Hm. Well, it appears my concerns about that deluge of new visitors from The Whatever were overblown, since nothing much seems to be happening around here. So much for my delusions of grandeur.
Moving right along, I see that my skills at predicting box-office success are no better than my estimation of my own celebrity drawing-power. By which I mean that I was surprised by the generally good business done this weekend by United 93, the movie about one of the doomed 9/11 flights. I honestly didn’t think there would be a market for this film.
In the week leading up to United 93‘s release, there seemed to be a lot of discussion in the blogosphere about whether it was “too soon” for this sort of film, i.e., a 9/11 movie. But I myself wondered less about the timing of the picture’s release than I did about its purpose. Why was this film made? What was the goal of its makers, and what were viewers supposed to get from seeing it? Given that all the reviews I’ve seen stress how sober, even-handed, and free of political messages the final product is, the only conclusion I can draw is that somebody simply thought we needed to relive that sparkling, awful late-summer day now five years in the past. But why? Why would we need to relive that?
I’m not trying to be obtuse here. I honestly don’t see the value of retelling the story of flight 93 unless there is new information to be revealed or a point to be made. From what I’ve read, there is neither to be found in United 93. It is simply a dramatization of what we think happened on board that plane. And I don’t see the purpose of that.
Some have suggested that seeing this film is similar to Schindler’s List in that it’s a grim but useful viewing experience that will somehow make the viewer a better person for having seen it. I don’t buy that, though, for a lot of reasons, not least of which is the fact that the story of Oskar Schindler was 50 years old and not widely known at the time of List‘s release. There was a genuine informational element to that film, because few modern movie-goers had ever heard of Schindler. That isn’t the case with United 93. Everyone older than toddler-age knows this story; it’s still fresh on our minds and in our hearts. And it’s an extremely hurtful story for many.
I know several people who were so affected by the events of 9/11 that they find it difficult to watch purely entertaining films that have elements reminiscent of what happened on that dark day. One of my friends was turned off on Spider-Man of all things, because it includes several scenes of New Yorkers falling from great heights. (I myself maintain that Spider-Man, released not long after 9/11, functioned as a sort of cathartic wish-fulfillment experience because it did include those scenes. In the movie, our hero manages to save the falling people and thus grants the viewers an emotional relief that was, of course, impossible in real life. But that’s another topic for another time.)
I myself am not one of those who was so badly traumatized by 9/11 that I can’t watch certain films or television programs. I have no problem with Spider-Man or Die Hard (a film in which a tall building explodes and which has been somewhat maligned in the post-9/11 period), and I’m religious viewer of 24, with its frequently horrific stories of terrorism and innocents dying. But those stories are fiction. Watching Tobey Maguire pretend to be a comic-book hero is not the same thing as watching actors pretending to be real people who really found themselves in a bad situation and really did die.
In addition, I think dramatizing events of this nature inevitably leads to a troubling deification of everyday people, which makes it easier for the powerful and would-be powerful to exploit their deaths. Even though the filmmakers apparently went out of their way to avoid placing any particular message within the film, the fact is that a lot of political baggage has already been assigned to the story. The passengers and crew of 93 did act heroically and they deserve our respect and remembrance. But I believe it would be a disservice to their memories to turn them into martyrs or simplistic symbols for a cause, a road they’ve already gone a ways down because of the Bush Administration’s flogging of the catch-phrase “let’s roll,” among other things. Fiction, no matter how factually correct or sensitively done, invariably tends to make real people seem larger-than-life; it’s just part of having someone’s face magnified to twenty feet tall on a giant screen in a darkened room. And that’s the last thing we ought to be doing to these people. The people of the aircraft that was called United 93 should be remembered as people, no different than you or me, not as characters in a film called United 93. At least, not yet.
I guess in the end, for me at least, it really is a matter of “too soon.” I have no intention of seeing United 93 and can’t understand why anyone else would want to, either. But I do look forward to seeing how the film is remembered in coming years when historians have begun to make sense of this tumultuous age in which we live…
OK, well, two things:
1) I bookmarked your site after The Whatever thing, so I’m still here. No promises, of course, but if you keep posting interesting stuff, it doesn’t really cost me much to pop in once in a while, so I guess the onus is on you…
2) United 93: I have a different take on this. I live in northern New Jersey and work in New York City (and was in the World Trade Center on 2/26/93, when the first bomb went off, though thankfully not on 9/11/01). I’m not so bad as to avoid certain movies, etc., but it still bugs me to see a plane fly behind a tall building (although I know in my head that it’s nowhere near the building, the visual brings back the memories), and it still bugs me to see video of the trade center in older movies (the end of Trading Places, for instance, is no longer funny to me).
I don’t really want to see the movie, but I almost feel like I have to. I understand your point about turning those people into political and/or marketing tools, but I think that’s just because you’ve come to view movies as purely commercial entities. There was a day where movies were part of our popular culture – modern art in a sense. When people make films about, say Jesus for example, I think of it as the modern day equivalent to what Da Vinci did with The Last Supper. Viewed in that context, United 93 is more of a historical documentary – much like Schindler’s List. Except it’s probably a more accurate telling, given that it was done only 5 years after the event, rather than 50 years on when many of the particulars have either been lost or dramatized into something far more romantic than they actually were.
Just my $.02…
Hi, Brian, nice to see you again.
First of all, I’m glad you weren’t in the Trade Center on 9/11 and sincerely hope you didn’t lose anyone.
I find it interesting that you feel like seeing this movie is some kind of duty. Given your proximity to the sites of the attacks, I would think you would be less inclined to want to see it. Could you explain why you feel like you have to see it? Is it to help you process something about the event, or to pay tribute to those who died, or something else?
Your point about movies being art instead of commodities is well-taken, and it’s a view I actually agree with — for the record, I usually don’t see films in purely commercial terms, although my wording in this entry unfortunately suggests otherwise. And I absolutely believe that one of the purposes of art, both popular and otherwise, is to help the artist and the audience work through the big issues of the day. But, based on what I’ve read about this film, I don’t see how it accomplishes that, because the filmmakers have supposedly been so careful not to interpret or spin the facts of what happened, inasmuch as we can know them. The terms I keep reading in reference to the film are “reminder” and “re-creation.” But do we really need a reminder of what happened? I don’t think anyone has forgotten after only four and a half years. If it’s intended as a historical document, why dramatize it? Why not make an actual historical documentary about the event?
To be clear, I’m not trying to be a jerk about this. But I genuinely do not understand the thinking of those who made this film.
Thanks for your concern, Jason. Thankfully, my family and friends were unharmed. The company I worked for at the time lost twelve people, three of whom I knew personally and two of whom had worked directly for me until several months before their deaths. I think if you asked around, you’d find that just about everyone in the New York area either knew someone who died that day, or knew someone who knew someone who died.
As to your other questions, my response got a little long, so I put it on my own blog. You can read it here.
And not to be too presumtuous, but if you want to know more about my thoughts on 9/11, you may want to check out my posts from the first, second and fourth anniversaries of the attacks.
I’m still here as well; unfortunately for your delusions of grandeur, I rarely feel that I have any insights worth adding to a discussion. Nevertheless I shall make an attempt:
I saw a TV ad for United 93 a few days back, and was immediately offended. My position is, however, based entirely on ignorance and gut feeling. It took only one day of non-stop media bombardment on 9/11/01 before I started avoiding any coverage of the topic, so I am stunningly uninformed about what many Americans would consider basic knowledge. Being that I had no idea this movie was even being made, I presumed it was a standard Hollywood “based on a true story” treatment, which struck me as abhorrent. Knowing that it is more fact based is mollifying, but I still have zero desire to see the film.
Like you, I am at a loss as to what point the filmmakers were trying to make with United 93. Being the cynical sort I am, I shall probably suspect political flag-waving and hype unless proven otherwise.
Brian, thank you for directing us to your blog. I’m ashamed to admit that I’ve never forced myself to really think about what happened on 9/11 and decide how it did/will effect me. I had never been to New York before and didn’t really think I had a connection to it all. Your posts have shown me that I should take the time to figure that all out. And I think seeing United 93 will help me to do that. I know Jason doesn’t want to see it, so this may be the first movie I go to a theatre by myself to see. Thanks for opening my eyes.
Anne (The Girlfriend)
Brian, don’t worry about “presuming” to link to your blog – you have some interesting, insightful things to say on this subject and I’d urge anyone reading this to follow your links. I left my comments over there and won’t repeat them here, except to say that I’m still trying to figure out exactly what I think about all of this.
Sara, you point out one of the things that underlies my discomfort with the idea of this movie and the motives of its makers, namely the “flag-waving and hype.” From what I’ve read, I don’t think United 93 suffers from those sins, but lord knows a lot of that has been done in the names of those who died on 9/11, and frankly I’m sick of it. I’ve been appalled at the way one of our nation’s greatest tragedies has been turned into a blunt political tool. I hate that how an individual feels about the events of that day is used by some to gauge that person’s patriotism. And I guess I was concered that this movie would stir up a lot of that sort of thing just when it seemed like we were getting past it.
I also, frankly, don’t want to know what the people on any of the four planes went through. My imagination has already filled in the gaps as much as I need them filled. I may expound on this more in a full-length entry, but I’ve spent the last four years downplaying the effect 9/11 had on me, being very impatient with those who became paranoid afterward or who just didn’t seem able to put it behind them. My attitude has been, “it happened, it was horrible, we’ve mourned, now let’s get on with our business.” But now this movie comes along and suddenly I’m thinking maybe I’m not as over it as I thought I was.
I don’t know. As I’ve said, I’m still trying to sort through my thoughts and feelings. And maybe that really was the point of making that movie, to get people to think about something we’ve all tried to repress… I just don’t know.
First of all, I hasten to mention that I’m not suggesting anyone should feel the way I do, nor do I judge anyone (on patriotism or anything else) for how they internalize the events of that day.
As a matter of fact, I wish I could put it past me the way you guys seem to have done. The difference, I think, has a lot to do with proximity – each morning, I take the commuter train from Newark, NJ to Penn Station, NY and ride by lower Manhattan. I see the “new” skyline, minus the towers and am reminded over & over again that they’re not there. Also, in Penn Station itself are national guard men & women, sometimes armed, sometimes not, but always wearing miltary camouflage, which also serve as a reminder. Then there’s the downtown E train, which is still called the World Trade Center train, the view down 6th Avenue, which now affords a sightline to the World Financial Center, which used to be obscured by the Trade Center towers, the various memorials, the street vendors selling trinkets to the tourists, etc. And that’s all without actually going downtown. So, as you can see, it’s very difficult to just “let it go.”
Sara – to your point about the politics – I agree that it’s been frustrating, but I think it has a lot to do with George W. Bush, who was the President at the time of the attacks, defining his presidency by that single day. Say what you will about him – I’m sure the man is traumatized to some extent. I mean heck – if I deal with it every day as a regular New Yorker, I can only imagine what the guy in charge of the whole country must have to do to cope. I’m very much looking forward to the political side of it going away when Bush’s second term is done and someone else takes the helm. Maybe I’m just being overly optimistic there…
Brian, please don’t misunderstand, I didn’t think you were judging anyone on their 9/11 reactions and I certainly didn’t mean to suggest that I think you ought to get over it just because I believed that I had (I’m not so sure about my feelings anymore, not after this discussion). I’m not sure anyone ever will get over it, and I understand that it’s not a process that can be rushed in any event.
What I was trying to say in that remark about patriotism is that I’ve been extremely frustrated by the way certain politicians have taken advantage of what happened in order to score points. I find such tactics distasteful in the extreme. And, if I may speak on behalf of Sara, I think we were both concerned that the U93 movie would be simply another salvo in the culture wars between those — to be frank — who support G.W. Bush and those don’t.
One more thing: I’ve been thinking myself about the proximity issue that you mention. I don’t know where Sara lives, but I know we here in Utah didn’t feel the same kind of trauma that people nearer to the attack sites must have. I find it hard to imagine that Salt Lake would ever become a terrorist target because it’s so obscure to the rest of the world, but living in NYC and LA and San Francisco must be a very different matter, and I sympathize with those who are living under the threat.
To wrap this comment up, I hope you haven’t been offended by anything that’s been said here. It certainly wasn’t my intent.
No offense taken, Jason. I, too, wanted to make sure I didn’t offend anyone.
For context I should have mentioned that I am Canadian, and had never heard of the World Trade Center until it no longer existed. I was shocked and horrified by what happened, yes–but in the same abstract way I was afflicted by the tsunami in Asia and the ongoing genocide in Darfur. Intellectually I know it’s a tragedy but all I have are facts and numbers. Any human interest story is almost guaranteed to bring me to tears though, so after only a few hours of news broadcasts on 9/11 it all felt like cheap emotional manipulation.
It also revealed how much I have internalized Canadian national pride. Fervent American nationalism engenders little more than unreasoning anger in me. I resented the implication that the event was so much more tragic than any third-world disaster merely because the victims were American. As much as I try to avoid prejudice, I still jump to conclusions at the first whiff of patriotism.
Brian – given your proximity I am not surprised that you are exponentially more affected than I. I do not intend to belittle your reaction at all; I don’t imagine I would have been able to avoid the media coverage if not for the geographic and national distance. The politics undoubtably influenced my knee-jerk reaction as well–my attention to politics peaked during the extremism of the last presidential election, and to this day I cannot read the news without becoming visibly angry.
FYI: I saw the movie tonight. My review is here.
Sara – a good friend of mine once told me “Where you stand depends on where you sit.” This has never been more true than it was on 9/11. While I’m shocked that you never heard of the World Trade Center (to me, that’s like never having heard of the Eifel Tower or the Great Wall of China, but again – that’s where I sit), I can easily understand and appreciate your reaction. Even after 9/11, things like the tsunami affected me with the same old “wow – that’s awful. Pass the coffee, please…” reaction that I had to things like this beforehand. I’m not proud of it, but that’s the way it is.
Politics aside, I guess the best I can offer as to why 9/11 was so much bigger of a deal is that America really is different than other places. Nothing like that has ever happened here, and when it did, it affected more of the world than it would have anywhere else (I forget the number, but I think something like 20 different countries lost citizens? Not to mention the worldwide implications of throwing the U.S. Economy into a tizzy for a while, and similar secondary effects).
I’m not saying this makes it any worse (seriously, I’m not – a dead innocent American is no more tragic than a dead innocent tsunami victim), just that it affects more people more deeply relative to other tragedies around the world. Maybe that’s not fair, but I think it’s true…