No.

Who ever created the genre for this film is obviouslly wearing a tinfoil hat.

Your entire point is muddled. I've read both your posts and have no fucking idea what your point is.

First you say the movies are tasteless, but then you seem to be more concerned about future DVD reviews. Following your logic, no one can ever make a movie about a serious subject because it might make writing DVD reviews awkward.

But I'm curious. What makes you think the movies themselves are tasteless? More important, how can you judge movies you haven't even seen as tasteless? If you'd seen "United 93," I doubt that's the adjective you'd use to describe it.

As far as how DVD reviewers can write a tasteful review of a serious film, reread any review of "Schindler's List" or "Saving Private Ryan." You're selling the reviewers short to an insulting degree.

congrats on being close midned.

Don't confuse rational thought and common sense with closed-mindedness.

Mr. Salty, your point is muddled too...im not even talking about the review of the movie as you said it is insulting to dvd reviewers. It doesn't matter if the movie is good or not. I bet the movie is very good. That doesn't mean it's tasteless. The idea of tasteless for these 9/11 movies have to do with being released too soon. 9/11 is just a bit more touchy subject right now than WW2, Holocaust, Vietnam, the Somalia soldier drag through the streets, for example. The filmmakers are so concerned with reminding the people about 9/11, don't worry, people think about 9/11 all the time.

My point is this: let's say UNITED 93 or WORLD TRADE CENTER are DVD audio/video reference quality, doesn't anyone feel a little wierd or guilty looking at this:





but not feel wierd/guilty looking at this:





Maybe in 20 years, I could own the 9/11 movies on DVD, but it's just too soon right now. (The Somalia BLACK HAWK DOWN is a recent event, but I feel nothing towards that event, so I own the DVD because it's a cool action movie based on a real event. The soldier being dragged through the streets of Somalia was shocking and sad at the time, but very soon forgettable since it didn't really involve Americans on American soil. 9/11 is not at a forgettable level. I would not want to do that with the 9/11 movies, because I feel something towards this event.) I would feel like a bit sleazy/wrong/guilty to own the Superbit DVDs of UNITED 93 and WORLD TRADE CENTER. I own all of those other real DVDs shown above. It's just that I'm not sure if I would want or think it's right to own them right after those events happened (if DVD had existed during that time). For example, Schindler's List is my favorite movie, and I remember in the theater the sound of the train pulling up to Aushwitz and remembering how powerful the sound of that scene was. And when the DVD came out, I was actually happy the DVD had DTS and that train scene was as powerful on DVD with subwoofer as it was in the theater. So I thought about the DVD quality of a holocaust movie, which is actually sort of tasteless, but it happened such a long time ago, it doesn't seem like such a big deal as it would be if I was looking foward to the DTS sound/subwoofer action of the towers falling down in the WORLD TRADE CENTER movie.

No, not at all.

United 93 is never going to be a "reference quality" DVD because the movie isn't a flashy visual or aural movie. All they can hope to do with the DVD is release it in a way that it comes as close to the theatrical experience as possible, which is what any DVD should do. Nothing weird about that. Are you suggesting it would be better if they introduced some dust and scratches into the video and maybe a few pops and hisses on a mono audio track?

Joe Molotov, I'm being hypothetical, because eventhough UNITED 93 and WORLD TRADE CENTER are supposedly being handled carefully and not in a Michael Bay way, people would still see and buy the DVDs of 9/11 movies if they were filmed Michael Bay style, with awsome surround sound.

Actually with UNITED 93, since it's got the Robert Altman thing going (everyone chattering at the same time), I hope the audio of the DVD will be clear.

I am actually so happy Paul Greengrass did UNITED 93, because that means that he will never muck up the live-action movie of the graphic novel WATCHMEN that he was originally attached too, but changed his mind to do the 9/11 movie. WATCHMEN would be in better hands with Tim Story then Greengrass. I'm not crazy about his "let's make everything realistic by doing a hand-held cam shake" style that he did with BOURNE SUPREMACY...

And by the way, just to remind everyone, the families of the two main characters (one played by Nick Cage) in Oliver Stone's WORLD TRADE CENTER did not give the approval of their deaths to be Hollywoodized. Is Hollywood that sleazy that they couldn't find family members that wouldn't mind if their lost ones be represented on film? No, Hollywood had to choose two firemen that have families that don't want their dead loved ones in the film.

I image John McLoughlin and William Jimeno would be very surprised to learn they are dead, toddly6666.

I'm not really sure what you're getting at then. You're saying the movie is tasteless because of the way it might have been made, but wasn't?

Outstanding film...I am so impressed with how the material was handled. It's a shame that this film probably won't be seen by too many people because it was made too soon. I agree with the previous opinions that this is a must see film...one of those that everyone should see if they feel they are ready to see it.

Joe,
I think the 9/11 movies are tasteless mainly due to being made too soon. It doesn't really matter to me if they have Michael Bay action or if they don't show any action. Of course it would be more tasteles if it was an all-balls out action movie cheese-fest a la Bay's Pearl Harbor, but my main issue is that these movies are tasteless because they are released too soon.

To the people that have seen the movie,
Would UNITED 93 still be a great movie if it wasn't based on 9/11 and just be a fictional hijacking movie? Just curious...Well, i hope I will enjoy this film more than Passion of Christ, because i'm definitely curious now to see what all the fuss is.

Well, if United 93 was just a movie about a hijacking, it wouldn't be the same movie...at all. There are no super villains, there is no main protagonist and their aren't big flashy action sequences...if it was meant to be the kind of film YOU think they made, it would probably just be getting alright reviews...if it didn't have the historical frame of reference would it be as powerful? Of course not, but it IS a historical film, portraying a real life tragedy and made with extreme skill, precision and care. Your comments earlier about Paul Greengrass vs. Tim Story blow my fucking mind. Greengrass is one of the most talented and exciting filmmakers working today IMO and he really made a solid, respectful film here. I also love his past flicks and can't wait for his second go-round with Bourne... Tim Story on the other hand, is one of the most bland, unimaginative hacks getting work.

I don't think ANYONE, reviewer or not, is going to be looking at United 93 or WTC as DEMO movies to show off their system. If they are, I don't think a lot of people will be hanging around them to see their demonstration.

People will always be uncomfortable with films based on real life tragedies. I don't think this movie would play differently 5 years from now. Time doesn't heal all wounds and I don't think it's too soon for this kind of movie. The comments earlier about time making people insensitive to WW2 and the Holocaust blow my mind...

MATT

I personally feel that if United 93 hadn't been based off of a real life story I would have still enjoyed it. The intense buildup is immense and although it may not have been crying material like it was...it still would have been a very good film.

mdc3000,
Saving Private Ryan and Black Hawk Down are known as Reference quality demo DVDs. I would ask MR SALTY about what you said "I don't think ANYONE, reviewer or not, is going to be looking at United 93 or WTC as DEMO movies to show off their system."

That's okay if you like Greengrass, I think he is an awful director. Maybe i'll like him though after watching United 93.

Okie dokie.

I'm curious: did anyone complain that Black Hawk Down was too soon? The real-life event took place on Oct. 3-4 in 1993, the movie was released Dec. 28th, 2001. If Universal had waited 3-4 more years to release United 93, would the "too soon" crowd be coming out? (I realize that there are some differences to both events.)

No, people would not feel guilty if the movie came out reference quality, it would be kind of odd to show it off for a specific scene "Hey check out how this rocks my subwoofer!" but there's a dozen other examples out there.

And no, the movie is not tasteless for being too soon. The movie is a moving (meaning movie, not an opinion on the film itself) memorial to the people on the flight, aren't most memorials in place within days of a persons passing? It's been years since this events passing and it's solid enough time to have a memorial to it. Above that, it isn't really intended to entertain (hence the number of "I won't be watching it again" posts). Of course, opinions = to each their own.

Paul Greengrass, however, is a very good director. His choice to use shakey cam hampered Bourne Supremacy but the direction itself was great. Bloody Sunday was also very well executed, and more similar to U93 in a sense (docu-drama).

Anyway, if they start doing release after release of U93 - ie: single disc, multi disc, commemeration edition, then it'd be slightly distasteful as it's a common money-milking strategy of studios.

from what i heard oliver stone added a missle being shot at the white house for his movie for a more dramatic effect. that was what someone reported on the radio so i don't put much validity in it, then again this is oliver stone.

the only reason people care about 9/11 is because it was on us soil, now they act like its's a big deal. when al qaeda bombed the us embassy in africa or bombed the uss cole and us citizens died, it wasn't much of an after thougt. and no one cared about bin laden or al qaeda. if movies had been made about that, no one would've said to soon, why cuz no one really cared. same thing with blackhawk down. no one really cared. but 9/11 was on such a massive scale it was hard to say, "wow, that's terrible" and then go on with your life. people were up in arms yelling "bomb turbanheads" and buying their us flags in support of the us. where was all this emotion before? there really wasn't any. that is why some people are saying to soon.

Seriously, what the fuck?

You're the one who keeps bringing up the possible audio/video quality of an eventual DVD of "United 93," and none of us here have any fucking idea what your point is with that. I also don't think you know the meaning of the word "tasteless." If you did, you certainly wouldn't be using it if you had seen "United 93."

And maybe that's the point: You need to actually go see the movie before you make any more foolish posts in this thread. Believe me, it's a movie that speaks for itself, and it has done a wonderful job of silencing its critics.

you have entered a dimension of sight and sound, a world where man wants movies to be reference quality, a world where toddly6666 thinks all movies should be reference quality...... you have entered the toddlyzone......


someone is drinking grandpa's cough syrup

Guys, how about more reviews of the actual movie and less hypothetical discussion about what might be or could have been.

BELLS OF WAR, that's very true...it's because no one really cares until the shit hits the fan in our backyard. There is a war going on in Iraq, but no one really cares except for the family members of the soldiers there. Citizens aren't involved in war as in the past, such as during WW2 or Vietnam. It's passive and the people let the govt. do whatever they want as long as we can continue to go to Starbucks and buy DVDs....I hope Oliver Stone puts in the conspiracy theme into his movie, but I have a feeling he won't because he probably needs a hit so he's play it safe...

MR SALTY, yes I don't know what the meaning of tasteless is. Thanks for confiming that. What's wrong with talking about the upcoming DVDs of the 9/11 movies. I'm just curious how people will react to them. Will people be honestly checking the DVD backs to see if it has DTS or DD 5.1. And inside they are thinking "yes, this has DTS!!!" or "damn it, this has only mono sound!" I'm just throwing it up in the air to see if it's an okay human reaction to be thinking about the DVD audio quality of these 9/11 movies. I certainly get excited for awesome audio quality of any war movie. I'm just curious if people have lost touch with sensitivity. I'm sorry if you don't like my bizzare hypothetical topic.

DGIBFEN, I don't even think it's an issue of BLACK HAWK DOWN being too soon. I just think no one really cares that much about that event, at least not in the same way as 9/11. The same goes for any recent Gulf War or Yugoslavian War movie. Eventhough they are at a similar level (death related), recent war movies are not a touchy issue as 9/11. It may have to do with the fact that everyone (citizens, govt. and military) is involved in 9/11, but only soldiers and their family members are involved in recent wars or military affairs.

RAVEN, haha...I do think all movies should be reference quality on DVD.

*glances at JFK*

I think you're way off base with this.

No one is going "I care more about DTS and 5.1 than what happened on September 11th." People who are going to see United 93 aren't going to see a Pearl Harbor-type movie, they're going for a cinema experience, one of pain, drama and ultimately hope when all else is lost. Sure audiophiles will care what type of audio it's released in just as any movie, but as I said, it's really irrelevant for most people who plan to buy this film. Given that no DVD specs are even close to being released, the sound quality is a non-issue in this thread as far as I'm concerned. If you want to complain about the audio in the movie itself, by all means... but let's quit guessing what people's reactions are going to be to the DVD.

toddly... this deserves to be in the dvd forum... not the movies forum...


and can we please stick to the reviews of this movie...


oh and if anyone needs a review of this movie, i can sum it up with this sentence... Go see it and you will remember it forever