American 9-11 conceits.....

bonkey

From today's IMDB :

Legendary director Steven Spielberg has called on filmmakers to ensure a movie about the terrorist attacks of September 11 is never made. The Schindler's List Oscar winner believes the horrors of the airborne attacks on Washington DC and New York and the plane crash in Shanksville, Pennsylvania, should be kept from a celluloid dramatization. He says, "There should never be a film about September 11. It was the 21st century's moment of infamy and we should all make sure it never happens again."

This says it all. Spielberg won an Oscar for a movie on the WW2 death-camps. However, he claims it would be somehow wrong to make a movie on 9-11 because its such a tragedy.

Funny that - its ok to make a movie on the 20th century's "moment of infamy" because, well, thats different.

I also think that claiming 9-11 is this centuries moment of infamy is also incredibly conceited - I mean - the century is only a couple of years in.....and already someone has decided that 9-11 will be the moment of the century?

Now, Spielberg isnt the only one. Over the past few months, I've seen nothing but American outcry whenever someone points out that sooner or later the horror of these events will dull in all our memories - just like the horror of all previous events has.

While there is no doubting that a tragedy occurred, I really have to wonder at the mindset of anyone who believes (or even wants to believe) that "their" tragedy is somehow more special than all the other tragedies in history.

jc

Mercury_Tilt

This post has been deleted.

mike65

Mr Moneybergs words are typical - not of Americans but of ppl,
the British talk about the "sprit of/in the blitz" for example without
ever thinking that the Germans had thier own version later in the war with no doubt a certain, similair spirt.

Some Irishmen will have you belive the famine was the worst thing that ever happened in the entire history of the world,
and will use that rhetoric to justify allsorts.

We're all prone to silly outbursts based on the passing belief that
whats just happened to "us" is beyond compare and will never be forgotten or surpased.

However most of us dim the memory-light quickly and no bad thing otherwise life would be unliveable.

Mike.

Shinji

British talk about the spirit of the blitz is justified, as indeed is Irish talk of the famine, Japanese talk of hiroshima/nagasaki, Russian talk of Stalingrad... And American talk of 9/11.

The difference is that only the Americans are conceited enough to think that their personal event is the most important of the lot... And only they are artificial and media-whorish enough to make the kind of statement that Spielberg did there.

Turnip

Perhaps he was affected so much by the tragic events of 9/11 maybe it's altered his outlook on the exploitation of suffering in the name of entertainment. I don't see how that's the worst thing in the world.

But it's a dead cert that if he doesn't change his tune and do a movie about the attacks at some point, someone else will.

bonkey

Originally posted by Turnip
Perhaps he was affected so much by the tragic events of 9/11 maybe it's altered his outlook on the exploitation of suffering in the name of entertainment. I don't see how that's the worst thing in the world.

Its not.

However, if that were the case, I would expect ol' Stevie-boy to issue a public apology for his involvement in Schindler's List, Eyes of the Holocaust, Survivors of the Holocaust, Amistad, Saving Private Ryan, Empire of the Sun, and anything else he's worked onwhich would be classifiable as "exploitation of suffering in the name of entertainment".

Funnily, I dont expect such an apology to turn up anytime soon.

jc

Frank Grimes

Originally posted by bonkey


Its not.

However, if that were the case, I would expect ol' Stevie-boy to issue a public apology for his involvement in Schindler's List, Eyes of the Holocaust, Survivors of the Holocaust, Amistad, Saving Private Ryan, Empire of the Sun, and anything else he's worked onwhich would be classifiable as "exploitation of suffering in the name of entertainment".

Funnily, I dont expect such an apology to turn up anytime soon.

jc

I think a public apology for Hook should come before any of the above

Seriously though, it's pretty much in keeping with all the other pandering to general opinion comments that have come from various sources over the past year.

yellum

Typical Spielberg. Anyway, if anyone says anything bad about his work on stuff like Schindlers list he'll just use the "Jewish" card.

Victor

Was Schindler's list entertainment or information? Perhaps it falls in between? I think that a film regarding Sept. 11 will be made at some point, once the various 'riddles' are solved.

There is also the point that the events should be remembered, respectfully.

DEmeant0r

That is just typical of America. I mean when the director re-made the event at Stanlingrad (Enemy at the gates) portraying that tragedy, and that was allowed, then how come they can't portray the event at 9-11? pfft...

Cr8or

this is a bit off topic but dem can yea contact me asap i sent yea pm with my email addy ... get back to me plz.

swiss

What a hypocrisy from Steven Spielberg. Shindlers List portrayed far greater suffering on the part of Jews than Sept 11th could possibly have inflicted on Americans. The aforementioned film also happens to be one of my favourites. It is a gritty, realistic look at the horror of the death camps in Germany during WWII, and the fact that it came from the sugar coated PC world of hollywood is nothing short of astounding.

Oh yeah, the 21st century moment of infamy. Does that preclude a nuclear holocaust. Well as long as an american city isn't affected, I guess that's OK :rolleyes:. The reason why he doesn't want a movie made is because it cuts a little to close to the bone for american audiences atm. Films can be a powerful way of conveying emotions, telling a story in a poignant and meaningful way, and in his overriding concern about material wealth and commercial exploitation, Mr Spielberg seems to have forgotten this.

In times the wounds will heal, and a tasteful film about the events might be appropriate. Not from Hollywood though - I would think.

Turnip

Aw lay off Spielberg, he's always been a sucker for corny sentimentality.

Venom

No American movie director would ever touch the whole Sept 11 story due to the fact that the movie would need to include the reasion why the terrorist's hated America so much they were willing to die in the attack. This reasion would be the American forigen policy that has screwed over so many middle eastern countries for so long.

Do you honestly think Hollywood has the balls to make such a movie?

Turnip

Originally posted by Venom

Do you honestly think Hollywood has the balls to make such a movie?

They could give it the 'Blackhawk Down' treatment. Hollywood's business is to rewrite history.

Venom

The disaster is to big and to close to home to be re-written.

DadaKopf

Nice topic for discussion Bonkey. This is actually something that occurred to me the night before last for some reason or other but this Spielberg thing is news to me.

America is fighting two wars: one is being fought with military hardware, the other with words and pictures. Of course they say history is written by the victors but nobody's won anything yet and history is already being written by America.

US media domination is so expansive, so total, that there is no room left for the other victims of the War on Terrorism and even the terrorists themselves to tell their stories. As Churchill said in WWII, "in war, truth is the first casualty" and the US has used its capacity to take that principle to another level by drowining out everyone else's stories except their own - stories which have as equal a right to be heard.

If America (the government, the media and the people) were more eager to embrace democracy (as they so often claim to do) and went so far as to listen to those on the receiving end of US military aggression, a more honest picture of everything that's happening, and ought to happen, would emerge. But this is something both sides are unwilling to admit and explore but of course, during war, everyone's first instinct is to demonise the other.

mike65

That is just typical of America. I mean when the director re-made the event at Stanlingrad (Enemy at the gates) portraying that tragedy, and that was allowed, then how come they can't portray the event at 9-11? pfft...

Enemy... was a European production directed by Jean-Jacques Annaud. The only Yank of consequence on board was Ed Harris.

Mike.

Slutmonkey57b

The question on everyone's lips is, though:

What would Diana have made of 9/11 if she was still alive???

Or... who cares.
I sincerely hope Mr. Speilberg does get pulled up on this in a reasonably public fashion. I'd imagine David Letterman had fun with this but of course since we don't see it here anymore... sniff...

krankykitty

Senor Spielbergo (from the Simpsons!) should do the film, Spielberg himself will be on the bandwagon as soon as someone else threatens to make it.

personally i think they SHOULD make a film of it perhaps then generations from now people will remember what happened and that it shouldnt happen again etc, just like the Holoucaust.

Gordon

Maybe Spielberg is just trying to keep the "war on terror" going until it is acceptable to the US public for him to make a film about it. Whoever makes a film about 11-9 will be rolling in money... or dead, one or the other.