Total Motorcycle Community Forums

jonnythan wrote: It's just a movie. It's entertainment.

To you it may be.

To others its picking up something a they're are still emotional about, and abusing it in the name of making money.

To another set of people, its an insult.

The point is, whilst you see it one way, this money was actually made to profit from a tragedy, and will even offend others. It was a singularly poor choice to make it.

The only way to make the movie industry see that is if it hurts their pockets. I have zero intention of seeing this, no matter how entertaining people say it is, thats my silent protest. Capitalism has gone too far in this case

Yeah, well I can't figure out why people wanted to go see Christ get beaten and tortured, as if a snuff film would make your faith stronger. What a piece of work that Mel Gibson. If you needed that to build your faith, you've got issues. If you have no faith, this film does nothing to build faith. Oh, well, we shouldn't go here - sorry for the diversion. I think I watch too much Southpark.

Anyway, if it is put on film, and people pay for it, the film maker wins, and it is entertainment. Even if it is such a horrible topic in which someone makes a profit. I think most of us still have a "why?" in the back of our mind, and we can't really ever understand the end result of 911. Accordingly some people are still curious to see more, and others wish it would just go away and stop reminding us of all that pain.

Nibblet99 wrote:They turned an act of terrorism like that into a movie?

Thats just plane wrong

i couldn't tell if you're being a smartass, or if plain and plane are spelled the same in the UK.....????

no pun intended right

scanevalexec wrote: Accordingly some people are still curious to see more, and others wish it would just go away and stop reminding us of all that pain.

yes, and maybe it's good that we get reminded of such, and perhaps even be reminded of the days following when the people of this country actually started to give a "poo poo" about each other, instead of dissolving into the bunch of cynical no funs that we've become.

this movie wasn't a blatant excuse to make money off of a tragedy (i.e. pearl harbor, titanic). it's a celebration of the human spirit in the face of tragedy. it's easy (and quite fashionable) to play the cynic, but until you have seen the movie, you really have no idea what you are talking about.

Big B wrote:this movie wasn't a blatant excuse to make money off of a tragedy (i.e. pearl harbor, titanic). it's a celebration of the human spirit in the face of tragedy. it's easy (and quite fashionable) to play the cynic, but until you have seen the movie, you really have no idea what you are talking about.

I see and respect your point of view, but I also see that some people think it is not appropriate to make a movie about this situation. Seems wrong to them, making money or not, to drag familes through their hero sons, daughters, or whoevers horrible death. I can see that point of view too, and I think we should all respect that side of the issue. You don't have to agree, but calling it all cynicism is not totally fair. And cynicism has its place on both sides of the argument if you really think about it.

I can see personally the market will bare an audiance of good size to see such a movie, so captalism says "more power to them". I'm not likely to see the movie myself, and I have a lot of respect for those who died that day and flight 93 was a reminder that we all need to not just be observers, but also be willing to stand up and do something. I don't need the film to inspire me about the human spirit on that day, but I do think it is cool that they made the film, and some people enjoy it. As is always the case - change the channel, don't pay the admission fee, or write your congressmen - whatever applies to a give b!tch.

i won't see this movie.
i didn't see pearl harbor, or titanic.

i won't watch a movie that is set with something this tragic as the backdrop. With titanic, that story could have (and has been) played out in space or in the desert or some ship that wasn't named the titanic and i might have seen it. but to piggyback on a tragedy is wrong in my books.

if it's a story about the triumph of the human spirit and the compassion of man, does it have to be based at the WTC to have the same effect? are we going to see Katrina the movie next?

i understand that 911 will be a rallying point for a long time and a hard memory for many people to deal with. if 10% of total tickets and video sales until the end of time went to a victim's fund i could agree with it, but 10% for the first week/month is just free publicity.

God forbid a movie use a well-known historical setting.

We should all boycott Platoon, Black Hawk Down, Saving Private Ryan, Titanic, etc etc etc, because they only cash in on human suffering

cashing in on tragedies is not the same as cashing in on a war or a single incident in any armed conflict. tragedies are things that due to their impact and being rather sudden leave pretty big emotional scars for the families/friends/relatives of the event.

as with anything, you are entitled to your opinion and can go see the movie if you wish but with Oliver Stone at the helm forgive me if i don't think this movie was for anything other than pushing some agenda or to make some cash.

bok wrote:cashing in on tragedies is not the same as cashing in on a war or a single incident in any armed conflict. tragedies are things that due to their impact and being rather sudden leave pretty big emotional scars for the families/friends/relatives of the event.

as with anything, you are entitled to your opinion and can go see the movie if you wish but with Oliver Stone at the helm forgive me if i don't think this movie was for anything other than pushing some agenda or to make some cash.

So you are saying that any armed conflict doesnt impact or leave emotional scars for families/ friends/ and relatives?

bok wrote:if it's a story about the triumph of the human spirit and the compassion of man, does it have to be based at the WTC to have the same effect? are we going to see Katrina the movie next?

it makes a lot more sense than telling a story about prevailing against all odds at a topless beach

and if there was an agenda in this movie, i missed it. it was based on a book written by one of the officers and it held very close to it. one of the few changes was that stone edited out a death of one of them, at the bequest of his widow. either way, this story was going to be told, i'm glad it was told in the way it was.

scan- much respect, because i quoted you it seemed as though i was singling you out, didn't mean it that way. mea culpa