Sandor 797 Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 http://www.apple.com/trailers/paramount/wtc/Personally; I once said that if Stone makes a decent film, restained from any Fahrenheit 9/11 criticism, this could turn out fine. The trailer certainly is an indication that Stone got it right. I know some of you feel that this film should *never* got made. What are your opinions after seeing the trailer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Breathmask 555 Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 Still too early to tell.Parts of the trailer gave me goosebumps, while others seemed to blatantly pound in the patriottism.Also, while Cage looks the part of this cop, I don't think he acts it quite well. Still, it's just the trailer we've seen so far.- Marc, who'll wait, but probably not go and see this anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morlock 11 Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 Major suckfest, judging by the trailer. An insult. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robthehand 3 Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 United 93 looks a lot more tasteful, and generally a lot better. I don't know if I'll see World Trade Center, but nothing has persuaded me to at this stage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Morn 8 Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 Looks much like Ladder 49. This is not the first fireman movie. Perhaps they should have picked a less soppy and manipulative theme. I mean it's a serious issue, where that trailer makes it look like a pop corn make you cry film, not a proper tribute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMan 0 Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 I agree. Although Im going to watch this film, I think United 93 was less soppy and more real. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pi 0 Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 Why make of movie of these things? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigMacGyver 0 Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 Why did they cast Nicholas Cage for this film? Really, there is no good reason why this guy should be in a film like this.The usage of the music in the trailer gives hope that the score will play an equally important role in the film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandor 797 Posted May 18, 2006 Author Share Posted May 18, 2006 Why make of movie of these things?Including the Holocaust, Hiroshima, the war in Yugoslavia, etc. you mean? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265 Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 The usage of the music in the trailer gives hope that the score will play an equally important role in the film.People thought the same when they saw the trailer for Saving Private Ryan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandor 797 Posted May 18, 2006 Author Share Posted May 18, 2006 People thought the same when they saw the trailer for Saving Private Ryan.Can't remember that... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265 Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 The trailer for SPR was underscored with music from The American President.Much more patriotic and sweeping then the score williams would write. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandor 797 Posted May 18, 2006 Author Share Posted May 18, 2006 Oh, yeah... I DO remember that... Also; I remember the trailer for Rosewood with it's excellent use of James Horner. And Randy Edelman's Dragonheart for the Seven Years In Tibet trailer was a killer! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tpigeon 3 Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 Why make of movie of these things?Why make a movie about a man who steals a bike? My point is that good/great movies can be made from any kind of plot, characters, and stories. I'm not saying this will be great cinema, I'll have to wait until I see it, but I don't think movies about certain subects should not be made.Ted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandor 797 Posted May 18, 2006 Author Share Posted May 18, 2006 Ted, I agree of course. See my comment above. Of course; certain material should be dealt with delicately and respectfully. In Belgium we had this child rapist/murderer and his "life story" was turned into a movie. I have no desire to see that film, but I heard that it was made with a serious and non-exploitive tone to it. That's the risk when turning something truly awful into a "movie". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pi 0 Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 Why make of movie of these things?Why make a movie about a man who steals a bike? My point is that good/great movies can be made from any kind of plot, characters, and stories. I'm not saying this will be great cinema, I'll have to wait until I see it, but I don't think movies about certain subects should not be made.TedI don't see why this needs to be glamourized and made so commercial - documentary's i can understand but this is not cool. Being born in NY and having family in the towers i just don't think this is appropriate - personal opinion thats all. Its still a senstive thing here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
diskobolus 3 Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 It looks to be the same as United 93... extremely upsetting. I hate the marketing though. How many people need to be reminded it's a true story? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandor 797 Posted May 18, 2006 Author Share Posted May 18, 2006 We still have to see it, pi. I do understand your feelings on this. I really do. Some critics called Spielberg's Schindler's List Holocaust Park back in 1993. They felt Spielberg turned the tradegy of WWII into a Hollywood spectacle.Even Polanski received similar criticism for The Pianist. And I won't even begin talking about the Japanese film Rain (about Hiroshima). Despite the fact that these were all movies and, yes, they make money and are marketed as such, I do honestly believe that the filmmakers had their heart in the right place.Even Stone on WTC... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoodMusician 56 Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 Personally, I don't believe the official story of 9/11... there's just too much that happened that doesn't add up. I could go on for hours about it so I won't but I'm not seeing it.I don't need to see it. It'll just make me more angry than I am now at the Government. Personally I felt that the begining looked like the beginning of a moster movie... the silhouette against the building... then everyone feeling the boom as it hits the tower. I felt like I should have heard the Godzilla roar... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pi 0 Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 Next will be the london bus bombing, the african embassy bombing, the iran hostage crisis, isreal olympic atheletes (oh wait that was done), the 2002 US presidential election, the Oklahoma City bombing. It wouldn't be so bad if ALL the profit went to the families, whom without this would not be possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandor 797 Posted May 18, 2006 Author Share Posted May 18, 2006 ...But there have been many, countless actually, films made about past tradegies. If WTC is unacceptable, then ALL those films from the past are equally controversial. In the end; the only thing important for me is the respect and dignity shown by the filmmaker. Even if there are heartless, bloodsucking, "moneyhungry" executives eager to make money out of it, I MUST believe that Stone had his heart in the right place when he chose to do this. If he made this just to get back some favor after Alexander than he really is an &$#@. But somehow, I think Stone KNEW that this film would bring along controversy and upset. If he REALLY wanted to earn some money he would have pulled a Copolla. Remember Jack? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tpigeon 3 Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 If it has some aesthetic value, which I am unsure of at this point, then of course it should be made. I would have a problem if it is exploitive, made only to cash on tragedy and employing every device possible to wring superficial emotion for the sake of making a buck. I can't tell by the trailer, though the film does seem to be more outwardly Hollywoodized than United 93, which is respectful, somber, and thought-provoking due to the near absence of editorializing and politicizing. I don't think it was a masterpiece, but I certainly think it is a very good film that explores a wide emotional canvas. World Trade Center looks to be more overtly about heroism and loss based on the trailer, but who knows what it will be like.Ted Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hitch 57 Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 The trailer for SPR was underscored with music from The American President.Much more patriotic and sweeping then the score williams would write.The start of the teaser trailer also used a good bit of Horner's "Hymn" from COURAGE UNDER FIRE. Is the music on the WTC trailer Craig Armstrong's because the same music was heard on the website before the trailer was put up?? Love that last shot of the smoke towering into space. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnnyecks 33 Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 The trailer moved my wife and I to tears. It still brings back some very painfull memories for us living so close to NYC. Why I don't agree with these films being made, we all knew they would happen. I cringe a little knowing that Stone is making this, (JFK anyone?) but I feel that he will do a decent job.At least it isn't being turned into a Bruckheimer film.And the music in the trailer........ WOAH. I am very curious as to what this is, if it isn't Armstrong's score. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeshopk 8 Posted May 18, 2006 Share Posted May 18, 2006 I have no interest in seeing this unless it contains said "Farenheight 9/11 criticisms". If I want to honor the victims, all I have to do is think about that day. A film should offer something organized and interesting, not just a sad patriotic re-enactment/docudrama. Even if the conspiracy theories are just theories, there are some interesting details that would make the film watchable, such as witnesses hearing detonators and the unexplained level collapse of a third tower. If anybody's middle name is "conspiracy theory" it is Oliver Stone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandor 797 Posted May 18, 2006 Author Share Posted May 18, 2006 I'm SO glad he stayed away from all the "conspiracy theory" crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry B 50 Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 Ooh. This would make a great double feature with the new Poseidon Adventure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg1138 3 Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 Cerrabore - congrats on the 2000! I gotta say, this movie looks just like I hoped any 9/11 movie would be made (behonest - it was never anything less than inevitable)....not much to go by on the trailer, but from here it looks like Stone has nailed it....I just hope that the trailer is representative of the movie as a whole and Stone doesn't use the opportunity to vent his spleen.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alfredo 0 Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 The trailer gave me goosebumps. I will see it. If this were a special segment of 60/60 no one would be upset. A movie is just another way of telling a story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoodMusician 56 Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 actually Joshepk, the third towers collapse wasn't really that unexplained...The guy who owned the towers--and who, three weeks before hand, insured them each for millions of dollars extra specifically for acts of terrorism(and then after the attacks tried to claim billions of dollars citing each act as a seperate act of terrorism)--said on public tv that the firemen asked him what they wanted to do with Tower 7 because it was "beyond repair."He said to "pull it," which is demolition slang for demolishing a building. It takes weeks to plan such a thing, and yet we are told that tower 7, which unexpectantly collapsed in on itself into a neat pile was set up for demoltion within two hours without warning anyone.I wonder if they'll have that in the movie?wasn't that the same tower that a german company resurrected nearly 30 hard-drives from and found countless illegal transactions in the upwards of several millions were made in the hours before the attack?... and then that information handed over to the CIA which then put them in a box and never dealt with it... I think so... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MAG-SI 10 Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 OMG. It is so obvious why this is made. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unlucky Bastard 7,782 Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 I have no interest in seeing this unless it contains said "Farenheight 9/11 criticisms". If I want to honor the victims, all I have to do is think about that day. A film should offer something organized and interesting, not just a sad patriotic re-enactment/docudrama. Even if the conspiracy theories are just theories, there are some interesting details that would make the film watchable, such as witnesses hearing detonators and the unexplained level collapse of a third tower. If anybody's middle name is "conspiracy theory" it is Oliver Stone.I completely agree, I'm disappointed Stone didn't go that way. Flashbacks to the event from the point of view of the witnesses called up in the 9/11 Commission and other investigators who know much more than we do would have been more interesting than the run-of-the-mill Bruckheimer/Bay style disaster movie. The stories of the victims of 9/11 should stand on their own without the help of Hollywood, who are playing it too safe on this one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Richard Penna 3,695 Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 It wouldn't be so bad if ALL the profit went to the families, whom without this would not be possible.I couldn't possibly agree more - if I was in the directing chair, I would insist that a huge portion of it went to them.It infuriates me that those executives will make millions from this, yet those families who need the support will be paying to see their own lives disappear again Should be the other way round, and I won't be seeing this movie in a hurry, for a multitude of reasons (Cage looks wrong and I just don't like the tone of the movie as well).Maybe just a rental sometime.I may say this a million more times, but money is coming before everything else these days. It's truly pathetic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greg1138 3 Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 I completely agree, I'm disappointed Stone didn't go that way. Flashbacks to the event from the point of view of the witnesses called up in the 9/11 Commission and other investigators who know much more than we do would have been more interesting than the run-of-the-mill Bruckheimer/Bay style disaster movie. The stories of the victims of 9/11 should stand on their own without the help of Hollywood, who are playing it too safe on this one.True - I think - to an extent......and much as though I am looking forward to both 9/11 movies even I have to say that it's too soon for the conspiracy stuff (and heaven knows there's plenty of it).........maybe in a few years......give it time......maybe we'll see a Stone "Counterpoint" movie where he lets rip a little more with that aspect of things.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unlucky Bastard 7,782 Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 I couldn't help finding this shot interesting. Take note of the Zoolander poster, which copped some flack from Roger Ebert for deleting the Twin Towers from certain shots of the film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JWfangirl1992 18 Posted May 20, 2006 Share Posted May 20, 2006 Ok I saw the trailer before the Da Vinci Code, and I have to say it flat out looks like a movie made to seem like it was made as a tribute but is really a "I wanna be rich" movie. I feel as an end result it will move people to tears but it will leave a horrible mark on Cage's, the director's, and a few other peoples reputation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnnyecks 33 Posted May 20, 2006 Share Posted May 20, 2006 He already is rich.I *hope* to see that Stone, Cage, Armstrong, et. all approach this film with the immensity that this subject invokes.I could be let down, as I have often, but I still hope this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265 Posted May 20, 2006 Share Posted May 20, 2006 Really looking forward to the special effects on this film.Is ILM on this?I hope they do a great job on those towers falling down.This should be Oscar worthy CGI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sandor 797 Posted May 20, 2006 Author Share Posted May 20, 2006 I hope they do a great job on those towers falling down.I was waiting for you to say that it will be "so cool to watch". I would say that after your John Williams/Patrick Doyle cancer remark, your ability to use sarcasm has reached an all time high. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265 Posted May 20, 2006 Share Posted May 20, 2006 I wonder what Craig Armstrong will come up with for the cue were the first plane dives into the WTC.This would be a good opportunity to do a homage of Williams SW music when Luke fires the fatal shot into the Death Star's duct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
orrakul 0 Posted May 20, 2006 Share Posted May 20, 2006 I could also see this moment playing without any music at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeinAR 1,949 Posted May 20, 2006 Share Posted May 20, 2006 I agree. Although Im going to watch this film, I think United 93 was less soppy and more real.ok, how can you say that since this is about those that survived the collapse and is true story, while the United 93 is pure speculation.perhaps you should refer to a dictionary the next time. btw, I am shocked that I think it looks good.I have constantly said its too early.perhaps I am wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GoodMusician 56 Posted May 20, 2006 Share Posted May 20, 2006 United 93 is more than speculation. Its Fiction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMan 0 Posted May 20, 2006 Share Posted May 20, 2006 I agree. Although Im going to watch this film, I think United 93 was less soppy and more real.ok, how can you say that since this is about those that survived the collapse and is true story, while the United 93 is pure speculation.perhaps you should refer to a dictionary the next time. btw, I am shocked that I think it looks good.I have constantly said its too early.perhaps I am wrong.Well, All I meant is that the United 93 put me right with the passengers on the plane. That is all. Watch the sarcasm please. Thanks.JMan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265 Posted May 21, 2006 Share Posted May 21, 2006 Well, All I meant is that the United 93 put me right with the passengers on the plane. Wouldn't you be dead then?That is all. Watch the sarcasm please. Thanks.JManYou make it so difficult sometimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeinAR 1,949 Posted May 21, 2006 Share Posted May 21, 2006 Watch the sarcasm please.was it too subtle? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMan 0 Posted May 21, 2006 Share Posted May 21, 2006 Yes. Just drop it already. And no, I wouldnt be dead because I was in the theater. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeinAR 1,949 Posted May 21, 2006 Share Posted May 21, 2006 chill J, just kidding, don't get your last line though, you lost me there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
#SnowyVernalSpringsEternal 10,265 Posted May 21, 2006 Share Posted May 21, 2006 That was referring to my comment, Joe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hitch 57 Posted May 21, 2006 Share Posted May 21, 2006 Watch the sarcasm please.was it too subtle?Subtlety isn't in the Dutch vocabulary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now