CLOVERFIELD and 9/11 imagery- Page 2

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 1/8/08 at 1:42pm

perhaps they could come to a deal with the "monster" offering say a certain percentage of the population as sacrifice in order that the majority might live in peace.

[Auggie27]

Posted: 1/8/08 at 1:42pm

Of course, even feeling strongly that it's insensitive to exploit the event, I'd argue vehemently that it's any artist's right to do so. I'm not interested in blacklisting people for work that might be deemed socio-politically "wrong." If it does well -- and I betcha it does -- then it's up to the culture to have an intelligent dialogue about the merits of these works. Hey, maybe that's what we do here: intelligent dialogue.

I must say, I didn't feel WAR OF THE WORLDS offended in the quite same way, though in the film's narrative, the use of the poignant posters and makeshift memorials certainly invoked 9/11's aftermath (even if they made no sense in that film's apocolyptic context; if the world in toto in under life/death seige, who runs to the dime store for poster board and markers to create "Have You Seen?" posters? So yeah, Spielberg ripped that off rather blatently.)

[ShbrtAlley44]

Posted: 1/8/08 at 1:43pm

That would be very controversial, DG, but I don't know if Cloverfield is meant to be an allegory, unless it's supposed to be about the horrors of deep-sea mining (the monster is supposed to have been awakened by a company mining for a secret ingredient for their drink "Slusho" at the bottom of the sea). Updated On: 1/8/08 at 01:43 PM

[TheatreDiva90016]

Posted: 1/8/08 at 1:48pm

"Volcano was one of the best movies, for that reason alone. (that and the fact that Anne Heche played it "straight" that year."


YES!! I actually live right down the street from the La Brea Tar Pits and LOVE watching that movie because it's my neighborhood going down in flames!

Updated On: 1/8/08 at 01:48 PM

[Calvin]

Posted: 1/8/08 at 1:48pm

Slusho?

Was this a rejected script for "Futurama"?

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 1/8/08 at 1:50pm

there go the deep thoughts. is the head of the company named apu?

[ShbrtAlley44]

Posted: 1/8/08 at 1:54pm

Updated On: 1/8/08 at 01:54 PM

[ShbrtAlley44]

Posted: 1/8/08 at 1:55pm

Supposedly if you drink Slusho you turn into some sort of whale. Hence the girl exploding in the trailer. Hahahahaha

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 1/8/08 at 1:57pm

I'm becoming desensitized to the trailer, but the first few times I saw it I IMMEDIATELY thought of 9/11 and was disgusted by the lack of sensitivity. It's not about terrorists, so it's different - but the image of people standing on the streets of New York looking up as buildings are blowing up....too much.

[DayDreamer]

Posted: 1/8/08 at 2:00pm

I guess my point is - where do you draw the line? Are 9/11 references insensitive because it was a terrorist attack? What about other disasters and tragedies? Drunk-driving accidents? Plane crashes? Can we never have a movie about a tsunami now?

[papalovesmambo]

Posted: 1/8/08 at 2:07pm

i have no problem with incidental parallels and similar imagery since they're bound to happen given the nature of the genre.

i do take offense at specifically aping iconic imagery of a tragedy merely for shock value without even the benefit of an allegory.

he's got every right to do it and i defend his right to do so. i personally am offended by it and won't be spending any of my money on the movie.

it'd be like setting a meteor movie in hiroshima or nagasaki and having the poster be a mushroom cloud over the city.

by all means do it if you want, but be forewarned that you're going to piss off upset some people. which is i'm sure their intention. use the controversy to heighten awareness and generate buzz. thanks, but i'll pass.

Updated On: 1/8/08 at 02:07 PM

[DG]

Posted: 1/8/08 at 2:13pm

More conjecture, from Shbrt's post:

So the country is invaded because of a corporate interest in drilling for a resourse out of our domain?

And another comment on the movie's poster - not only is it labled "MONSTROUS", but our iconic representation of 'liberty' has its head blown off.

I'm not sure if it's "merely for shock value", or actually commenting directly.

[nitsua]

Posted: 1/8/08 at 2:14pm

I think people are being a little sensitive.

[SNAFU]

Posted: 1/8/08 at 2:15pm

Post 9/11 New York has become the new Tokyo in films. There are also the snips of people obviously on rooftops in Brooklyn watching lower Manhattan in flames with plumes of smoke.

[Rose_MacShane]

Posted: 1/8/08 at 2:23pm

When I first saw the trailer and the poster, 9/11 was all I saw.

[ShbrtAlley44]

Posted: 1/8/08 at 2:26pm

SNAFU, I think they're actually on the Lower East Side watching the explosion occur in midtown. It just really looks like Brooklyn.

[SNAFU]

Posted: 1/8/08 at 2:37pm

In either case we have seen that actual footage before.

[SNAFU]

Posted: 1/8/08 at 2:43pm

They also were filming the populace, dirty and injured trudging across the Brooklyn Bridge,(an image ingrained in my mind as I was one of the many people who had to escape Lower Manhattan that day on foot) one night when I was on my way home from work.
It sort of brought back the feelings I had that day.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 1/8/08 at 2:44pm

I didn't immediately get the 9/11 imagery due to the fact that the dialogue in the trailer indicates it is an entirely different scenario and I simply decided to go along with the fictitious story being presented. That said, any film which shows the disastrous destruction of skyscrapers in Manhattan will have to live with the 9/11 stigma, not to mention the image of a plane hitting a skyscraper anywhere. At what point will it be acceptable to use such imagery again or is it deemed eternally offensive? Was there a lot of backlash from the openings of Dante's Peak, Earthquake or The Poseidon Adventure? I don't remember. Or perhaps there was enough distance from the distasters they resembled for it to be considered inoffensive.

Are all images of famous disasters equally sacred? My guess is no.

Speaking of famous disasters, I have always wanted an epic motion picture treatment of the Galveston hurricane of 1900. The biggest national disaster in the history of the country deserves a little more attention than the already-forgotten novel Isaac's Storm.

Updated On: 1/8/08 at 02:44 PM

[StickToPriest]

Posted: 1/8/08 at 2:46pm

I think we should all wait until the film comes out. Until then, we have no idea if it is for artistic purposes/allegory or shock value.

Until I see the film, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.

[Unknown User]

Posted: 1/8/08 at 2:49pm

Party pooper! Why wait to judge when we can judge RIGHT NOW! ??

[TheatreDiva90016]

Posted: 1/8/08 at 2:51pm

I would like to see a movie made about the Iroquois Theatre Disaster of 1903.

Since I was working in the theatre on the 100th anniversary of the tragedy, I've been doing a lot of reading on it.

I think it would make a fascinating film.

[ShbrtAlley44]

Posted: 1/8/08 at 2:54pm

Exactly my feelings, Mister Matt.

[DG]

Posted: 1/8/08 at 2:55pm

'Timing' is certainly an interesting aspect. It took a few years for Viet Nam to truly get addressed - enough that for me they served as windows into something I was just young enough to have missed.

But then you have something like TITANIC - years after the fact - and the element of human tragedy took a back-seat.

Perhaps there's a point to tapping into the fresh feelings of pain, anger and hurt.

[Liverpool]

Posted: 1/8/08 at 5:25pm

ummm, so wait, Was the Godzilla movie with Matthew Broderick cashing in on 9/11 imagery? What about Armageddon? The only reason people are saying this has 9/11 imagery is because 9/11 has happened. Pre-9/11 movies with similar imagery aren't offensive because well, you have no right to be offended by them (for having such imagery).


The moral of a the story, jsut because you have a right to be offended, doesn't mean you have to be offended. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.