As I predicted in the "United 93" thread, the "World Trade Center" is a piece of political fluff, whereas "United 93" was apolitical. Here's what the L.A. Times review had to say:
"Larded with fake uplifting moments too numerous to mention, "World Trade Center's" insistence on up-close-and-personal heroics puts it at the opposite end of the spectrum from Paul Greengrass' austere "United 93." If that film had too little overt emotion, this one has too much. It's too bad it wasn't Greengrass who directed Berloff's script. That would have been the Sept. 11 film worth waiting for."
The full review can be found at http://www.latimes.com.
AC
P.S. To be fair, the movie was uplifting, tear-jerking, and very, very Republican (I know because I am one). But as I enjoyed this well-made manupulative movie, I could feel the marionette strings tugging at my emotions. Conservative propaganda for the election year. Sigh! (which smiley is for the sigh?).
"Larded with fake uplifting moments too numerous to mention, "World Trade Center's" insistence on up-close-and-personal heroics puts it at the opposite end of the spectrum from Paul Greengrass' austere "United 93." If that film had too little overt emotion, this one has too much. It's too bad it wasn't Greengrass who directed Berloff's script. That would have been the Sept. 11 film worth waiting for."
The full review can be found at http://www.latimes.com.
AC
P.S. To be fair, the movie was uplifting, tear-jerking, and very, very Republican (I know because I am one). But as I enjoyed this well-made manupulative movie, I could feel the marionette strings tugging at my emotions. Conservative propaganda for the election year. Sigh! (which smiley is for the sigh?).
saynomore Wrote:As I predicted in the "United 93" thread, the "World Trade Center" is a piece of political fluff, whereas "United 93" was apolitical. Here's what the L.A. Times review had to say:
"Larded with fake uplifting moments too numerous to mention, "World Trade Center's" insistence on up-close-and-personal heroics puts it at the opposite end of the spectrum from Paul Greengrass' austere "United 93." If that film had too little overt emotion, this one has too much. It's too bad it wasn't Greengrass who directed Berloff's script. That would have been the Sept. 11 film worth waiting for."
The full review can be found at http://www.latimes.com.
AC
P.S. To be fair, the movie was uplifting, tear-jerking, and very, very Republican (I know because I am one). But as I enjoyed this well-made manupulative movie, I could feel the marionette strings tugging at my emotions. Conservative propaganda for the election year. Sigh! (which smiley is for the sigh?).
As Spacey said in The Negiotator, I wonder why that is?
So many are criticizing Stone for not taking a more controversial approach to understanding the historical significance, sociological analysis and political ramifications of 9/11.
I suppose if he hads treated 9/11 in the same manner as JFK or Nixon, folks would have been clamoring saying he was being insensitive or overlycriticial of our Commander in Chief who sat for 7 minutes before he left Florida that morning.
This seems to me to be a case of being dammed if you and dammed if you don't. You can say that its perhaps too early for any cinematic depiction but since the two individuals are terribly grateful for still being here amongest us, I am sure they are pleased that Stone did not take liberties with the events of their lives.
It is perhaps easier for movie attendees/buffs to want something other than what is being presented on screen. As a film critic friend of mine said, watching Flight 93 made her even angrier...........
For myself, it gave me a greater undertanding of what it was like that day. Watching on television could only provide so much. Seeing what these two men went through ,was to me, so very indicative of what transpired for others.
Perhaps, in the end, World Trade Center might best be remembered for trying to capture/understand without cinematic gloss, the events of so a horrific a day.