United 93 - Discussion about it...

[assassin_696]

From what i've heard this film is very respectful to what happened, and in that case I have no problem with this film being made. I think it's important to help other people understand what happened, and although I hope there isn't an American hero theme portrayed, the overall message of the film that the world will rally against terrorism i think is important.

 

 

 

I don't have a problem with the timing of it, it's been long enough and if all the families involved were okay with it, i think it's purely jumping on the "it's too soon!" bandwagon. I know Ghostranger isn't doing this, but a lot of other people are doing, when really it acts as a fitting tribute and testimony to the heroism of the people on that flight, why wait for it?

[Goliath]

What I have heard, I don't know if it's correct, but the plane United 93 was the plane that crashed on a field in Pennsylvania or somewhere?

 

Not that it would make it any less tragic, but that wouldn't really affect the WTC victims, right?

[MyPurpleCrayon]

I heard that this movie is suppose to be really great, very dark, and not very politically siding.

 

[weezcake]

I actually want to see it. Although, it may just be propaganda and support for the war. :P

[Punc]

I'm confused... Is it going to be a docu or a 'real' movie?

 

And if it is a real movie, how much will they change to make it more appealing to the audiance?

 

 

 

I don't care if they make the movie, I do care what the end result will be...

[MyPurpleCrayon]

It's going to be a real movie about what the people on the flight did to try and stop the terrorists. But yes, it is acted and it is a scripted movie just like any such as Air Force One or Top Gun.

[Scruffy5389]

If I see it, and I hope I do, I will treat it as a dramatic film like any other. The fact that it is real simply makes it that much more powerful.

 

 

 

If one of my loved ones had died on Sept 11th, that would also make it more powerful, and I would be glad for the chance to further understand the tragedy and my own emotions in relation to it. Any dramatization is an exploration of emotion, and I would welcome whatever it could teach me about my feelings regarding the tragedy. Even if the movie tried to make a political statement (and you may know I'm a pretty loud liberal), I would not view it that way, I would view it purely as a story of bravery and loss.

 

 

 

That is how I view all drama/theater/acting/film/etc., and from my point of view, it is never to early to make a movie. In fact, it may be society's obligation to make a piece like this as soon as possible to try and come to grips with the event.

 

 

 

I can see the opposite viewpoint, though, and I have to say I can't really argue directly against it.

[ScarletEve]

I think it will be controversial, like a win/win situation for the movie companies really.

 

 

 

While people who are for it will be flocking to see it, the people who are against it will be lobbying to have it taken out of the scene. It will cause twice the publicity as a normal movie would have.

 

 

 

In a way it's kind of sad because the very thing they are against, will be the thing they promote the most.

[How2PK]

Actor Lewis Alsamari didn't get a visum to see the movie for the first time at the Tribeca-filmfestival in New York. He played one of the plane's hijackers and he's also from Iraq.

 

 

 

Where is this world going to?

[RoyalKnight]

But what needs to be brought to our attention?

 

We already know what happened, why should we be reminded of it?

 

 

 

Now that's just ignorant. Using that weak arguement, all documentaries, memorials, books, movies, songs, paintings, basically any form of art or media imaginable, that are centered around tragic events should be banned. Basically all of the History Channel would go off air and much of most libraries and museums would be cleared out. I don't know if you were just playing the devil's advocate, but that's just ridiculous.

 

 

 

Whoa buddy, calm down. There is no need for personal attacks here.

 

 

 

All I'm saying is it is way too soon to release this movie. We don't really need to be reminded of it THIS soon. There are families still mourning over the losses, not many people are still mourning over the losses of Pear Harbor.

 

 

 

You have no idea, do you? Go to CNN.com and watch a video there talking about the movie. You'll see relatives of the victims there saying that they have nothing against it. If anything, some of them even helped in making the movie.

[Anesthesia]

Because of course it was only the relatives of the victims and the victims themselves that were affected by this.

[RoyalKnight]

And I'm sure someone in the UK would know that.

[Anesthesia]

I see, so the fact I am in the UK right now makes what I said wrong? Are you affirming that only the victims and their families were affected by this incident?

[RoyalKnight]

I see, so the fact I am in the UK right now makes what I said wrong? Are you affirming that only the victims and their families were affected by this incident?

 

 

 

Why don't you ask the other guy?

 

 

 

All I'm saying is it is way too soon to release this movie. We don't really need to be reminded of it THIS soon. There are families still mourning over the losses, not many people are still mourning over the losses of Pear Harbor.

[Anesthesia]

Ahh now I'm starting to get it, because he didn't mention the others affected they are rendered irrelevant?

[RoyalKnight]

Ahh now I'm starting to get it, because he didn't mention the others affected they are rendered irrelevant?

 

 

 

Here, I'll lay it out for you.

 

 

 

He said:

 

 

All I'm saying is it is way too soon to release this movie. We don't really need to be reminded of it THIS soon. There are families still mourning over the losses, not many people are still mourning over the losses of Pear Harbor.

 

 

 

then I said:

 

 

You have no idea, do you? Go to CNN.com and watch a video there talking about the movie. You'll see relatives of the victims there saying that they have nothing against it. If anything, some of them even helped in making the movie.

 

 

 

I said that because he was talking about the families of the victims. Why the hell would I post something that isn't even relevant to what he said?

[Anesthesia]

What's wrong with you? I said that the victims and their families aren't the only people with a right to care.

[MyPurpleCrayon]

Go to CNN.com

 

Roflmao!!!!!!

 

 

 

No thanks man, I'm glad the 'select few' are okay with it. And also, he has a point, the victims aren't the only ones that were affected. It affected everyone in the nation buddy, you don't need to live in America to understand that one.

[RoyalKnight]

Go to CNN.com

 

Roflmao!!!!!!

 

 

 

No thanks man, I'm glad the 'select few' are okay with it. And also, he has a point, the victims aren't the only ones that were affected. It affected everyone in the nation buddy, you don't need to live in America to understand that one.

 

 

 

Lol, pedal back son, pedal back. It was you who said that 'noes, it shouldn't be seen cuz families are still cryin' about it.

 

 

 

I should've known, you're one of those Fox people.

[Guest GhostRanger]

Go to CNN.com

 

Roflmao!!!!!!

 

 

 

No thanks man, I'm glad the 'select few' are okay with it. And also, he has a point, the victims aren't the only ones that were affected. It affected everyone in the nation buddy, you don't need to live in America to understand that one.

 

 

 

Lol, pedal back son, pedal back. It was you who said that 'noes, it shouldn't be seen cuz families are still cryin' about it.

 

 

 

I should've known, you're one of those Fox people.

 

 

 

Saying that families are still crying about it is not a statement that is EXCLUSIVE to families, and so it doesn't even pertain to what he just said.

[Anesthesia]

Saying that families are still crying about it is not a statement that is EXCLUSIVE to families, and so it doesn't even pertain to what he just said.

 

 

 

Exactly.

[RoyalKnight]

 

Saying that families are still crying about it is not a statement that is EXCLUSIVE to families, and so it doesn't even pertain to what he just said.

 

 

 

I'm sorry, I didn't know that in this forum, there's a hidden message in every post.

[Guest GhostRanger]

 

Saying that families are still crying about it is not a statement that is EXCLUSIVE to families, and so it doesn't even pertain to what he just said.

 

 

 

I'm sorry, I didn't know that in this forum, there's a hidden message in every post.

 

 

 

A hidden message? And what message is that? My point is that if you are talking about families being upset, that has NOTHING to do with whether or not other people are upset as well, so those two statements by MPC don't pertain to each other at all. Please explain this "hidden message."

[RoyalKnight]

 

Saying that families are still crying about it is not a statement that is EXCLUSIVE to families, and so it doesn't even pertain to what he just said.

 

 

 

I'm sorry, I didn't know that in this forum, there's a hidden message in every post.

 

 

 

A hidden message? And what message is that?

 

 

 

So when he said 'families are still mourning', it isn't families at all? I'm sorry for being logical seeing as when he said families, I actually thought he meant families.

 

 

 

Is that the right answer or was your question a trick question?

[Guest GhostRanger]

 

Saying that families are still crying about it is not a statement that is EXCLUSIVE to families, and so it doesn't even pertain to what he just said.

 

 

 

I'm sorry, I didn't know that in this forum, there's a hidden message in every post.

 

 

 

A hidden message? And what message is that?

 

 

 

So when he said 'families are still mourning', it isn't families at all? I'm sorry for being logical seeing as when he said families, I actually thought he meant families.

 

 

 

Is that the right answer or was your question a trick question?

 

 

 

No, you're misinterpreting what I'm saying.

 

 

 

When he said families, yes he means families. But later on he posted talking about other people mourning as well. Just because he only said families earlier doesn't mean that he CAN'T believe other people mourn as well. The two points don't stop each other. The two posts aren't relevant at all which is what my point was. You said:

 

 

 

It was you who said that 'noes, it shouldn't be seen cuz families are still cryin' about it.

 

 

 

My point was that it doesn't matter if he said that about families, because it's not like saying that EXCLUDES him from believing other people mourn as well. His two statements don't pertain to each other at all.