trivialize the heroism of the people on that plane by turning them into cliches.
My concern about World Trade Center is that Oliver Stone is making it. 'nuff said.
Jeff, naturally you have a point. If we always had reservations about consuming art that depicted reality, even tragedy, for the sheer reason that the artists made money. This post actually more echoes my concerns upon first hearing about the movie, which have been allayed significantly in subsequent weeks. (Oh, and in fairness, I never bought "The Rising" and I'm pretty sure "Schindler's List" happened to be a free rental. However, I guess Wilco's "Yankee Hotel Foxtrot" also falls into this category, so this parenthetical was useless. Ignore it.)
Other Chartruse Meat, yes, World Trade Center is also coming out, but it's Oliver Stone, so you can bet on it being more politically charged and less matter-of-fact than its predecessor. Ergo, in
Ah, so that's where my deleted "ergo" ended up.
Dammit, Ben, how did you sneak that comment in before mine?
"Chartruse" nice. I'm actually afraid the ending is gonna be a "Perfect Storm" ending. They're gonna have an idea about what happened but just make something up for the most part then say "its all true"
Post a Comment
<< Home