Maybe it's just me, but the idea of anyone profiting from recreating the events of 9/11 kind of sits wrong with me. It's the cynic in me but the trailer makes it seem like the people in charge had more of a clue of what was going on than they actually did. It just seems to be rewriting history slightly.

My sentiments exactly.

 

When I saw the preview before INSIDE MAN, I thought to myself: "This better not be what I THINK it's going to be about -- Oh, man. It's way too soon for this." I felt squeamish and the theater was dead quiet.

 

I can't say that they don't have a right to make it because every great tragedy and triumph in human history has been committed to celluloid so why not this? I just believe that the wounds are still way too fresh and no, it still doesn't sit right with me just yet.

Maybe it's me, but considering the air traffic communication that made the news and the communication they depict in the trailer seem to be completely different. The guys on the news sounded confused, understaffed and very much bewildered. The people in the trailer are straight on it, scrambling jets and communicating with the planes... from all I gathered at the time the whole thing took everyone by surprise and no one reacted in time. On one level I feel this a movie about the tragedy as America should remember it rather than as it happened. That kind of sickens me. "Here's how it went down". No, here's how we make it dramatic and compelling... honestly, this film shouldn't even have came into consideration for another 10 years seeing as the effects are still being felt and a war that spun out of it is continuing on. To me this would be like handing a woman a video of their abortion after it's been through an editing sweet to jazz it up. Just bad taste, bad timing... all round bad.

Man, I agree with Cam and CJ completely. I mean, when Schindler's List came out, it's like, okay, a movie about the Holocaust, but it had a thin veneer of respectability because it took the guise of "storytelling". And that some 50 years after the Holocaust took place. The first acclaimed movie about the topic was Judgment at Nuremburg which came out in 1961, which was SIXTEEN years after the end of WW2.

 

But United 93 to me seems like a TOTALLY cheap way to make money off the event. I mean, it's not even done as a documentary. That's what makes it even worse. And don't get me wrong, I'm not this huge pro-American patriot or anything, but it's still REALLY CHEAP.

 

Our theatre for Inside Man was DEAD silent when the preview for United 93 was on, too. I don't think I even heard anyone breathe.

Ugh.

 

Considering I could get in my car and be at the Flight 93 Memorial in about an hour and a half, I don't need this kind of movie to be made right now.

 

I had people IM'ing me that day asking if I was okay (the inital reports had 93 crashing "near Pittsburgh"), which made for one of the most surreal experiences of my life. There were thousands of people who were obviously not OK that day, who cares about me, ya know?

 

I just can't not be cynical about this. Considering how the GOP tried to co-opt the "Let's Roll" phrase as a election cheer (what's happening in November 2006? oh yeah...) and how judging by the trailer it's not exactly an accurate description of events, I can just imagine the cowboy revisonism we're in for in this movie.

 

So yeah, I'll pass.

A Dark Day Revisited

Five years later, Hollywood is betting that America is ready for films about what happened on 9/11. Are we?

By Sean Smith and Jac Chebatoris

Newsweek

 

April 10, 2006 issue - If movie trailers are supposed to cause a reaction, the preview for "United 93" more than succeeds. Featuring no voice-over and no famous actors, it begins with images of a beautiful morning and passengers boarding an airplane. It takes you a minute to realize what the movie's even about. That's when a plane hits the World Trade Center. The effect is visceral. When the trailer played before "Inside Man" last week at the famed Grauman's Chinese Theatre in Hollywood, audience members began calling out, "Too soon!" In New York City, where 9/11 remains an open wound, the response was even more dramatic. The AMC Loews theater on Manhattan's Upper West Side took the rare step of pulling the trailer from its screens after several complaints. "One lady was crying," says one of the theater's managers, Kevin Adjodha. "She was saying we shouldn't have [played the trailer]. That this was wrong ... I don't think people are ready for this."

 

We're about to find out. "United 93" is the first feature film to deal explicitly with the events of September 11, 2001, and is certain to ignite an emotional debate before and after it opens on April 28. Is it too soon? Should the film have been made at all? More to the point, will anyone want to see it? Other 9/11 projects are on the way as the fifth anniversary of the attacks approaches, most notably Oliver Stone's "World Trade Center," starring Nicolas Cage, opening Aug. 9. But as the harbinger, "United 93" will take most of the heat, whether it deserves it or not.

 

The real United 93 crashed in a Pennsylvania field after 40 passengers and crew fought back against the terrorists who had hijacked the plane. Writer-director Paul Greengrass ("The Bourne Supremacy") has gone to great lengths to be respectful in his depiction of what occurred, proceeding with the film only after securing the approval of every victim's family. "Was I surprised at the unanimity? Yes. Very. Usually there are one or two families who are more reluctant," Greengrass writes in an e-mail. "I was surprised and humbled at the extraordinary way the United 93 families have welcomed us into their lives and shared their experiences with us." His team's research was meticulous. "They even went so far as to ask what my mother had been wearing on the plane," says Carole O'Hare, whose 79-year-old mother, Hilda Marcin, died on the flight. "They were very open and honest with us, and they made us a part of this whole project." Universal, which is releasing the film, plans to donate 10 percent of its opening weekend gross to the Flight 93 National Memorial Fund. That hasn't stopped criticism that the studio is exploiting a national tragedy. O'Hare thinks that's unfair. "This story has to be told to honor the passengers and crew for what they did," she says. "But more than that, it raises awareness. Our ports aren't secure. Our borders aren't secure. Our airlines still aren't secure, and this is what happens when you're not secure. That's the message I want people to hear."

 

It's unclear whether Americans will pay $9.50 to hear it. The A&E cable movie "Flight 93" drew 5.9 million viewers in January, the highest-rated show in the channel's history. But movies are different. "I don't want anyone to go who doesn't want to have this experience," says Adam Fogelson, Universal's president of marketing. "But when I see what's on screen, I feel comfortable that a lot of people will." Audiences seem to be split on the issue. "I don't think that's a movie I really want to see," says Jackie Alvarez, 73, of San Ramon, Calif., after seeing the trailer. "It gave me the creeps. It's way too soon." But 17-year-old Antoine Richardson of Memphis, Tenn., is looking forward to it. "I don't think it's exploitative or too soon," he says. "It helps us remember." As if any of us could

forget.

 

-------------

 

IMDB.com follow-up:

 

Theater Yanks Trailer for 9/11 Film

 

A New York City movie theater pulled the trailer for the upcoming movie United 93, about the flight that crashed in Pennsylvania following the terrorist plot of Sept. 11, 2001, after several theater patrons complained, according to Newsweek magazine. Kevin Adjodha, a theater manager at the AMC Loews Lincoln Square 12 theater, told the magazine that one lady was crying and saying that the theater should not have played the trailer. "I don't think people are ready for this," he said. Newsweek also said that in Los Angeles, some in the audience at the Grauman's Chinese Theatre shouted "Too Soon!" when the trailer appeared. But Carole O'Hare, whose mother died on the flight, voiced support of the film, which is scheduled for release on April 28. (It is due to open the Tribeca film Festival three days earlier.) "This story has to be told to honor the passengers and crew for what they did," she said. "But more than that, it raises awareness. Our ports aren't secure. Our airlines still aren't secure, and this is what happens when you're not secure. That's the message I want people to hear."

-------------

 

Theater Pulls Trailer for 'United 93'

Tue Apr 4, 11:46 AM ET

 

NEW YORK - A New York City movie theater has pulled the trailer for "United 93," which chronicles in real time the hijacked United Airlines flight that crashed into a Western Pennsylvania field on Sept. 11.

 

The AMC Loews Lincoln Square 12 theater in Manhattan said it made the decision after viewers complained they found it too upsetting.

 

"I don't think people are ready for this," theater manager Kevin Adjodha said.

 

"One lady was crying," Adjodha told Newsweek. "She was saying that we shouldn't have played the trailer. That this was wrong."

 

Universal Studios in Los Angeles, meanwhile, said it would go ahead with plans to show the trailer for the thriller, which is scheduled to open in theaters on April 28.

 

Adam Fogelson, Universal's president of marketing, said the trailer would be shown only before R-rated movies or "grown-up" PG-13 ones.

 

"The film is not sanitized or softened, it's an honest and real look" at the events of Flight 93, Fogelson told The New York Times in Tuesday editions. "If I sanitized the trailer beyond what's there, am I suggesting that the experience will be less real than what the movie itself is? We as a company feel comfortable that it is a responsible and fair way to show what's coming."

 

"United 93" is scheduled to make its world premiere on opening night at the Tribeca Film Festival in Manhattan.

 

The festival, which was created to help lower Manhattan recover economically from the attacks, begins April 25 and runs through May 7.

 

The trailer begins with images of passengers boarding the plane on a sunny morning, and builds to a disturbing scene that includes actual news video of a plane about to hit one of the World Trade Center towers. It then returns inside Flight 93 as terrorists begin hijacking it and a passenger calls his family to tell them of the impending disaster.

 

The Families of Flight 93 have said that Universal Pictures will donate 10 percent of the first three days' grosses to the memorial.

Tribeca Fest Opens with 'United 93'

 

Organizers of the Tribeca film festival, which opened Tuesday with the premiere of United 93, gave the film their full endorsement as the industry continued to debate whether such a film can be successful at the box office. (A Canadian headline about the movie described it as "The Most Powerful Film No One Will Want to See.") Robert De Niro, who cofounded the festival with Jane Rosenthal in 2002, remarked that the movie "honors bravery and sacrifice." Rosenthal said, "I was downtown on Sept. 11. I've lived with this every day. It's not too soon [for the movie to be released]." Reporters attending the screening said that at the end of the movie, the audience sat in stunned silence, while the families of the 9/11 victims who attended sobbed and wailed in a balcony section of the theater set aside for them. FoxNews.com's Roger Friedman, who attended, said that he had never heard such anguish in a movie house. "It was gut wrenching, and it was terrifying. I don't know if United 93 has given them closure or permission to keep reliving this horror."

stupid fuckin' NMB

stupid fuckin' NMB

Did you get the white screen of doom?

I dunno, I still think it's too soon for a 9/11 movie, especially one about Flight 93 that so many people still wonder about.

I'm wondering why the people who were in a rage over Brokeback Mountain getting "free advertising" from the OMGLIBRULMEDIA aren't upset about United 93 getting the same treatment so far.

ANOTHER REMAKE?!?!?!

 

I saw the preview for "The Omen" the other day. Great. This just affirms my suspicion that there are no original ideas in mainstream movies anymore. I hate you, Hollywood!