Article

2006-04-03 Home Front: Culture Wars

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Steve 2006-04-03 10:58|| || Front Page|| [7 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 I don't seem to recall hearing about any protests about it being "too soon" back then.

That's because back then people had something called "patriotism" and "the will to fight back" and also "cheering the home team". These concepts are extinct on the east and west shores.

Posted by DarthVader 2006-04-03 11:37|| 2006-04-03 11:37|| Front Page Top

#2 cmon, half of those movies were not about Pearl Harbor. I mean Casablanca, cmon. And Pearl was seen as an attack on the US military. The whole emphasis on the deaths of civilians, the individual obits, the focus on tragedy, wasnt there then.

All of which is only a quibble on the "we were so tough" in 1942 meme. Personally I have no problem with this movie being released now. I hope they do a good job of it, Id like to see it.

Posted by liberalhawk 2006-04-03 11:41|| 2006-04-03 11:41|| Front Page Top

#3 "I don't seem to recall hearing about any protests about it being "too soon" back then."

That was the "Greatest Generation". We have had the "Me Generation" since then.

Posted by Fordesque 2006-04-03 11:55|| 2006-04-03 11:55|| Front Page Top

#4 cmon, half of those movies were not about Pearl Harbor.

Having reading comprehension problems, LH?

As for whining about the movie -- there are a hell of a lot of people who want us to forget. Look at Yale for a humongous concentration of them.

Posted by Robert Crawford">Robert Crawford 2006-04-03 12:16|| http://www.kloognome.com/]">[http://www.kloognome.com/] 2006-04-03 12:16|| Front Page Top

#5 Better too soon than too late.

Posted by Matt 2006-04-03 12:19|| 2006-04-03 12:19|| Front Page Top

#6 I am so going to this movie.

'Hawk: Casablanca takes place in the week before Pearl Harbor, and Rick's character arc is a bit of an allegory for U.S. entry into the war, as evidenced by my favorite bit of dialouge in the film:

Rick: It's December 1941 in Casablanca, what time is it in New York?
Sam: I don't know. My watch stopped.
Rick: I'll bet they're asleep in New York. I'll bet they're asleep all over America.

Posted by Mike 2006-04-03 12:47|| 2006-04-03 12:47|| Front Page Top

#7 That's because back then people had something called "patriotism" and "the will to fight back" and also "cheering the home team". These concepts are extinct on the east and west shores.

It was a little easier back then for Hollywood and the press to cheer for the home team, because the home team was fighting on the same side as their beloved Uncle Joe Stalin.

They were patriotic, all right; but not for America.

Posted by Dave D.">Dave D. 2006-04-03 13:22|| 2006-04-03 13:22|| Front Page Top

#8 I don't want to see this movie at all. I fear it will be FULL of inaccuracies and portray the terrorists of Flight 93 as "human". As for all this nonsense about "remembering", I have no need. I couldn't forget even if I wanted to. The image of those Towers coming down, the whole in the Pentagon, and the seen in Pensylvania is FOREVER engraved in my mind.

If you have to see this movie to remember the events of that day, you just plain out don't CARE. Sadly, to many Americans today have that exact problem. And yes I am angry about this. Something just doesn't sit right with me, thinking about each individual never going home. Mothers, daughters, wives, brothers, husbands, sons, all lost.

I don't seem to recall hearing about any protests about it being "too soon" back then.

War movies GENERALIZE people. You see the uniforms, the guns, the nameless ranks of soldiers. And the characters are almost always fictional. This movie will be about people, specific people, their last moments on earth, the calls of panic and terror on their faces as the plane went down into that field. Trying to picture, yet alone recreat that moment just doesn't sit well with me. To me it feels like we're belittling them by making this movie.

Posted by Charles 2006-04-03 13:28|| 2006-04-03 13:28|| Front Page Top

#9 I haven't seen a movie (made after 1964) in a movie theater in 20 years. I'm planning to see this one if it lives up to my expectations based on the approval of all the families.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2006-04-03 13:33|| 2006-04-03 13:33|| Front Page Top

#10 yeah, mike but we're not talking about something subtle, we're talking about a movie about the events of that day. And lets not forget, the events of that day werent an attack on a naval base - it was the deliberate murder of thousands of civilians. This would be more like a movie about the holocaust in 1942, or 1945. Which would have been a good idea, but I would understand some folks not wanting to see that.

Posted by liberalhawk 2006-04-03 14:14|| 2006-04-03 14:14|| Front Page Top

#11 SOMERSET, Pa. - The Flight 93 National Memorial will receive part of the box-office revenue from the new movie about the airliner hijacked during the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Writer-director Paul Greengrass' "United 93" is scheduled to open April 28. Universal Pictures plans to donate 10 percent of the first three days' grosses to the memorial, the Families of Flight 93 announced Thursday.

Gordon Felt, whose brother Edward was a Flight 93 passenger, said the studio's efforts "to help permanently memorialize the bravery of the 40 passengers and crew of Flight 93 who chose to fight back in the face of violent adversity are remarkable." Last year, the official 9/11 Commission report said the hijackers crashed the plane as passengers tried to take control of the cockpit.

Chris T. Sullivan, who heads a $30 million fund-raising campaign for the national memorial, said he hopes "United 93" will result in worldwide support for the proposed monument in a field near Shanksville.

"United 93" chronicles in real time the hijacked United Airlines flight that crashed Sept. 11, 2001, killing all 40 passengers and crew. The film makes its world premiere at the Tribeca Film Festival in New York this month.

The winning design for the memorial was modified after some critics protested that its initial crescent shape symbolized Islam. The memorial's name also was changed from "Crescent of Embrace" to "40 Memorial Groves."

Posted by Steve">Steve 2006-04-03 14:29|| 2006-04-03 14:29|| Front Page Top

#12 Is not Oliver Stone the Director? Inaccuracies? Yuh think?

Posted by Sgt. D.T. 2006-04-03 18:33|| 2006-04-03 18:33|| Front Page Top

#13 Writer-director Paul Greengrass, per the article.

Ergo, I think not.

Posted by SLO Jim 2006-04-03 18:36|| 2006-04-03 18:36|| Front Page Top

#14 Charles: this isn't a film exploiting "last moments on earth, the calls of panic and terror." It's about heroism, about ordinary people rising against terror and panic and doing something extraordinary. They died in the end, but they saved hundreds of others by their sacrifice--and came within an ace of retaking the plane.

The cable movie Flight 93 was a worthy tribute, and I expect this will be as well. If it's as good as I hope, it'll be a welcome antidote to Farenheit 9/11 and Syriana and Cynthia McKinney and Howard Dean and Charlie Sheen and all of the general free-floating moonbattery that's afflicting our media culture.

Posted by Mike 2006-04-03 18:38|| 2006-04-03 18:38|| Front Page Top

23:35 Listen to Dogs
23:10 Listen to Dogs
23:04 Listen to Dogs
22:55 Listen to Dogs
22:52 Listen to Dogs
22:31 Listen to Dogs
21:41 Listen to Dogs
19:57 Listen to Dogs
19:50 Listen to Dogs
19:35 Listen to Dogs
19:17 Listen to Dogs
18:56 Listen to Dogs
18:49 Listen to Dogs
18:46 Listen to Dogs
05:06 Listen to Dogs
04:42 Listen to Dogs
04:22 Listen to Dogs
03:07 Listen to Dogs
02:52 Listen to Dogs
02:57 Listen to Dogs
02:32 Listen to Dogs
02:27 Listen to Dogs
02:23 Listen to Dogs
01:47 Listen to Dogs