United 93
I expected something from this film. I'm not sure what, exactly, but...something.
A really good film will haunt us for a day or two. But United 93 provoked so little thought, that upon waking the next morning, it was several hours before I even remembered that I'd seen it the previous day.
It's very sad (although not surprsing), that the first mainstream cinematic rendering of the attack is so tepid and unchallenging. It's merely a chronological rehash: beginning with a scene of Arabic-speaking men in a hotel room, praying and performing grooming rituals, and ending in a chaotic push of terrified passengers into the cockpit.
The script relies heavily on well-documented news reports and interviews with people closely involved. It doesn't teach us anything new, it offers no original insight, and it does not have a point of view. It is simply the re-telling of a story that every single one of us certainly remembers all too vividly.
Thus, one is left with the question: why was this film even made?
Perhaps it's because the film-makers believe that most Americans prefer to be entertained, rather than be expected to think about the issue and it's deeper implications. If that's so, then the film achieved it's objective.
The acting was good, the setting was realistic, the story line was tense & gripping. So in that sense, it's a really good film.
But for the fact that it's about the most significant event that most Americans alive today have ever witnessed, it fails by focusing merely on the spectacle of September 11th.
Thanks to television and the Internet, we were all there on that awful Tuesday morning. And nothing from Hollywood can ever hope to surpass the horror of watching the event unfold right before our very own eyes.
But what if we were to find out who is at fault for allowing it to happen? Because someone somewhere dropped the ball; a mistake resulting in the deaths of nearly 3000 people.
Certainly if this film had dared to ask that question (or any of a number of other questions still unanswered about the attack), it's existence might then be justified. But it didn't, and the result is a movie that feels cheap and exploitative.
A really good film will haunt us for a day or two. But United 93 provoked so little thought, that upon waking the next morning, it was several hours before I even remembered that I'd seen it the previous day.
It's very sad (although not surprsing), that the first mainstream cinematic rendering of the attack is so tepid and unchallenging. It's merely a chronological rehash: beginning with a scene of Arabic-speaking men in a hotel room, praying and performing grooming rituals, and ending in a chaotic push of terrified passengers into the cockpit.
The script relies heavily on well-documented news reports and interviews with people closely involved. It doesn't teach us anything new, it offers no original insight, and it does not have a point of view. It is simply the re-telling of a story that every single one of us certainly remembers all too vividly.
Thus, one is left with the question: why was this film even made?
Perhaps it's because the film-makers believe that most Americans prefer to be entertained, rather than be expected to think about the issue and it's deeper implications. If that's so, then the film achieved it's objective.
The acting was good, the setting was realistic, the story line was tense & gripping. So in that sense, it's a really good film.
But for the fact that it's about the most significant event that most Americans alive today have ever witnessed, it fails by focusing merely on the spectacle of September 11th.
Thanks to television and the Internet, we were all there on that awful Tuesday morning. And nothing from Hollywood can ever hope to surpass the horror of watching the event unfold right before our very own eyes.
But what if we were to find out who is at fault for allowing it to happen? Because someone somewhere dropped the ball; a mistake resulting in the deaths of nearly 3000 people.
Certainly if this film had dared to ask that question (or any of a number of other questions still unanswered about the attack), it's existence might then be justified. But it didn't, and the result is a movie that feels cheap and exploitative.
posted by Mickey @ 1:53 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home