I dont even know where to begin with this rant.. This movie looks like the most exploitive, kiss ass piece of shit ever produced. your opinions?
somehow, hollywood finds a way to make millions of dollars of profit off of one of the most tragic events in American history....starring nicholas cage
yeah i saw the previews when i went to the theatre the other day to see clerks II. it looked pretty badass. i plan on going see it when it comes out. do you know the date?
its about time imo... i really wanna see it from the perspective of the people who witnessed it.. dont think so negative.. everyone has almost forgotten about the tragedy, this movie will wake us up agian.
how can you even begin to describe a movie depicting the event that resulted in the deaths of thousands and thousands of innocent Americans as "badass." tragic? yes. sad? yes. badass? not quite. tell that to the thousands of wives, husbands, sons, daughters, families, etc. who lost someone that day.
this movie looks like pure propoganda. i would never see this movie. i dont even know where to start... i wonder if they will put the invasion of iraq into the movie, or american imperialism.
I live in NYC. I saw the towers fall. I saw the last 2 planes crash. No movie will ever come close to replicating that. And yes they will make a movie about th einvasion of iraq because we like to see war movies. They sell and make lots of money. World War 2 was a tragedy but they make great movies about it and no one complains.
Get over it....how many other "tragic events" have been reproduced by hollywood? It happens....there's no stopping it.
dude, if nic cage is good enough to be GHOST RIDER, he's good enough to play some NY fireman. lol, but seriously, we have to learn to laugh at tragedies, or else we won't progress. what if some 90-something complained about titanic being produced?
I'm definately going to see it... Oliver Stone, he's great. I was wondering what kind of conspiracy theories Stone was brewing up when i heard that He's going to avoid any political or conspiracy type edges on the film. Focusing completely on what happened that day (I like this idea) Although i was disappointed by Alexander ( what the fuck was he thinking?) I still have hope for this one... Preview looks good btw. And Nicholas Cage was great in Wild at Heart, and 8mm.. I think he'll fit the role quite well (although he looks kinda mongloid)
I would rent it from the store, and possibly go to see it if somone paid for me. Hollywood does what it does, you juts have to tolorate it. eric
apparently the movie hints to explosives in the towers. The reality is, this movie is about the emotional aspect on 9/11, not the political or mechanical. I would like to see this film and suspend my opinions of what exactly happened that day. I think it's got a good director, good actors and i'll probably see it.
no one was upset when pearl harbour came out. i know its only been a few years, but what did you expect? its an exciting story with a lot of emotion. it could wind up being a great movie if its tasteful and properly written.
makes me sick to think they wanna make money off of something like this i will never never never see this movie makes me so fucking sick
i need not a film to re-live the event. i remember perfectly what i wore, said, and thought that day. my thoughts havent changed much from then: "why, must we kill each other." i dont like the idea of any company profiting from this, but i cant stop it and niether can you. think of all the holocaust movies, they did the same, but; if done correctly based upon the emotions and feelings of those during the event. and, without a political agenda, i repeat without a political agenda; i may support it then.
Eh, it's no different than a movie about many of the other events in history. Unfortunatly, I still think the events are too fresh for a movie, I mean, it's not like people forgot what it was like and need to see an emotional movie to remind them how horrid it was. It's all still fresh in the minds of most people. So all this movie will do is skewer the perception of the event. That may not be a bad thing, but what it means is that they won't (or shouldn't) change too many details in the movie since it was so recent and we all know how it actually went down (where-as in, for example, a war movie, the director can make the battle seem however he wants since no one had a video camera to show what it was like). I guess what I'm saying is, I hope they stick to facts, but I'm guessing since it was so recent they probably will.