'United 93': Too Much, Too Soon

At the end of this month a film called United 93 opens nationwide, exploring in real time what happened on the hijacked September 11th flight that was supposedly destined for the White House, but ended up crashing in a field in Pennsylvania instead.

Much of the discussion about United 93 began when the trailer for the film showed in Manhattan and some theaters refused to continue showing the preview after angry audience reactions.

I was curious about the controversy, so I decided to check out the trailer.

Let me go on the record: This film looks like 100% pure exploitation of September 11th. The timing of the film's release is miserable. Just five years after 9/11 they're releasing this movie that basically just reenacts the whole flight and the obscene horror of United flight 93? Please.

When the trailer was shown in Manhattan, patrons yelled "Too soon, too soon!" at the screen.

I agree wholeheartedly.

United 93 looks like ugly emotional pornography. It's designed to take you in, get you there, exploit some emotions, allow entrance to a sickly voyeuristic mindset, and watch the "last moments" of the plane's passengers.

Arguments that this is a film honoring the victims of United 93 are pretty flimsy. Everybody in the world knows that the passengers on the plane fought back against the attackers and that it's possible the passengers foiled the hijackers' mission. We know that already. We don't need to see it on a big screen for two hours, milking us for every moment of horror and grief.

This fall another film, called World Trade Center, opens starring Nicholas Cage. Seriously, people, is this our new form of entertainment? Watching Hollywood reenactments of 9/11?

It all seems a bit sick and twisted.

* * *

To add insult to injury, Universal's website for United 93 is mortifying. It features a movie poster of the Statue of Liberty, an airplane in the sky, and the burning World Trade Center. The slogan "Never Forget" plays when you click to open the flash media player. The music in the background is awful. The site made me want to take a shower after I visited. What was Universal thinking?

Comments

[Adam]

Hey guys, I read your blog all the time and I agree with you about this movie. I just saw the previews for it early on 4/4 and I was spee chless.

[Scholiast]

This, I guess, is what makes the rest of us feel that Americans will do anything for money...

It's true, we all know what those passengers did - and how it ended. Their families are still in mourning, how can they make a film - let alone two! - already?!

I know you're not like that, neither are my other American friends and bliends, but this really is extremely tasteless.

[Roy]

Ok, I am SO agreeing with you on this! When I went to the theatre a couple weeks back to watch V for Vendetta, the trailer for that movie came on. The whole place went into this dead, eery silence. I felt sick that I was watching that. I think it's a poor choice on their part to make such a movie, but I can see why some would want to see it. However, I have mourned over that day, and I think that seeing the movie would just stir it all up again. I think Bush would love to have everyone watch this movie.

[timothy]

Supposedly the director (producer?) of the Flight 93 movie personally phoned every family member of the passengers on Flight 93 and wouldn't make the movie without the family member's approval. And apparently a percentage of the first day's gross is going to a charity of some sort. While both points are admirable, I still think the movie (and the other one) is capitalizing on tragedy. It's disgusting. And they say lawyers are ambulance chasers. Sheesh.

[mollycoddler]

I think everybody that's commented here about this is playing into the whole 'controversy.' Newsflash: Movies have always been made that reenact historic events. Who is to say when is 'too soon?' Should we wait until everyone that knew anybody hurt or killed is dead? As far as the trailer playing for unsuspecting movie-goers in New York: yeah, that kind of sucks. I would consider that a bit of insensitivity in the town where it actually happened. However, as far as the movie being made in the first place: BIG FUCKING DEAL. I personally can't wait to see it. It's the American way: we like to watch the movie version. It helps some people work out their own issues surrounding the event. People who are 'offended' by the movie can just not go see it. The lame sentiment of feeling insulted by others' capitalization on tragedy is so convoluted, it makes me want to scream. Any movie telling a 'true' story is capitalizing on the event, whether it be good or bad. Why is 9/11 any different. Maybe only a certan number of people were actual physical victims, but it happened to EVERYBODY that lives in this country. For those of us that like movie versions of historic events, United 93 will be part of that healing process.

[ben]

While i DO agree that its in poor taste to have this movie so soon after the actual event, I fail to see the difference in the horror this will surely cause for people who lost relatives on september 11th, than the horror felt by war veterans who are reliving it when we dramatise it all the fucking time. Theres no reason why we need any of these movies, the only reason why they use true events as opposed to making up nasty stories to use is to trigger the emotional reaction of "this actually happened", and the emotional reaction will surely be stronger after 5 years than in 50. its business for universal. people will be disgusted everywhere and tickets will sell.

[My Spin]

I don't think I will be able to go and see this. The trailer just about did me in. I think it will always be too soon for me to see anything more about 9/11. It's something I will never forget. Damn, I lost four friends that day, and I still cry.