ouizy
Rock n' Roll Doggie
I am concerned with the 'entertainment-ization' of what happened on 9/11. The fact that Oliver Stone is now shooting a film with Nicholas Cage about what happened at Ground Zero:
http://www.cnn.com/2005/SHOWBIZ/Movies/11/03/film.sept11.movie.ap/index.html
and the "Flight 93" film that is also in the works.
I just wonder:
Do these films HAVE to be made?
I think there are some subjects that just do not need to be put on the big screen. I was in Hollywood last week, and everyday of my life I go past Ground Zero. To think the people sitting in movie studios are going to make a film about what happened here makes me very distraught.
Now they may do a good job in telling the story, but why does this story have to be told? Everyone knows what happened, and I am not so sure I am all that interested in Oliver Stone's conspiracy theory as to why it happened.
I know, I know - I do not have to see the film, but to think that people are going to be making money off of this, and will have to advertise this, and junket this thing around makes me sick. Even if Oliver Stone were to donate all the proceeds to the cause, all the crew on this film would still be getting paid to make a film about a disaster that ruined hundreds of families lives.
The whole thing does not sit well with me. The fact that the crew is not even filming at Ground Zero is a good thing in most repects, but to think that some people in California are going to "recreate" the destruction on a sound stage in Studio City makes my stomach turn.
I may be in the minority here, but I just do not understand why this horrible episode in US history has to be brought to the masses by way of a movie. Having lived through it, my opinion is that this is a very bad idea.
I am very interested in your thoughts, and extremely curious how they will differ amoungst those that were in downtown NYC on 9/11, and those that were not.
All are equally relevant.
http://www.cnn.com/2005/SHOWBIZ/Movies/11/03/film.sept11.movie.ap/index.html
and the "Flight 93" film that is also in the works.
I just wonder:
Do these films HAVE to be made?
I think there are some subjects that just do not need to be put on the big screen. I was in Hollywood last week, and everyday of my life I go past Ground Zero. To think the people sitting in movie studios are going to make a film about what happened here makes me very distraught.
Now they may do a good job in telling the story, but why does this story have to be told? Everyone knows what happened, and I am not so sure I am all that interested in Oliver Stone's conspiracy theory as to why it happened.
I know, I know - I do not have to see the film, but to think that people are going to be making money off of this, and will have to advertise this, and junket this thing around makes me sick. Even if Oliver Stone were to donate all the proceeds to the cause, all the crew on this film would still be getting paid to make a film about a disaster that ruined hundreds of families lives.
The whole thing does not sit well with me. The fact that the crew is not even filming at Ground Zero is a good thing in most repects, but to think that some people in California are going to "recreate" the destruction on a sound stage in Studio City makes my stomach turn.
I may be in the minority here, but I just do not understand why this horrible episode in US history has to be brought to the masses by way of a movie. Having lived through it, my opinion is that this is a very bad idea.
I am very interested in your thoughts, and extremely curious how they will differ amoungst those that were in downtown NYC on 9/11, and those that were not.
All are equally relevant.