World Trade Center Movie- Page 3

[Rose_MacShane]

Posted: 8/12/06 at 6:07pm

"I also can't imagine why that horrific hole in the ground is a tourist attraction, so apparently I'm in the minority."

Because of morbid curoisity, I assume. I live just a few miiles from Columbine High School and all during the summer after the shooting, there wasn't a day you could drive by the school without seeing at least one group of people taking pictures (some got shots of themselves standing by the school's sign, smiling and waving. Truly disgusting). And those were the good days. Several times, tour buses would pass by or stop in the parking lot. It was the definition of bad taste for me.

[Mr Roxy]

Posted: 8/12/06 at 6:14pm

Talk about morbid curiosity, vendors still sell photos taken on 9/11 of the towers on fire & people are still buying them

I crossed the 59 th St bridge that day on foot & watched the smoke. When I got home, we could see the smoke from our bedroom window. Will see it eventually either in the movies or on pay per view.

Cannot see why someone would want to get the DVD to repeatedly watch it though

[Rose_MacShane]

Posted: 8/13/06 at 2:11am

It makes perfect sense. I've been wrestling with the exact same thing.

[zzannahk]

Posted: 8/13/06 at 2:36am

the only problem i have is that somewhere (in hollywood?) there is a replica of the destruction and that someone BUILT it. I mean, how freaking detached do you have to be to be able to do that?

[Rathnait62]

Posted: 8/13/06 at 9:36am

I understamd what you're saying, Twelvy, but I can't go near a Holocaust museum either (forget ever touring a concentration camp), and I am not old enough to remember, nor Jewish, nor have any other direct or indirect ties.

Updated On: 8/13/06 at 09:36 AM

[WickedGeek28]

Posted: 8/13/06 at 10:28am

Actually, zz, the movie only features the tower under attack through old news clips. You never actually see the plane, besides a shadow.

The movie is really about how two men were covered in debris and needed to help eachother to escape.

[best12bars]

Posted: 8/13/06 at 10:54am

I know what you're saying, Rathy. I DID go to the Simon Wiesenthal Museum in L.A. with the non-profit org I used to work for. One of our executive officers broke down in huge, sobbing tears inside. I mean a complete (understandable) emotional meltdown. We were all feeling overwhelmed that day, to say the least. And then I saw a letter from Anne Frank under glass, and it hit me too as I stood there reading her own beautiful handwriting (in English, which I wasn't expecting for some reason). Again, I felt like I was an uninvited visitor witnessing a very private moment.

So my own feelings are equally divided here. Why do we immortalize death and human tragedies in museums, cemeteries, on film, monuments, memorials, and in art?

The good answers:
1) For posterity, so people will remember what happened for generations to come. We must never forget.
2) To try and make sense of it all, to process our grief or a better understanding of what happened. To face our own fears.
3) To educate and enlighten.
4) To honor the dead.

The bad answer:
1) For profit, personal gain, artistic recognition of our own achievement.
2) For the sensational aspects, shock value or thrill factor.
3) Morbid curiosity and fascination.
4) To challenge ourselves to see if we can "take it."

The problem is that when I stare at a sarcophagus lid, I'm not exactly sure why it's there in front of me in the first place.

I ask the same question about this 9/11 film, or Schindler's List or Titanic.

Updated On: 8/13/06 at 10:54 AM

[Jon]

Posted: 8/13/06 at 11:10am

Shindler's List is Speilberg's sincere "let people never forget" effort.

"Titanic" is pure commercialism. There certainly isn't any serious attempt to pay tribute to those who lost their lives. I always thought the movie should have been called "A Love Story that Just Happens to Take Place on the Titanic".

People have romanticized the Titanic story for decades. At traveling carnivals, there are inflatable slides in the shape of the sinking Titanic.

Face it, does anyone here know anyone who's grandma died on the Titanic?

[best12bars]

Posted: 8/13/06 at 11:16am

Well, using your own criteria, on the Titanic side, I would add "Gone With the Wind," "A Farewell to Arms," "From Here To Eternity," and many other romanticized fictional stories that have historical human tragedies (wars included) as their backdrops. They just happen to take place where they do, too, I guess.

EDIT: And Jon, will you be happy in 90 years, when someone asks the same "grandma" question about 9/11? I'm sure it will happen.

Updated On: 8/13/06 at 11:16 AM

[LaurenB]

Posted: 8/13/06 at 11:16am

"The movie is really about how two men were covered in debris and needed to help eachother to escape."

That's my point as to why I don't want to see it yet. I can see honoring the heroes and telling their stories, and I think that is important to remember and record for history. And it is an uplifting story about humanity and man's ability to face certain death in the noble cause of helping to rescue other people.

But I'm afraid most people, especially those outside of NY, may get caught up in the political correctness of the film, marvel at the special effects and outstanding performances, and nominate this "important" film for awards. And for the masses, this film may oddly romanticize 9/11, if that is the correct word.

I don't equate this film to the other propaganda films made during the 40's during WWII. In many of those films, you knew who were the enemy -- the Nazi's and the SS. And you cheered when the Americans (and their allies) whooped their a--. The war was still going on, but you felt motivated to continue the good fight. Good against evil. And Hitler was pure evil.

In this film, is there an enemy? Do you leave the theater feeling sad for the tragedy but glad that the leads survived?

I want to leave the theater with those emotions, but also with the emotion that I want to kick somebody's butt. And unless people leave the theater wanting to track down the people who planned this ATTACK and killed thousands in a matter of minutes, then I think the film may do a disservice at this time. I don't equate this film at all with prior disaster flicks like the Titantic. There was no enemy per se, just normal stupidity and greed. That being said, I may be unfairly criticizing the film, so I will get off my soap box.

Sorry, but this gets me so angry. I used to work downtown and came into the Trade Center every day.

[Mamie]

Posted: 8/13/06 at 11:19am

I'm sorry - but you miss me completely when you say there's no difference at all. One is a film that is telling the story of two men who were THERE - who actually lived those moments and are here now to tell about them. And only 5 years from the event - not after the passage of nearly a century. No difference between that and a romanticized story about a historical event and involving all fictional characters? (I'll admit there were a few characters representing real people - but the scenes involving them were all created in the minds of the filmmakers.)

I've seen a strong tendency on the boards to immediately write this off as another WTC film, just trying to cash in on the tragedy. It's not that at all. People have been trying to say this over and over but few are listening. If you're out looking for some tintillating footage of the towers being hit and coming down - you're going to be VERY disappointed.

[LionessInWinter]

Posted: 8/13/06 at 11:22am

But WickedGeek28, in reference to what zz was saying, in the film, there is a freakishly realistic set of the debris that the rescue workers were crawling on to find survivors. And several other very realistic shots of debris on the site itself and the surrounding areas. As odd and upsetting as it was to see it, I thought it was brilliantly done.

I think there's a lot of people outside of the NY Metro area who most likely were and are more detached about that day, people such as some who worked on the WTC film building sets or whatever their roles, who would not have such an emotional tie to it all and have difficulty working on it, especially if they were based on the west coast or Canada and no particular ties to anyone in NY. Much as I am very saddened to see terrible tragedies in other countries from events such earthquakes and tsunamis that kill thousands of people, I can't say I'd feel a significant emotional connection that would make it difficult to work on a project about them. Doesn't mean I don't feel anything, but it's just that I was far enough removed most likely.

If it was something that regarded the Holocaust, I can't always say the same thing oddly. Though when I visited Dachau about 15 years ago, I was extremely surprised that I had a strangely benign reaction. It was a rather antiseptic site. None of the barracks were left, except outlines and it was all just so....clean and peaceful. If the housing buildings had all been there decrepit and breaking down, I think I would've had a much harder time. I could've really put myself there at the time it was open if they had been standing. I don't know how Auschwitz compares, I know Elphaba went, but I'm thinking I'd have a much more difficult time there. I've been to the Holocaust Museum in D.C. and I found it to be an excellent learning experience, even though it saddened me. I think we should learn from places such as this.

I don't mind seeing things like Schindler's List, Titanic and the like because it helps me to really visualize what it may have been like and try to put myself there emotionally more so than just reading about it ever could. Most times it can enhance my understanding of a particular time period or event. Now with WTC, I didn't need that help in the least at this point in time since I was here as it happened.

Wow, didn't mean to go on so much. I just got on a roll.

[jimnysf]

Posted: 8/13/06 at 11:24am

Mr. Cage, Mr. Stone and Paramount should donate their salaries/profits to the rescuers who are suffering from lung disease due to their efforts on 9/11. Bloomberg won't pay them disability which is a disgrace.

[LionessInWinter]

Posted: 8/13/06 at 11:30am

It's not going to amount to a great deal, but they're donating 10% of opening box office receipts to various 9/11 charities, just like they did with United 93.

http://www.showbuzz.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/07/26/movie_news/main1839494.shtml

[jimnysf]

Posted: 8/13/06 at 11:42am

10% is nothing. They should donate more. No one should be making a profit from this tragedy.




ANGEL OF MERCY: Sister Cindy Mahoney (with attorney David Worby) rushed to the World Trade Center on 9/11,and says she is now dying because of it.


August 13, 2006 -- A nun who spent six months blessing human remains in the rubble at Ground Zero says she is dying of lung disease and wants her body autopsied to prove that she and her fellow 9/11 workers were sickened by the poisonous air at the site.

Sister Cindy Mahoney, 54, summoned David Worby, the lawyer representing thousands of sick Ground Zero workers, to her Aiken, S.C., hospice last week and requested that he act as her guardian and fulfill her dying wish by overseeing her autopsy after she's gone. "I can still do God's work," Mahoney said Thursday in Aiken, her hometown, where she lay connected to oxygen tubes.

She was surprisingly upbeat, even laughing at jokes - which reduced her to violent coughing.

"She's an angel," Worby told The Post after meeting with Mahoney privately. He said she hugged him warmly, cried, and told him how her previous pleas for help had gone unheeded.

"The government should help these people - not leave them to die like I'm dying," she told Worby.

Mahoney, a former emergency-medical technician, dashed from a Midtown convent and hopped on an ambulance to Ground Zero after the first plane hit the World Trade Center's north tower on 9/11. She stayed there through the night. She then donned her habit and spent nearly every day for the next six months as a volunteer with the American Red Cross and the city medical examiner's fatality team.

Officials said Mahoney was a chaplain at Ground Zero and at Pier 94, where she consoled relatives of those killed. She was photographed for People magazine that October, and told the publication, "Some people just want to hold our hand."

According to Worby, she now suffers from asthma, reactive airways dysfunction syndrome, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and gastroesophageal reflux disease - all severe illnesses that have plagued WTC workers.

Only after spending weeks at Ground Zero was she was given a respiratory mask, Worby said, but she was not told how to use it. And because her job was to pray and talk to people, "she kept taking it off."

Mahoney also suffers post-traumatic stress syndrome, Worby and others said. She witnessed WTC victims burn or jump to their deaths, and prayed over countless human remains.

Unaware until recently that many others who worked at Ground Zero were sick, Mahoney last week tracked down Worby, an outspoken advocate for the health of 9/11 workers. He filed the first lawsuit for a leukemia-stricken NYPD detective who served at Ground Zero and the Fresh Kills landfill, a case that mushroomed into a massive class action with 8,000 WTC workers.

If Mahoney joins the suit, she would leave any money to those in need, she said.

During the meeting, a priest friend, Father Scotty, gave Mahoney Communion.

"She would do it all again. She would give her life again," the priest said. "She still believes God's mission for her is to help, through her death, the other 40,000 rescue and recovery workers get medical care, testing and coverage," Worby said. "She feels that anyone who gave their lives for others should be taken care of better than she's been taken care of."

Mahoney is staying in an old, stuffy house on a semi-rural road outside Aiken. The place belongs to friends who took her in and receive a "hospice" stipend from Medicaid to house and feed her.

Mahoney's closest companions, her 24-year-old niece and her niece's 3-year-old son, sleep on a mattress on the floor in the same cramped room. "They're my reason for living,'" she said.

Mahoney, a nonsmoker, was an active scuba diver before 9/11, Worby said. The Guillain-Barré syndrome she suffered three decades ago flared up again last year. Worby asserts that heavy metals at Ground Zero caused immune deficiencies that triggered such neurological disorders.

Mahoney was a junior nun with the Order of St. Helena in Augusta, S.C., an Episcopal sisterhood, when she was transferred to New York City not long before 9/11, she said. She lived at the order's modest East 28th Street convent, which runs a novitiate, a program for beginning nuns who have not yet taken final vows.

When Mahoney heard the news about the first plane hitting, she asked another nun, "What's the Twin Towers?" Worby said.

A sister at the convent told The Post that Mahoney ran out the door that day. "She told me she was going down to help," the nun said. Mahoney threw on an old EMT uniform from her former post with a rescue squad in South Carolina, and raced four blocks to Bellevue Hospital to volunteer. Warned that many people were dying, she said, she jumped into an ambulance en route to the scene, using a marker to write her name, address and phone number on her arm as identification.

When the first tower fell, she hid behind a tombstone at St. Paul's Church across the street. "The air was so thick and hot I could not breathe . . . It felt to me that the sky was falling. I thought I would die," she wrote in an account of the day.

When the second tower fell, "two firefighters and I were able to get underneath a firetruck, and they shared their air with me."

In an Oct. 12, 2001, e-mail to a friend back home, Mahoney described her work at the morgue: "Sometimes I pray over a body bag that has a firefighter's complete uniform from his helmet to his jacket . . . with nothing visible inside. It gets very difficult."

She went back and forth into the pit to "bless and say a prayer for the fallen and for those who have found them," she wrote. "I am grateful I can work in this war zone and be a witness to the heroism I see every single day."

She added, "But when I get home, I do have a hard time. What I've seen has been challenging, but what will stay with me forever is the smell. It is like nothing I have ever experienced in my life."

Ellen Borakove, a city medical examiner's spokeswoman, said clergy of many faiths flocked to temporary morgues around Ground Zero and to the main morgue next to Bellevue. "Spiritual people were always allowed to bless any human remains we had. They were blessing remains as they were found at Ground Zero as well," Borakove said.

Mahoney wrote her friend, "I think I have changed inside - not bitter or angry or anything like that, just more centered and having a better understanding of my ministry and that I am committed to whatever God calls me to do."

Months later, feeling ill and distraught, she was told by a counselor that "it was a good time to start taking care of myself," she said. Mahoney left Ground Zero on Feb. 11, 2002. But she found little sympathy or support back at the Manhattan convent, she told the Aiken Standard in a front-page story in February. She left the convent that July. Over the next two years, her health worsened. Mahoney quit jobs in an animal shelter, a store and an office. "I ended up sleeping in my car because I had nowhere else to go," she told the paper.

A friend accompanied Mahoney on a train trip to Manhattan about six months ago to register with the WTC Medical Monitoring Program at Mount Sinai Hospital. She collapsed while getting a lung test and was sent to the emergency room, Worby said.

Now that Mahoney says she is dying, she wants to make a difference. "She wants her death to have meaning, so this tragedy won't happen to other rescue and recovery workers in future disasters," Worby said. "I will not let her die in vain."

[sabrelady]

Posted: 8/13/06 at 5:17pm

A lot of films about WWII were done around the the same time, but it was a less sophisticated time, the good guys were much clearer and always triumphed and the horror and violence less realistic. I think it would have been easier to watch.
Even when I see the WTC trailers, I start to tense up, become hyperaware, then actually feel uneasy. Can't do it. Not yet anyway. But do feel the stories need to be told. The collective memory of the world is only slightly more than a gnat's.

[balletandbroadway]

Posted: 8/13/06 at 10:39pm

I saw it a few hours ago and it was hard to watch considering the fact that it wasn't too long ago. I really tink that it is too soon for this movie to have been made. I saw the MTV movie special on it and a kid from NYC had said that while watching it, it "felt like salt on an open wound" and I completely agree. It was really traumatizing for me to watch even if I wasn't directly affected by the event. A lot of people even left the theatre during the movie because they couldn't deal with the emotional impact that it was having on them. I thought that it was well made but just made too soon.

[Mamie]

Posted: 8/14/06 at 8:35am

Anyone who left in the middle of the film walked out during the worst part. If you had stayed, you would have walked out with an incredibly positive feeling about the capacity of human beings to survive the worst possible conditions and to help others when the need is there - even when their own need is so great. Leaving early only allows the worst parts of that time to thrive.

[best12bars]

Posted: 8/14/06 at 8:46am

It grossed $19 million this weekend, which was ahead of expectations. It came in third for the week. The studio was expecting it to tank because of the recent terrorist attempts, so they were pleasantly surprised that the turnout was this strong.

I still haven't seen it.

Not sure when or if I will.

[Mister Matt]

Posted: 8/14/06 at 10:32am

"I also can't imagine why that horrific hole in the ground is a tourist attraction, so apparently I'm in the minority."

Because it also serves as a memorial. When Jarico and I went to NYC, he wanted to visit Ground Zero. He had only seen images on TV and visiting the site helps to put the entire event in pespective. You get a sense of the size and scale of the catastrophic event that took place that cannot be captured on 2-dimensional screens. For others, it provides closure. And there are those that are simply rubber-neckers or history buffs. It's the same reason people visit the Pearl Harbor memorial, Gettysburg, Normandy beach, or Auschwitz. But it really depends on your sensitivity on the subject.

"So death and tragedy are 'okay' as certain stories, or backdrops for stories (even Broadway musicals, right?)... as long as we didn't have our own direct connection to it?"

No, I believe there are many people who believe it is okay because they have a personal connection to it. Like the members of the cast of United 93 who were actually involved in the events in the film.

"I want to leave the theater with those emotions, but also with the emotion that I want to kick somebody's butt."

**SPOILERS**

There actually is a very specific line towards the end of the film regarding this. I remember thinking what a controversial line to put in the film, but that's very "Oliver Stone" for a film that is very not "Oliver Stone", if that makes any sense.

I must admit, I was really put off by the trailer and did not want to see this film, but my boyfriend dragged me to it and I'm glad I went. With the top 40 power ballad playing during the slow-mo montage in the trailer, it looked like it was being billed as a typical Armageddon-style summer action blockbuster film and with the addition of Nicholas Cage, I was sure I did not want to sit through 2.5 hours of his over-the-top intensity and look-at-me tics and spasms. Luckily, Cage is reigned in and plays everything very low-key. His devotion to maintaining focus on the task at hand is what allows this film to work on a more sincere level. There are moments of gratuitous emotion, but if I remember correctly, it was one of the most emotional days in recent American history, so I think I can live with that. The movie gets imagery of the plane crashes and the burning towers out of the way at the beginning, which is certainly unnerving for anyone who remembers that day. This only provides the emotional background and perspective for the rest of the film, however, and the plot zooms in to sharp focus on the two policemen and their wives, with a few scattered featured characters to assist in the plot, depth and perspective without actually distracting from the plight of our protagonists. The only major flaw I saw in the film was the use of colored contacts for Maria Bello, which I found HUGELY distracting. In the end, does the color of her eyes really matter? I never know why directors allow this (with the exception of establishing a supernatural effect) as it is so obvious the color is on the surface of their eyes and only makes them look like zombies. It drove me nuts. Unfortunately, there was a problem in the theatre where I saw the film and about two-thirds into the movie, the lights came on full. The management turned the lights back down, but they came back on about every 15 minutes until the end of the movie. We got a full refund, so essentially, I saw it for free, but it was a major distraction. Knowing what to expect, I may see it again to enjoy the entire film.

I did not see United 93 for fear it's real-time perspective on the event may be unsettling. I think World Trade Center is definitely a softer take on the other events of the same tragic day, but it probably helps me to prepare to see United 93 when it available on DVD. Is it too soon for these films? I can't say. I think our ability to see these films without major riots, demonstrations or backlash proves that it is not. We have already proven our ability to move on after such a monumental tragedy in virtually every way, so I don't think it's an issue. For me, the television specials that ran about a month after the event was a little too soon and the DVD sales of those specials were capitalizing on the event more blatantly than either of these films.

Updated On: 8/14/06 at 10:32 AM

[munkustrap178]

Posted: 8/14/06 at 11:24am

I saw it Saturday, and I thought it was tastfully done.

I thought it was very well done, very emotional, but I just feel like the piece as a film (and not a tribute) could be improved on many levels.

It's an okay movie - I just wasn't wowed by it. Maggie Gyllenhaal is fantastic, though.

I can't see any Oscars for this one, but you never know.

I found UNITED 93 to be 14,000x better.

[FindingNamo]

Posted: 8/14/06 at 6:03pm

"The key to converting disaster into entertainment is uplift." -- J. Hoberman

[jrb_actor]

Posted: 8/14/06 at 7:51pm

I saw this film today, and I thought it was very tastefully and artfully made. I don't understand or subscribe to the notion that if it's on the stage or independant, it's ART but if it's coming out of Hollywood, it's ONLY about MONEY. That's BS. Oliver Stone is an artist. The people involved with this film both in front and behind the camera are artists. And they are all doing what artists do.

If it's too soon, rent it when it's not too soon if you like. But it is NOT too soon for these films to be made--and clearly there is an audience out there who wants to see these films now. I didn't hear any of you complaining over any of the 9/11 plays that have come out.

And that's all I want to say on THESE aspects of this thread because we already had those debates in the United 93 threads.

I HATED the trailer for this film. That had me not wanting to see this film. It was a very schmaltzy trailer. But, what made me what to see the film was knowing that Maggie and Donna were in the film--and that they wouldn't sign onto a 9/11 film that was gonna be BS. I also respect Maria Bello. And, I know that most trailers SUCK and betray a film. Thus, the outstanding reviews confirmed my wanting to see the film.

It was beautifully acted and I think it will be regarded as one of the best films of the year. No idea if it will get any Oscar noms, but it wouldn't surprise me. I agree that United 93 is the better film. But both films do an excellent job preserving stories, facts, and emotions of that day. And if the rest of the year turns out to be weak, they could easily be nominated along side each other. So many great performances but I can most see Maria Bello, Michael Pena, and Maggie G getting noms. However, Cage is on various Oscar buzz long lists and he was very good.

That brilliant performance in the hospital was that of Viola Davis. The film has many theatre folk in it. The film definitely deserves a SAG nom for Best Ensemble.

[LionessInWinter]

Posted: 8/15/06 at 11:21am

I thought this was interesting.


http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060814/ap_on_re_us/attacks_hero_found

[Peter]

Posted: 8/17/06 at 2:59pm

Nearly hated the film. It takes a really skillful director to take such an incredibly moving story and not cross the line into complete sappiness, but Stone took the easy route here and went beyond turning it into something approaching Republican propaganda.

The visions of Jesus..the memories of the simple things in life..like fixing a roof.., the scene with the black woman in the hospital and then the heroic Marine who acts like some kind of deranged video game hero (with some of the silliest dialogue Ive ever heard) and many other scenes..are actually quite hilarious if taken out of context of 9/11 and just add up to a weak director's manipulation here. Not only that, the film has a definite Republican bent here...Stone actually implies a connection with 9/11 and Iraq with the Marines pro-American defense stance and the superimposed lines that he served in Iraq. We learn very little about the trapped guys too..other than the fact that they are heroes and good family guys who love their family. This is just a feel good about yourself, contrived, Hollywoodized, rah-rah America, manipulative account of 9/11 IMO. The LA Times pretty much got it right I think:

"Even more puzzling is that Stone, usually viewed as the antichrist in conservative circles, has made a film that rightist commentators are falling all over themselves to applaud. Cal Thomas, in a much-quoted example, has called it "one of the greatest pro-American, pro-family, pro-faith, pro-male, flag-waving, God Bless America films you will ever see." This tribute comes in part because "World Trade Center" makes an explicit connection between Sept. 11 and the war in Iraq that will make the Bush White House and the Republican National Committee eager to embrace it as their own."





LA Times Review Updated On: 8/17/06 at 02:59 PM