Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by Daniel Swartz, Sep 13, 2002.
I say make a film about it, just not anytime soon.
I'm with SS on this one. 9/11 was so horrific and traumatizing to most Americans that if a film were made, it might frighten some people. The only way to do a 9/11 film w/o offending people is to wait years and years.
Time heals all wounds.....but there will always be scars.
Films will get made, whether Spielberg likes it or not, but they should wait a few years, the tragedy is still far too vivid in peoples minds.
There are several different films that can be made from Sept 11, the WTC attack, an entire film can be made from the NY firemen's perspective, in fact it already has, witness the excellent 9/11 documentary.
Another film can be made focussing on the jet that crashed in trees in Pennsylvania, when the heroic actions of passengers on board thwarted a possible attack on the White House.
The tricky part is getting ethnic actors to play the terrorists, who would want to play those parts?
It's only been a year, they shouldn't even be discussing making films about it.
I agree makeing a film about 9/11 will make sense in 2045. The same way that all the WWII movies have come out in the past fiew years.
SS, is being quite the hypocrite. There will be plenty of made for tv films and theatrical releases of what happened. I predicted last year that the first film about the events will be out in under ten years. It's just a matter of time.
Give me a break!!
This coming from a film-maker who made a film about the Holocaust, a horrific tragedy that I'm sure nobody thought should be made into a film back in 1945. [sarcasm]Okay Steven, I guess 9-11 was more of a tragedy than this[sarcasm/off].
Like Eric said, "Time heals all wounds". If done intelligently & tastefully, I see no reason why a film can't be made about the event. Steven needs to get off his high horse.
Spielberg is right. And we should also make sure no one makes a film about Hiroshima or Watergate or JFK's assassination or Martin Luther King's assassination or the crucifixtion of Christ or Gettysburg or Slavery or the Holocaust or Pearl Harbor or any other tragedy.
In other words, I completely disagree with him. Not making a film about it isn't going to make it go away. I simply do not understand that mindset.
My only wish is any films made about it be well-done and make a clear distinction between fundamentalist extremists (of all religious persuasions) who are the terrorists, and the vast majority of Muslims who abhor such violence as much the majority of those from all other religious persuasions.
What a bizarre statement. As others have said, we have films about every other tragic event throughout history, not to mention fictional films full of violence and terrorism. I hardly think 9/11 deserves special "kid gloves" treatment. Though I agree that it should not be done for several years.
I agree with what others are saying. If films about the Holocaust and WWII can be made, then films can be made about ANYTHING. As bad as the 9/11 attacks were, the horrors of WWII were FAR worse.
This from the guy who not only made Schindler's List, but 1941!
Cinema has always reflected major historical events, both positive and tragic. I don't see why this should be any different.
Regardless of what Mr. S has to say on the matter, a film will eventually get made. It's inevitable.
IMDB news frequently misquotes or misrepresents, so I am curious as to his exact wording. But I agree with the opinions of most posters above. If he did say it, it's a bit hypocritical. That said, one can only hope future filmmakers treat these events with the same respect SS treated some of the historical events he dealt with.
I have no doubt that good and bad stories will be told, and much sooner than 4 decades.
I hope Spielberg was misquoted. I was just beginning to think of him as one of my favorite filmmakers again after disaggreeing with my friends for so many years by proclaiming he had lost his edge. Not that if this is truly his opinion his films can't be good, just that he is beginning to not look at film as art but purely entertainment.
Did Spielberg just say this recently? I seem to remember an old interview with him, conducted very shortly after 9/11, when he said that he could never make a film about the events of that day. He did not call for any kind of permanent moratorium on dramatic films about 9/11, as I recall.
I suspect that old interview is just being trotted out and sensationalized a bit here, although I could be wrong.
Like most of you, I find this quote to be very bizarre. How could a filmmaker like Spielberg, who has pillaged traumatic events in American and world history to become one of the richest and most successful film directors of all time say this with a straight face?
Let's look at his body of work:
Saving Private Ryan
Empire of the Sun
The Color Purple
How could someone who has adapted the Holocaust, one of the worst atrocities of the last century, into a classical three act structure with clear protagonists and villains, make a claim like this?
The more I think about it the less it surprises me. I always respected Spielberg as a craftsman, but his moral and ethical footing has always been irrelevant to me.