United we watch
The trailer for United 93 is difficult to watch. It’s not something I would recommend to everyone. I have no personal stake in the events of September 11th, no more than any other American—I was not in New York or D.C. and did not know anyone harmed in the attacks—but I can’t help but continue to be shaken by the images the day left us with.
The trailer suggests that the film will take the cool, rational, hard-nosed documentary approach of director Paul Greengrass’s first movie, Bloody Sunday, telling a sprawling, multivocal story with as little in the way of the cinematic flourish as possible. His approach, even in the Bourne sequel, is one that eschews overt judgments and manipulation. Of course, in telling horribly real stories such as this, a refusal to judge can be just as much a slant as any one-sided narrative, but it’s probably appropriate in this case. It will be difficult enough to watch this film without being told how to feel about it. Greengrass’s refusal to manipulate the audience makes him, in many ways, the anti-Spielberg, and for that we are fortunate. September 11th brought us more real life bombast than I ever cared to see; I certainly hope I am correct in thinking that Greengrass will not add to it.
On the question of whether or not it is too soon for a film like this I have no answer. Perhaps after seeing the movie I will know, or perhaps I will simply know whether or not it was too soon for this particular film. Sitting there in the comfort of a glitzy, modern multiplex, will the film provide us with anguish, renewed outrage, catharsis, confusion, or—most likely—a mix of all of those? I don’t know for sure, but it appears that by the end of the month, I’ll find out.
posted by Peter @ 4/03/2006 02:12:00 PM
3 Comments:
"A refusal to judge" may be a better thing to see than a film that makes a wrongheaded kind of judgment ("Munich") but it still begs the question of just why is it not possible in this day and age to see a movie about the greatest atrocity committed on US soil by an outside force that *makes* a blatant judgment? The answer ultimately is the sad reality that "neutrality" of a kind that only doesn't bash the US or load up the script with necessary concessions to the PC interests of the left is about the best we can ever hope to see from Hollywood, which for the most part is sadly incapable of telling history properly in the movie setting any longer.
As someone who was part of the same college class as Todd Beamer (though I was not personally acquainted with him), I have an interest in seeing this film, and maybe ultimately I'll find that lack of judgmental manipulation of the film and an approach that lets the inexcusable evil of the terrorists speak for itself will be more effective. Even so, given present day Hollywood's attitudes, and looking at how in the movies of World War II and the early Cold War, there was at least some candor regarding the struggles America faced, it's unfortunate we have to see films like this emerge in which a person like me will be holding my breath to see if its going to fall victim to give us the dishonest history that so often comes from Hollywood.
I think we agree here. As I said, a refusal to judge, especially in a "true story" such as this, is often just as much a point of view as anything that more obviously reveals bias. Refusing to take a stand is, in a very real sense, taking a stand.
I haven't seen the film, obviously, so I can't comment on it yet. But to answer your question about why we can't see a movie that makes a judgement... well. We still might (if not here, then with Oliver Stone's movie, World Trade Center).
But I'd be wary about any movie that takes a bold, blatant judgement about 9/11, if only because Hollywood, whenever it does take sides, usually does so in a spectacularly hamfisted manner. To turn 9/11 into a typically moronic Hollywood product would certainly be an affront. If this movie is to be made (and I'm not defending that it should be), the only approach that stands a chance is one that's more subdued.
Show the events, show them honestly and without overt judgement. They'll speak for themselves.
I'm certainly ambivalent about the movie, and the trailer did little to answer my questions. If anything, I felt that the trailer hinted that the film would be manipulative and would take a position on 9/11. I'll likely see the film because I'm very much invested in these issues, but I do wonder what kind of story he'll be telling.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home