That's ture but he makes movies that play on the emotions of Americans for financial gain and the memories of 9/11 I think were still fresh in the minds of all of us. I don't think he cared if he was undermining any "war effort" or the Commander in Chief.... basically, I think emotions of the attacks can be connected to both movies, obviously more to United 93 than his film... but, I haven't seen United 93 yet so I can't really compare the two properly... just my .02 I guess.
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
United 93
- Thread starter goosegagnon2
- Start date
Just so everyone nows, the producers went to each family member of the victims on United Flight 93 and asked them if they were ok with the making of the movie and if they objected to it. I think thats pretty classy on their part, also this is NOT a movie it is suppose to be a documentary, so if you go to the movie theatre expecting to see a movie you might be disappointed, also remember that some of the movie is fictional.
Screamtruth
นักมวย
KillerSnakes said:
Have not heard YUT in a while.
Semper FI
A4sForever said:
I think it's the nature of the beast.
I read a statistic today that over 60% of Americans don't even know the full lyrics of the "Star Spangled Banner"
I would be willing to guess most people don't know the significance of December 7th anymore...in another couple decades 9/11/01 will be forgotten for current events as well.
Edit: Tun Tavern!!!
Dbl Edit: I'm sure that 60% stat was probably pulled out of someone's azz, but the fact that it is believable speaks volumes
debeneadtos said:
WTF? lol. Sorry, that just seemed like the most oximoronic statement i've ever read.... Awesome
I don't really know what to think about this 'movie.' Let us remind ourselves that this was made (as the rest of movies are made) with one goal in mind; TO MAKE MONEY. On one hand I feel that it is completely tacky (for lack of a better word) to make money off of such a tragedy; especially if it is done so to push a political agenda (not that it is, but I would find it hard to believe that the film doesn't contain one). In my eyes, whatever corporation is behind this (be it Universal or Paramount, etc) is as guilty as those classy punks that are pedaling 9/11 memorobilia at ground zero.
On the other hand, I think it is appropriate that America is reminded of the events that occured on 9/11. In this sense, I completely agree with A4s. Christ, it has only been 5 years, FIVE YEARS, since that day has passed, and look how ignorant americans are acting.
Every other time I go to the airport I see people b*tching about security lines, whining because they have to take their shoes or belt off, or take their laptops out of their cases. These are the same Americans that emphasized they would 'never forget,' and if seen at the airport a few months after 9/11 would be quiet as a mouse, gladly cooperating with security. And don't even get me started about those liberal b*stards that constantly whine about the Patriot Act infringing on their 'freedom.' Lets see how much they whine the next time a few thousand American citizens (or god forbid more) perish in another terrorist attack.
Call me a pessimist, but in my humble opinion, the only way these Americans are going to 'remember' is after our homeland is attacked once again. Hopefully this movie, the various documentaries on the discovery channel, etc will serve a purpose in taming this apathy. Time will tell.
Just saw it
I just got home from the 7:00 showing of "United 93" in the most crowded theater I've ever seen in Pensacola. The most surprising thing to me was that the movie does not appear to be politically motivated or overly-dramatized. If you hate Michael Moore, rest assured this movie is nothing like his pitiful excuses for filmography. I think I was expecting something inflammatory like that, but instead I got something that played more like a documentary. It is most definitely NOT "too early" for this movie to be released. If you are the least bit curious and have a strong stomach, then go see it. Don't buy snacks. I don't think you'll regret watching although if you're like me you won't ever want to see it again.
I just got home from the 7:00 showing of "United 93" in the most crowded theater I've ever seen in Pensacola. The most surprising thing to me was that the movie does not appear to be politically motivated or overly-dramatized. If you hate Michael Moore, rest assured this movie is nothing like his pitiful excuses for filmography. I think I was expecting something inflammatory like that, but instead I got something that played more like a documentary. It is most definitely NOT "too early" for this movie to be released. If you are the least bit curious and have a strong stomach, then go see it. Don't buy snacks. I don't think you'll regret watching although if you're like me you won't ever want to see it again.
OK, because I got out voted by my friends, I went ahead and went to this tonight despite my previously stated intentions to pass on it.
I'll admit it was a good movie. For once, Hollywood did not try to rewrite history.
I'll also agree that it was a good reminder to the short-lived memory of the American public.
I wanted to cry when I heard the group of college kids walking out of the theater in front of us say "So that's what happened on the plane. I didn't realize that knew so much."
While I'm glad that they are giving 10% of the opening weekend gross to the memorial fund, I think that is just Hollywood's way of trying to make it OK that they are going to make a butt load of money off this tragedy and to make the victims' families think they care.
They say the families agreed "it was time". If I was part of a victim's family, I would probably agree too just to ensure my loved one was not forgotten. But I hope I would realize that the biggest motive behind this film is profit.
Call me cynical, but Hollywood does not make movies for altruistic motives. They make them to make money. If 100% of the profits from this movie were going to the victims' families, the memorial or charity - then I would accept all the BS the director said about his motives.
Bottom line, I wish I had stuck to my guns with my friends and either have convinced them to see a different movie or let them go by themselves. I feel like I helped someone profit off of a national tragedy.
I'll admit it was a good movie. For once, Hollywood did not try to rewrite history.
I'll also agree that it was a good reminder to the short-lived memory of the American public.
I wanted to cry when I heard the group of college kids walking out of the theater in front of us say "So that's what happened on the plane. I didn't realize that knew so much."
While I'm glad that they are giving 10% of the opening weekend gross to the memorial fund, I think that is just Hollywood's way of trying to make it OK that they are going to make a butt load of money off this tragedy and to make the victims' families think they care.
They say the families agreed "it was time". If I was part of a victim's family, I would probably agree too just to ensure my loved one was not forgotten. But I hope I would realize that the biggest motive behind this film is profit.
Call me cynical, but Hollywood does not make movies for altruistic motives. They make them to make money. If 100% of the profits from this movie were going to the victims' families, the memorial or charity - then I would accept all the BS the director said about his motives.
Bottom line, I wish I had stuck to my guns with my friends and either have convinced them to see a different movie or let them go by themselves. I feel like I helped someone profit off of a national tragedy.
DanMav1156 said:
Any movie starring Ben Affleck can generally also be considered a national tragedy.
Concur. And don't even get me started on the "historical accuracy" of said movie.
goosegagnon2
Member
nice...
lol