With the planned release of "United 93" - a film recreating the experience of the fourth plane on 9/11, which eventually crashed in Pennsylvania after the passengers and crew overthrew the hijackers - a question has been posed to the movie-going public: is it too soon for a movie about 9/11?
I can say "yes" with utmost confidence.
The events that occurred on 9/11 were the most televised acts of terror in the history of the world. With minimal research, one can find and view real-time footage of people dying and screaming in terror at the horrors around them.
Earlier this month, the AMC Loews Lincoln Square 12 Theater in Manhattan pulled the trailer for "United 93" because of viewer complaints. The theater manager Kevin Adjodha said to Newsweek, "I don't think people are ready for this" and that "one lady was crying."
Even though the trailer was received poorly, Universal Pictures decided to keep the preview running in theaters. But if Universal has so much respect for the victims of this disaster, why can't they afford moviegoers the same sympathy?
The morbid fascination with revisiting the event again and again cheapens the loss of life, and in retrospect, hasn't gotten us any closer to understanding why it happened.
The film is supposed to show the heroism of passengers who attempted to overwhelm the hijackers. I fully understand the motivations for telling an inspiring tale, but what are the motivations behind telling that story now?
"United 93" is directed by Paul Greengrass, who also directed "Bloody Sunday," a film noted for its objective storytelling. "Bloody Sunday" told the story of slaughtered Irish civil rights protesters 30 years after the fact.
What's Greengrass' rush this time?
"Tora! Tora! Tora!" was released nearly 30 years after Pearl Harbor. Why can't we afford 9/11 the same dignity?
Surely, this film will make money from controversy alone. Profiting off of a tragedy is a surefire hit for many movie studios. Anyone up for a viewing of "Titanic?"
The families of the victims of this flight have given their approval, and Universal Pictures will in turn donate 10 percent of the first three days' revenue to a memorial paying tribute to the victims of the attack.
I sure hope that the 10 percent does not break the billion-dollar movie studio's bank. This is probably nothing more than a gimmick to get a tax write-off from the government.
The 10 percent given to the victims' families cannot heal the wounds of those damaged and broken, and I find it to be a hollow gesture. What we need in this media-saturated world is a moment of quiet reflection, a moment with the televisions off, and a vacation from Hollywood to really come to terms with what happened that day.
If the victims of United 93 were alive to see what has transpired in the last four years, I wonder what their take on the movie would be. I cannot speak for them, but I wonder if in celebrating their heroism, we are overlooking our own mistakes.
There were two major attacks on 9/11. The first was the terrorist attack against the Twin Towers. The second was an attack on our senses from the nonstop barrage of violent imagery from the media.
This film might once again incite war fever. "United 93" is bound to re-impassion viewers who wanted revenge the day of the attacks and ignite xenophobia in people who never imagined the occurrences as vividly as they are portrayed.
For the sake of those most affected by this attack, let's hope those first three days are profitable, so people who are most in need of relief can find in it in a memorial that will stand as a reminder of quiet dignity.
