Wide Release Films May 25 2012
oh right. because they never made stuff like this (isn’t nazi-porn scarier than most horror movies?)
on the other hand i recommend nikolaus geyrhalter’s pripyat for an eerie window into the chernobyl tragedy…
Dib – I’m not exactly sure where my line is, but I think I’m a lot more accepting of a not-to-be-taken-seriously horror movie than a big-budget manipulative drama. Then again, The Thin Red Line could probably be put in that category, but I liked that, so I really don’t know. I think I take it on a case by case basis…
My only protest against World Trade Center was not seeing it, but I probably wouldn’t have seen it even if I didn’t think it was distasteful.
“So my final argument would be ‘If you don’t like it don’t watch it’. You may be appalled but other people have a different perspective on the film and it’s important to tolerate differences of opinion. It’s the same as all the people who complain about sex in movies. You don’t have to like it, but don’t forget you’re the one with the remote control in your hand.”
exactly. If you don’t want these movies to be made, don’t give them attention or your money.
“Just go play S.T.A.L.K.E.R.: Shadow of Chernobyl instead; much more interesting.”
this too. One of the best games of the last decade. Where were the protests when this game came out? You are looting the zone and killing people and mutants that have supernatural powers due to the radiation. The zone pretty much becomes worshipped if I’m not mistaken. This game got pretty popular too, but I didn’t hear about any controversy surrounding it.
“I’m just trying to imagine a found-footage horror movie about 9/11. I think being a dumb horror movie makes it better because it’s not supposed to be taken seriously, which is precisely the problem I had with World Trade Center.”
I agree with Drunken that it’s a stupid horror film that’s not supposed to be taken seriously. I would be much more concerned with a film that exploited a tragedy but did it for serious/dramatic purposes. Many people last year complained exactly that about Extremely Loud.
I’m with Jirin here that everyone has a different perspective and if you don’t like it, don’t watch it. This whole pissing contest about what tragedy is worse and making excuses for certain movies over others is really the only thing that bothers me. Whether you were directly effected by a disaster should have nothing to do with whether a production company halfway around the world decides to make a movie about it. What, are we supposed to wait until all the victims of a disaster have died before we can make a movie about it? That’s crazy talk.
PS – I’d be more offended by Michael Bay’s Pearl Harbor because it’s a bad film, not because it’s an exploitative film. To quote Seinfeld, “So this offends you as a Jew? No, this offends me as a comedian!”
>>PS – I’d be more offended by Michael Bay’s Pearl Harbor because it’s a bad film, not because it’s an exploitative film. To quote Seinfeld, “So this offends you as a Jew? No, this offends me as a comedian!”<<
This is really the key point. Part of treating a subject respectfully mean making a quality film and not junk. So while I found World Trade Center exploitive because it used 9/11 as a setting for a standard disaster movie, United 93 gave me no pause as a moving dissection of part of the events of that day. I’m sure Oliver Stone meant well, but making a bad film about 9/11 seemed less sensitive than making a good one. I’m sure that same standard can apply to any tragic story one wants to tell.
^yep
I would watch an Ilsa-ish movie about 9/11. Not sure what it would be…maybe told from truther pov? Obviously there would have to be naked chicks, maybe the 70 virgins or whatever could be tempting the pilots with an erotic musical number
anyone else see Smith’s smack of that journo well discussing MIB 3 and find it homophobic?
No, not at all. I would have done the same thing.
Not homophobic at all, especially given the rumors regarding Smith’s own homosexuality.
It was his anger at the situation.
Surely he must have dealt with cheek kissers before.
Maybe he was doing his best Chris Brown impression.
The only thing that would bother me would be would be a movie directly attacking the people who died or their families, otherwise its a part of history and open to interpretation. a bad movie about 9-11 would bother me as much as a bad movie about ice skating or trampolines or whatever. Im an nyc native.
ok, so seriously, major appreciation for the DP of Chernobyl Diaries. I was incredibly impressed by the camera work here which is something I don’t particularly appreciate so much in most modern horror films. the film itself isn’t bad at all either. there’s one real silly part, but wasn’t enough to kill it for me.
PolarisDiB
“POLARISDIB d you see any ghost-zombie-monster haunting poor ignorants teenager all over those movies???? PLEASE!!! we need more Critical Thinking here.”
I mentioned both because both were heavily criticized for exploiting that event for entertainment/commercial purposes, and the discussion is somewhat ongoing. For what it’s worth, people complained about Pearl Harbor being ‘too soon’ (I don’t really know what happened to movies like From Here to Eternity or Tora! Tora! Tora! when they came out, and yes I am aware I’m pointing out more Titanic like movies than Paranormal Activity like movies).
You have made clear that you draw the line at the monsterfication of Chernobyl victims specifically. I’m asking DaFoo about his line because he’s mentioned 9/11.
—PolarisDiB