You are viewing an archive of the old fxhome.com forums. The community has since moved to hitfilm.com.

World Trade Center movie trailer

Posted: Wed, 17th May 2006, 5:41pm

Post 1 of 196

Redhawksrymmer

Force: 18442 | Joined: 19th Aug 2002 | Posts: 2620

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Rating: +1

The teaser trailer for Oliver Stone's latest movie (based on the tragic events of 9/11) is released.

World Trade Center - Teaser Trailer
World Trade Center - Teaser Trailer (HD)

Last edited Fri, 19th May 2006, 7:17am; edited 5 times in total.

Posted: Wed, 17th May 2006, 5:55pm

Post 2 of 196

NickD

Force: 2163 | Joined: 10th Sep 2003 | Posts: 1224

EffectsLab Lite User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

The links work for me, but I can't open the quicktime files.
Posted: Wed, 17th May 2006, 6:29pm

Post 3 of 196

Redhawksrymmer

Force: 18442 | Joined: 19th Aug 2002 | Posts: 2620

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Make sure you have the latest version of Quicktime 7 installed, which can be found here.
Posted: Wed, 17th May 2006, 6:48pm

Post 4 of 196

03ruby

Force: 900 | Joined: 17th Oct 2004 | Posts: 224

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Lite User Windows User

Gold Member

This really annoys me!!!!

How dare hollywood make a profit on such a horrbile tradegy it just goes to show that capitalism really rules supreme in western socitey.

I can see why they made it and i respect that but the fact that fat cats in hollywood are making money off so many peoples pain, i feel it is immoral

sorry to be so non conformist! not usually like this!
Posted: Wed, 17th May 2006, 7:11pm

Post 5 of 196

Evman

Force: 4382 | Joined: 25th Jan 2004 | Posts: 3609

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

03ruby wrote:

This really annoys me!!!!

How dare hollywood make a profit on such a horrbile tradegy it just goes to show that capitalism really rules supreme in western socitey.

I can see why they made it and i respect that but the fact that fat cats in hollywood are making money off so many peoples pain, i feel it is immoral

sorry to be so non conformist! not usually like this!
Well, I guess I'll say i agree with you right now. The only thing I have to add is that I think it is a good idea for the disaster to be capitalized on in a few decades, when the wounds have mostly healed, and the new generation of people don't remember or care about what happened.

It's kinda like Pearl Harbor. It was a tragedy of it's time, but by the time the movie came out, no one cared about it. The movie was the only thing that the common person would be willing to watch in order to learn what happened. While the movie itself was kinda bad, it did accurately portray what happened... for the most part, and showed the post WW2 generations what a horrible tragedy it was and how important it was.

That being said, I do agree that now is too soon for a big budget film like this. Flight 93 didn't seem like it was out to make money, just to show the events as they happened. This seems different and it is too early for this movie now, since everyone who will see it remembers the day clearly anyway and doesn't need a glorified reminder.

Also, the quicktime isn't working for me either...
Posted: Wed, 17th May 2006, 7:32pm

Post 6 of 196

03ruby

Force: 900 | Joined: 17th Oct 2004 | Posts: 224

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Lite User Windows User

Gold Member

I agree, it should of been made as a memory like 30 years after and also have deeper meaning then 5 years after.

but....

I mean i know films are made 1, for a person or persons to express their emotions and to inform and educate and 2, to make money, thats life, fair enough,

but to make money off a tragedy i think just shows how desprate hollywood is at the moment
Posted: Wed, 17th May 2006, 7:39pm

Post 7 of 196

Arktic

Force: 9977 | Joined: 10th Nov 2003 | Posts: 2785

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Rating: +2

How dare hollywood make a profit on such a horrbile tradegy it just goes to show that capitalism really rules supreme in western socitey.
So we as filmmakers should censor ourselves from expressing what we think and feel about events if they are horrible or tragic?

Surely that's the opposite of what our art is about?

And people have emotions now. They want to express those feelings now, not in thirty years time. Why should they wait?

but to make money off a tragedy i think just shows how desprate hollywood is at the moment
Are you also opposed to commercial news and doccumentary TV chanels covering events such as these? Surely they are just out to make money too? The bosses at CNN didn't cover 9/11 out of the good of their hearts. They show news, so people watch, so they can make money. But people don't complain about news or documentaries about the event....
Posted: Wed, 17th May 2006, 7:52pm

Post 8 of 196

Garrison

Force: 5404 | Joined: 9th Mar 2006 | Posts: 1530

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Obviously not having seen the film itself and taking into account that Oliver Stone is hardly what I would characterize as a capatalizing director, I think the market should ultimately decide.

If the general population feel it's too soon, it won't make money.

Personally, I feel like the exposure of 9/11 is over saturated with all the theories and stuff out there. But putting conspiricy theories aside, I am interested in seeing those unspoken heroes that risked their lives in an unthinkable situation.

I don't know this for a fact, but IF Oliver Stone gave proceeds to the victims, would you feel like it's capitalism?

Just wondering.
Posted: Wed, 17th May 2006, 7:59pm

Post 9 of 196

Evman

Force: 4382 | Joined: 25th Jan 2004 | Posts: 3609

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Message removed:

Let me think about this more before responding again.

And has anyone figured out the quicktime issue?

Last edited Wed, 17th May 2006, 8:00pm; edited 2 times in total.

Posted: Wed, 17th May 2006, 7:59pm

Post 10 of 196

Waser

Force: 4731 | Joined: 7th Sep 2003 | Posts: 3111

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

SuperUser

I actually think this doesn't look half bad.

I was really against the making of movies (not documentaries, which is silly now that I think about it) about 9/11, but after I saw United 93, and that turned out to be a really nice suprise, I think that the subject can be touched on in a respectful manner.

I also appreciate that no where in the trailer does it say "AN OLIVER STONE FILM I AM A HERO", and that no one's name actually appears in the trailer.

I'll see this.
Posted: Wed, 17th May 2006, 8:11pm

Post 11 of 196

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Nicolas Cage? What the heck?
Posted: Wed, 17th May 2006, 8:23pm

Post 12 of 196

Redhawksrymmer

Force: 18442 | Joined: 19th Aug 2002 | Posts: 2620

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Evman wrote:

And has anyone figured out the quicktime issue?
Weird this with the quicktime issue, it works perfectly fine for me. Perhaps the site is just overheated since the trailer was released just a few hours ago?
Posted: Wed, 17th May 2006, 9:33pm

Post 13 of 196

pcremag

Force: 470 | Joined: 7th Nov 2005 | Posts: 173

EffectsLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

I'll probably go and see that one smile
Posted: Wed, 17th May 2006, 9:36pm

Post 14 of 196

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

I'm not entirely convinced by this one, though I mean to see United 93 when I can.
Posted: Wed, 17th May 2006, 11:04pm

Post 15 of 196

Evman

Force: 4382 | Joined: 25th Jan 2004 | Posts: 3609

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Redhawksrymmer wrote:

Evman wrote:

And has anyone figured out the quicktime issue?
Weird this with the quicktime issue, it works perfectly fine for me. Perhaps the site is just overheated since the trailer was released just a few hours ago?
Doubt it... I just reinstalled quicktime to be sure. Still nothing.
Posted: Wed, 17th May 2006, 11:30pm

Post 16 of 196

Harvey

Force: 2050 | Joined: 29th Apr 2005 | Posts: 513

VisionLab User MacOS User

Gold Member

Meh I dunno about this movie. Something about having big names like Nicolas Cage and Oliver Stone in a film about 9/11 concerns me. I just looked through the cast and crew list for United 93 (a film that I have not yet seen but have heard is excellent) and I did not recognize any of the names. Also the World Trade Center trailer didn't really impress me too much. But I haven't seen the film yet so maybe my opinion will change once I see it.
Posted: Thu, 18th May 2006, 12:45am

Post 17 of 196

Arktic

Force: 9977 | Joined: 10th Nov 2003 | Posts: 2785

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Something about having big names like Nicolas Cage and Oliver Stone in a film about 9/11 concerns me
Are you saying that just because someone is high-profile, they shouldn't do movies on controversial topics? Are only unknown indie artistes allowed to express their feelings about recent tragedies? I'm really kinda lost on that one, I don't follow the logic at all crazy
Posted: Thu, 18th May 2006, 12:48am

Post 18 of 196

Evman

Force: 4382 | Joined: 25th Jan 2004 | Posts: 3609

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Arktic wrote:

Something about having big names like Nicolas Cage and Oliver Stone in a film about 9/11 concerns me
Are you saying that just because someone is high-profile, they shouldn't do movies on controversial topics? Are only unknown indie artistes allowed to express their feelings about recent tragedies? I'm really kinda lost on that one, I don't follow the logic at all crazy
No, he's saying that big names usually imply big budgets and big budgets imply big studio control. Big studio control means they're mainly interested in one thing - $$$
Posted: Thu, 18th May 2006, 1:07am

Post 19 of 196

Arktic

Force: 9977 | Joined: 10th Nov 2003 | Posts: 2785

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Yes - money is obviously a factor, to some extent. But nobody kicked up a fuss about the countless thousands of documentaries and news specials that were aired in the past five years - all of which had money as a factor at some point.

You see, the thing is, to me this doesn't seem like profiteering. If you've read what the guys, who's story this is based on, have said about the film, you might see it in a different light.

John McLoughlin, played in the movie by Nicholas Cage, was one of only twenty people to be pulled out alive from the rubble after the WTC collapsed. He said "I feel someone had to tell the story of the people who were in the Trade Center before and after it collapsed... It needs to be told how this horrific tragedy brought Americans and the world together to help those in need. The people involved in putting this movie together are truly making an extraordinary attempt to tell those stories and the stories of those who are no longer with us".

I'm not saying that I think the movie will be great, or anything like that - I just think people are too quick to jump on the "omg! terrible!" bandwagon without really thinking it through.

Cheers,
Arktic.
Posted: Thu, 18th May 2006, 1:11am

Post 20 of 196

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

It's funny, because I remember thinking on 9/11 "I wonder what the movie they make from this will be like..." razz
Posted: Thu, 18th May 2006, 2:56am

Post 21 of 196

SyroVision

Force: 2130 | Joined: 1st Dec 2005 | Posts: 478

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Rating: -3

im not going to see it,

Making money from the death of thousands?

Esecialy from an "Attack" that hasmore evidence showing it was PART of a US p[lot...

makes me sick in all the wrong ways... so yeh... wont be seeing it
Posted: Thu, 18th May 2006, 4:12am

Post 22 of 196

Wizard

Force: 5941 | Joined: 18th Jul 2003 | Posts: 555

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker Windows User

SuperUser

SyroVision wrote:

Making money from the death of thousands?
I can see why this might be a common reaction to a movie such as this. To some, a movie may appear to be a shallow and hollow way to make money, counting on people’s emotions and memories regarding that day as tool to do so.

I prefer to think of it as an attempt to commemorate the victims and heroes that day. A way for people to fully respect and appreciate what those individuals must have been going through. An opportunity such as that may be invaluable to those who did not lose some one in the chaos, and have not been able to put themselves in that situation, and feel regret in some fashion as a result.

I don't like to presume what other peoples intentions are, especially when regarding a subject of this magnitude, but I would like to have trust in people’s morality, and ability to be genuine. Giving the creators of this movie the benefit of the doubt, I would like to believe that monetary gain is one of the last things on their mind, and that they are putting all of their efforts into making this movie ring true.

I can't say if this will be a movie I can walk away from saying "I enjoyed that", but I would like to be able to say that I think they did a good job representing the people, and the situation they found themselves in.

Perhaps a bit optimistic.
Wizard.
Posted: Thu, 18th May 2006, 7:05am

Post 23 of 196

Redhawksrymmer

Force: 18442 | Joined: 19th Aug 2002 | Posts: 2620

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

I updated the links and put the small quality version on my own server soi hopefully it will work. Just let me know when it works on the official site so I can remove the file, ok? smile
Posted: Thu, 18th May 2006, 6:52pm

Post 24 of 196

Harvey

Force: 2050 | Joined: 29th Apr 2005 | Posts: 513

VisionLab User MacOS User

Gold Member

Are you saying that just because someone is high-profile, they shouldn't do movies on controversial topics? Are only unknown indie artistes allowed to express their feelings about recent tragedies?
No, basically what Evman said, I am concerned that big names equal big studio control which means that this movie will only be out there to make money and nothing else.

I just think people are too quick to jump on the "omg! terrible!" bandwagon without really thinking it through.
I am not jumping to the conclusion that it is going to be terrible nor do I think it will be amazing, I just have concerns about the reasons for why it was made. But I guess we'll just have to wait and see.
Posted: Thu, 18th May 2006, 7:28pm

Post 25 of 196

Evman

Force: 4382 | Joined: 25th Jan 2004 | Posts: 3609

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Redhawksrymmer wrote:

I updated the links and put the small quality version on my own server soi hopefully it will work. Just let me know when it works on the official site so I can remove the file, ok? smile
The official site is now working for me.

EDIT:

Upon watching the trailer, I've decided I will see this. It does not seem to be what i thought it was going to be.
Posted: Thu, 18th May 2006, 7:50pm

Post 26 of 196

Garrison

Force: 5404 | Joined: 9th Mar 2006 | Posts: 1530

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Wizard wrote:

I can't say if this will be a movie I can walk away from saying "I enjoyed that", but I would like to be able to say that I think they did a good job representing the people, and the situation they found themselves in.
I agree with this. I think that is the perspective that this film is trying to take. For example, what kind of got to me in the trailer is when Cage's character tells his men that they have to evacuate the tower, and asks who will go with him, and out of that crowd of what looked like a dozen, only 3 stepped forward.

In this given situation, I don't know if I would have the heart to do something like that, and my respect and admiration goes out to those that had the courage to try and save others lives.

Whether our own government did this or it was terrorist on their own is not the issue. But even if it was our own government, does that change the heroism of the NYPD police and fire personnel?
Posted: Thu, 18th May 2006, 8:01pm

Post 27 of 196

Oeyvind

Force: 3040 | Joined: 6th Jun 2005 | Posts: 568

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Lite User FXpreset Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Nice find, Redhawk! I'll definitly see this one. If it's excecuted the right way (which it appear to be) it should be very interesting. I think it's actually good that they make a movie about this, to show people how horrible it really was. (Allthough I'm sure few people don't know this already). So I think it seems interesting, and I agree with what you wrote, Wizard.

Oeyvind
Posted: Thu, 18th May 2006, 8:23pm

Post 28 of 196

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

It actually didn't look bad the first moments. But then it got awfully cheesy and overly melodramatic.

The "The world saw evil that day" tagline made me laugh.



I'm definately not going to see this one.
Posted: Thu, 18th May 2006, 8:59pm

Post 29 of 196

A Pickle

Force: 1235 | Joined: 7th Sep 2004 | Posts: 1280

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

I'm actually inclined to...

Frankly, it'd be big on the part of theaters and the studios to reduce prices for this one, or even be honored enough to make it free. I suppose that would call for some integrity though... but it would make a nice gesture to see that this was done for something other than money.
Posted: Fri, 19th May 2006, 12:35am

Post 30 of 196

Jrad

Force: 230 | Joined: 30th Apr 2005 | Posts: 478

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Am I upset that they made this? A little
Will I go see it? Yes
Am I worried that they won't make it as realistic/dramatic as it was(too a point)? DEFIANTLY
Posted: Fri, 19th May 2006, 12:38am

Post 31 of 196

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

I totally agree with Sollthar... although the events of 9/11 were tragic, it's pretty much certain that they'll overdramatise it to the point of removing any meaning from them, mixing in some "War on Terror" propaganda in there too...
Posted: Fri, 19th May 2006, 12:43am

Post 32 of 196

Jrad

Force: 230 | Joined: 30th Apr 2005 | Posts: 478

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

After watching the trailer, I feel pretty good about it. Seems like Nicolas Cage did a good job...
AMERICA $%*& YEAH!!
Posted: Fri, 19th May 2006, 1:06am

Post 33 of 196

the new godfather

Force: 130 | Joined: 10th Oct 2005 | Posts: 476

Windows User MacOS User

Member

i really like stones work, i liked the feel of the trailer


film is about expressing urself, u cant always be pc




but every one can have an opion


but jsut looking at this as a film, it looks good


cheers



edit;

yes america f yeah


filsm like this and united 93 are inspiring a pride in the usa and a realixation of how ruthless our enemies are, it is good to be american again!
Posted: Fri, 19th May 2006, 1:52am

Post 34 of 196

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

*Sigh*
Posted: Fri, 19th May 2006, 5:01am

Post 35 of 196

the new godfather

Force: 130 | Joined: 10th Oct 2005 | Posts: 476

Windows User MacOS User

Member

Rating: -5

communist now?
Posted: Fri, 19th May 2006, 5:03am

Post 36 of 196

Bryce007

Force: 1910 | Joined: 5th Apr 2003 | Posts: 2609

VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

Spellcheck Man, Spellcheck.


This Film looks similar to "Ladder 49" in the fact that it's most likely going to have all the typical shots you've come to expect from working class hero films..
Posted: Fri, 19th May 2006, 5:06am

Post 37 of 196

the new godfather

Force: 130 | Joined: 10th Oct 2005 | Posts: 476

Windows User MacOS User

Member

Rating: -4

james bond, do u like the working class heros?




down with america, (is this pc enough now)!
Posted: Fri, 19th May 2006, 7:18am

Post 38 of 196

Redhawksrymmer

Force: 18442 | Joined: 19th Aug 2002 | Posts: 2620

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Since the official site trailer links now seem to work I have removed the file from my server, just let me know if the same thing happens again, and I'll make it availible again.
Posted: Fri, 19th May 2006, 7:33am

Post 39 of 196

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

The events were tragic, no doubt. It's always tragic when people have to give their lives for something they're not directly responsible for.


I have my doubts that the film will do well outside of the US. Because especially the tagline "The world saw evil that day" gets a bit of a different meaning, since it was the US that jumped to an action pretty much the whole world disagreed with and considered "evil". The reactions I've heard to the Trailer from non US people show pretty clear that these thoughts are the first to come up.

The trailer appears to be done in a pretty

good, innocent US
vs.
menacing, evil

way, which personally think is not really honoring the ones who lost loved ones in this tragic event, but merely using them. The tagline also suggests it's not really about the people and their tragedy, but about a political statement that has become more then questionable in the last years.

The simplicity of a "the world saw evil that day" should belong to silly action films and brainless video games, but not in a film about the real world. The real world is a bit more complicated then that.


Of course that's based on the Trailer, the film could be different. But the trailer clearly brings that construction across to me.
Posted: Fri, 19th May 2006, 7:40am

Post 40 of 196

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

Sollthar wrote:

The simplicity of a "the world saw evil that day" should belong to silly action films and brainless video games, but not in a film about the real world. The real world is a bit more complicated then that.
Agreed. The trailer looked pretty good until that moment, when it lost all semblance of restraint, authority or good taste. At that point it stopped portraying the events of the day and the heroism of the human being singular and transformed into a preaching political sermon.

Still, that doesn't mean the film will be like that. It just means that the people that made the trailer are buffoons. It'll be interesting to see if they do a different trailer for international audiences.
Posted: Fri, 19th May 2006, 7:49am

Post 41 of 196

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Still, that doesn't mean the film will be like that. It just means that the people that made the trailer are buffoons.
Yes, as I said, the film could be different. Judging from Stones previous films, it could likely be. And I did like it up to that moment.

I liked the fact it portrayed the complete helplessness of the cops and firemen who suddenly had to deal with something they were absolutely not prepared or trained for. Something they had no way to judge what will happen. And the courage that comes out of that situation is what is so impressive, and - from a dramatic and storytelling point of view - worth making a film about it.
Posted: Fri, 19th May 2006, 8:17am

Post 42 of 196

Waser

Force: 4731 | Joined: 7th Sep 2003 | Posts: 3111

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

SuperUser

I actually didn't get too hung up on the whole "the world saw evil thing" (though I think calling anyone evil in the whole thing is stupid), because it was followed with the "two men saw something else"

Knowing that this is an oliver stone movie, I highly doubt its going to make the terrorists out to be blood thirsty hate mongers.
Posted: Fri, 19th May 2006, 8:26am

Post 43 of 196

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

Waser wrote:

Knowing that this is an oliver stone movie, I highly doubt its going to make the terrorists out to be blood thirsty hate mongers.
I have no particular problem with portraying terrorists that killed thousands as bloodthirsty and hate mongering. That would seem to be a fairly accurate description.

But, as you say, calling things in the real world 'evil' is simply silly and a gross over simplification. I'm hoping that the WTC film doesn't even go into the politics and focuses entirely on the on-the-ground events.
Posted: Fri, 19th May 2006, 10:18am

Post 44 of 196

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

the godfather wrote:

communist now?
For mother Russia!


...no, but that's not to say I agree with capitalism either.
Posted: Fri, 19th May 2006, 3:15pm

Post 45 of 196

ashman

Force: 4913 | Joined: 10th Sep 2005 | Posts: 904

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

the world is a complicated place and films about tragedy even more so. I really don't know where i stand with this film until i see it, it would be nice to see some facts instead of fabricated propaganda but at some point im expecting sublimable messages that read "muslims are terrorists, get angry at them". I hope that it seperates terrorists/fanatics from the whole religion thing, because where i see it the media didn't. Everybody has an opinion on the WTC some think there's a conspiricy surrounding the whole thing, I really hope they approched this one carefully, the whole subject is still touchy, and alot of people are bound to be upset.
Posted: Fri, 19th May 2006, 10:33pm

Post 46 of 196

the new godfather

Force: 130 | Joined: 10th Oct 2005 | Posts: 476

Windows User MacOS User

Member

Rating: -4

jeese you need pride in America




capitalism is waht made this country great, it is the American dream


u want to be a sheep like everyone else hu? baaaaa baaaaaa
then be a communist


u should be thankful for america


_____________________________________________
Posted: Fri, 19th May 2006, 10:39pm

Post 47 of 196

Evman

Force: 4382 | Joined: 25th Jan 2004 | Posts: 3609

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Rating: +2

the godfather wrote:

jeese you need pride in America




capitalism is waht made this country great, it is the American dream


u want to be a sheep like everyone else hu? baaaaa baaaaaa
then be a communist


u should be thankful for america


_____________________________________________
Pooky lives in Canada.


And please stop typing like you're an illiterate second grader... If anything, that's more of a disgrace to Americans.
Posted: Fri, 19th May 2006, 10:49pm

Post 48 of 196

the new godfather

Force: 130 | Joined: 10th Oct 2005 | Posts: 476

Windows User MacOS User

Member

Rating: -4

hey these movies make the terrorists seem evil....... *tear*



oh no " the day the world saw evil" that really not nice



hmm terrorits = evil....what a concept




please cheer up cool
Posted: Fri, 19th May 2006, 10:56pm

Post 49 of 196

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

Rating: +1

The point people are making is that you can't always break things down into simplistic concepts such as 'good' and 'evil'. To reduce a highly complex series of (ongoing) events to such a generalised term is irresponsible and naive.

That's not to say that what the terrorists did on 9/11 wasn't horrific, and about as close to 'evil' as you can get, but to brand all terrorists with the same brush is to display ignorance. One man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter, and all that.

Terms such as 'evil' should be reserved for comic books and action movies, not for real life. Thus using it in a 2 minute trailer is even dafter, given the lack of context, proper commentary or real explanation. It's tugging on sentimental bathos that is entirely unnecessary, given the inherent tragedy and weight of the subject matter.
Posted: Fri, 19th May 2006, 10:59pm

Post 50 of 196

the new godfather

Force: 130 | Joined: 10th Oct 2005 | Posts: 476

Windows User MacOS User

Member

Rating: -1

hmmm, i new people who were killed in 9/11!!!mad

oh the terrorists arent that bad....it was close to evil....
are u nuts that was more than evil....



oh and the heros who gave their lives to try to save others that day were the "good" guys okay.....lets get that straight
Posted: Fri, 19th May 2006, 11:11pm

Post 51 of 196

Garrison

Force: 5404 | Joined: 9th Mar 2006 | Posts: 1530

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

"Gig for Bean..."

Martin Sheen from the movie Cadence.
Posted: Fri, 19th May 2006, 11:36pm

Post 52 of 196

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Finally, a debate on FXHome! smile

The Godfather - First, I'm not communist, although I do believe that capitalism is worse. When everybody fights for himself, a small minority end up happy, while the others end up very unhappy, and you probably know that the planet we live on is slowly turning into a place uninhabitable by man, because of it. When every person fights for everybody else, then, in theory, everybody is happy because everybody else is helping them.

Second, you're the typical example of an unfortunate propaganda-fed american. You're proud to be american and believe that the USA is good and everybody else is evil, or in-between. Well, turns out that nobody but you guys think that way. In some countries, YOU are evil and THEY are fighting for good, they just have different views of good (for example, religion). Really, if you want to be sure that you really are fighting for good, then being patriotic is possibly the worst thing you could do.

Your turn razz
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 12:03am

Post 53 of 196

the new godfather

Force: 130 | Joined: 10th Oct 2005 | Posts: 476

Windows User MacOS User

Member

Rating: -3

gone

Last edited Wed, 21st Jun 2006, 6:57pm; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 12:08am

Post 54 of 196

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Rating: +1

Erm. Capitalism/democracy is the worst political system that has been tried by man, except for all the other ones. Believe it or not, there are other political systems, and we can invent them.

Occidental countries have a far greater quality of life than all the other hundred countries, yes. Considering this comes at the cost of the planet and a large amount of people/countries, I don't see your point.

Terrorists believe they're doing a good deed. They don't want to do evil, they want to do good, and they believe that killing americans is the way to do that. It's totally stupid, yes, but it's not evil. In fact, some people would argue that there is no such thing as evil, only the absence of good (there is a difference).
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 12:22am

Post 55 of 196

the new godfather

Force: 130 | Joined: 10th Oct 2005 | Posts: 476

Windows User MacOS User

Member

Rating: -6

.

Pooky wrote:

Terrorists believe they're doing a good deed. They don't want to do evil, they want to do good, and they believe that killing americans is the way to do that. It's totally stupid, yes, but it's not evil. In fact, some people would argue that there is no such thing as evil, only the absence of good (there is a difference).
are u on crack.... ur generalizing all terrorists as these holy people who are doing "what they think is right" so its okay, are u insane?


and we r not talking about the earth here okay, i agree that the US uses to much resources and all but, but u make that out as being worse than a group of terrorists blowing up a neighborhood or 9/11; are u crazy? You need to open your eyes, no one has the right to take another persons life or take away their human dignity. Im not saying all terrorists are wrong, u could say that the US founding fathers were terrorists to Britian.... but the ones whos "goal" is kiling people and think that it is "good" to kill are evil. People are not born to kill each other, they learn, and its things like Osama that are ruining this world, not the US. Open ur eyes, killing, or shall i say the murder of innocent people, and yes those killed on 9/11 were innocent, is wrong and evil.


killing is wrong and there is nothing in ur commi beliefs that can change that..... u need to understand that things are evil... and we need to stop them, not jsut say its okay, they think they are doing a good thing for us, i dont care if a terrorists blows up the school down the road, hes doing "good". nutjob

Last edited Sat, 20th May 2006, 12:25am; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 12:24am

Post 56 of 196

averagejoe

Force: 3592 | Joined: 31st Mar 2001 | Posts: 710

VisionLab User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXpreset Maker Windows User

SuperUser

From a historical perspective, we Americans used "Terrorist" like tactics to wage our revolution in the late 18th century and early 19th Century. We commonly used "unconventional" means to gets our "enemies" attention and kill them. Likewise across history and the globe, terrorist tactics or unconventional tactics have been used to wear down and defeat foreign governments or oppressive regimes. The only time we call it terroism is when it is used against us or our friends. Events of 9/11 are arguablly evil actions, but it is not always as cut and dry as you make it Mr. Bong.
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 12:27am

Post 57 of 196

the new godfather

Force: 130 | Joined: 10th Oct 2005 | Posts: 476

Windows User MacOS User

Member

killing is wrong, okay. and the us military doesnt send suicide bombers into houses, get ur facts straight and open ur eyes. Mr. Joyce
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 12:34am

Post 58 of 196

averagejoe

Force: 3592 | Joined: 31st Mar 2001 | Posts: 710

VisionLab User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXpreset Maker Windows User

SuperUser

The person with closed eyes and askew perspective would be you Mr. Bong. I know several Vietnam veterans who partook in or watched unconventialy means to kill people we otherwise consider innocent. Back even furthur we can probably all agree that the Nazi regime in the 30's and 40's was evil. One of our tactics was to "carpet bomb" Berlin. The main purpose was to bomb them until they lost the will to proceed. This is a terroris tactic. We innocent live taken in the process. YES! We rationalize or perspective often. This goes for any country. Do I think the terrorist oganization responsible for the killings on 9/11 should be hunted and killed? YES! Do I think homicide bombers are misguided and wrong? YES! But in some instances even we are not completely and entirely free of spilling innocent blood. And if kill innocence is evil then in somecases we have dealt out evil too. Since you are yet a wee lad and not fully experienced in the ways of the real world I will not hold you completely responsible for all yoru comments. My only purpose in reply here is to get you to connect context with action and gain better perspective on we Americans and everyone else. We have a hopeful and desent society. But it is far form perfect, we too have a system of government that has forgetton its base of power.

The Mr. Joyce part does not have the same impact on me. My name is plainly stated on my profile. twisted

Last edited Sat, 20th May 2006, 12:39am; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 12:39am

Post 59 of 196

the new godfather

Force: 130 | Joined: 10th Oct 2005 | Posts: 476

Windows User MacOS User

Member

thanks for the support and facts, looks like the discusssion is over...

war is evil , yes.... and people die sadly, we are all dead men, but we can decide how we meet that end so that we are remembered as men



ps. spellcheck and grammer check




good debate guys, i liked this one, hope to talk to u guys soon


i have to go to a play, ttul
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 12:39am

Post 60 of 196

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Hmm, sorry to dissapoint you but I don't take drugs.

What I said was that they don't know that they are doing evil because they believe they are doing good. They don't want to destroy the world. They are wrong, yes, and what they did/do is horrible, yes, but it is not because they are evil people.

Oh, and sorry, this is just something that annoys me, but could you try using capital letters? razz

Last edited Sat, 20th May 2006, 12:40am; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 12:39am

Post 61 of 196

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

the godfather wrote:

killing is wrong.
Thanks for that Einstein.

Everything you've said so far seems to be based on the Western idealogy - which is of course understandable. Though it seems you've yet to look at things from the other side. The U.S. is not as clean as you may like to believe, as infact are any of our countries.

Terrorists don't become terrorists for no reason, regardless of what your take on the religious justifications may be. America became the enemy way before the religious slant came in. Perhaps you should read about the reasons for that.

I mean hell, you're telling me that killing is wrong and America is good yet I'm not convinced you were aware of your own countries involvement with helping Iraq fight Iran. This includes the biological weaponry (Anthrax) which Iraq then used against the villages which are now used to shock the west into seeing Iraq as 'evil'.

This rabbit hole is alot deeper than I think you can comprehend. wink Try to be a little more open minded rather than just opinionated. Some views might tell suggest that Americas invasion of Iraq was simply a search for the WMD's they themselves put there.

-Hybrid

Last edited Sat, 20th May 2006, 12:41am; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 12:40am

Post 62 of 196

the new godfather

Force: 130 | Joined: 10th Oct 2005 | Posts: 476

Windows User MacOS User

Member

pooky, u cant assume that

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Revolution

thats y we supported iraq

Last edited Sat, 20th May 2006, 12:45am; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 12:41am

Post 63 of 196

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

the godfather wrote:

pooky, u cant assume that
Isn't it you assuming that every act against the West is an act of Evil?
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 12:47am

Post 64 of 196

the new godfather

Force: 130 | Joined: 10th Oct 2005 | Posts: 476

Windows User MacOS User

Member

night' guys im going to a play, its been good, but i have to go, sry




cheer up
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 12:47am

Post 65 of 196

averagejoe

Force: 3592 | Joined: 31st Mar 2001 | Posts: 710

VisionLab User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXpreset Maker Windows User

SuperUser

The whole purpose of the forum here is to express views and opinions. Therefore differing opinions are expected.

Suggestion: When trying to make a point just saying I am right and you are wrong does not prove your point.

Our "Democratic" system has broken down to the " us against them" bull as well. That is why both sides of the aisle and our current Commander and Chief are stuck and unable to make real change for the better. They have stopped working to serve the people that elected them. They are more often than not just posturing to show they are not like the other guys.

PS spell check your own stuff too Mr. Bong. If there was a FXhome prize for the most ur's in a post u would have it. twisted
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 12:48am

Post 66 of 196

the new godfather

Force: 130 | Joined: 10th Oct 2005 | Posts: 476

Windows User MacOS User

Member

k



settle settle, theres no reason to scream over it and use red letters
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 12:54am

Post 67 of 196

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

The godfather is a good example why the rest of the world keeps getting more and more concernet about "america" and even think they have already gone far into dark side without even noticing it...

Unfortunately, there many people like him.

And that's why films like the above give me the shudders. Which is a shame, as I should mainly be concerned about the victims. But instead my first reaction goes towards the "America is great, everyone who disagrees is evil" attitude.
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 12:54am

Post 68 of 196

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

the godfather wrote:

k
settle settle, theres no reason to scream over it and use red letters
When reading your posts cause eyes to bleed there's plenty to scream about.
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 12:56am

Post 69 of 196

the new godfather

Force: 130 | Joined: 10th Oct 2005 | Posts: 476

Windows User MacOS User

Member

but using red letters is just uncalled for
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 12:59am

Post 70 of 196

Wizard

Force: 5941 | Joined: 18th Jul 2003 | Posts: 555

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXpreset Maker Windows User

SuperUser

Rating: +1

The godfather, I have a few words of advice for you. If you wish to heed my words, great, I hope they can benefit you. Please do not take them as an attack against you.

In the past few days I have noticed you have made an increasing amount of posts, the majority of which are of an insulting, or directly argumentative nature, which could be called abusive to the other members of this community. The remainder of your posts that do not fit this category are not of a productive nature, by any means.

After observing your statements in this topic, I can tell this is something you tend to feel strongly about, and understandably so. I am not taking a stance on whether you are correct or not, either. However, the insulting personal attacks that your posts contain, in which I spoke of earlier, have made their way into this, what could be called, adult discussion.

It is important that you understand that any merit your point of view has is diminished by your inflammatory comments that accompany. Everything you write that shows signs of being a valid argument is obscured by your inappropriate comments to pooky, or any other member that happens to disagree with your point of views on any matter.

There have been many topics in the history of FXhome that could be considered heated, and that the members who took part in the discussion cared deeply about. The difference between those scenario's and your half hazard posts is the lack of discretion you choose to use. Those members managed to maintain a civil, and mature debate, and the result was a healthy discussion.

If you wish to convince Pooky that perhaps you are correct, or even have him read your posts in entirety, you may wish to filter out the insulting remarks that I am sure you find to be amusing and effective.

Again, this post is not meant to be insulting, or an attack against you, or your point of view, but there has been quite a bit of attention surrounding you at FXhome, and it is not positive. I am only trying to make this apparent to you, and give you the opportunity to change this, and begin having a positive influence on this community. This will also make members more obliged to help you when you are in need, as I do not believe many members will jump at the chance given your current demeanor.

the godfather wrote:

killing is wrong...
Absolutely.
Wizard.
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 1:06am

Post 71 of 196

averagejoe

Force: 3592 | Joined: 31st Mar 2001 | Posts: 710

VisionLab User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXpreset Maker Windows User

SuperUser

The red letter was to highlight the fact you use internet shorthand. If I was screaming it would have been ALL CAPS LIKE THIS
I was not showing emotion, just poking fun at your style of forum banter biggrin
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 1:14am

Post 72 of 196

Evman

Force: 4382 | Joined: 25th Jan 2004 | Posts: 3609

VisionLab User VideoWrap User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Sollthar wrote:

The godfather is a good example why the rest of the world keeps getting more and more concernet about "america" and even think they have already gone far into dark side without even noticing it...

Unfortunately, there many people like him.
Don't worry, I've got my passport all set.

The America that was once great is deteriorating rapidly, and all attempts to stop it have failed. I'll keep fighting as long as I can, but as soon as the fight is lost, I'm out.
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 1:20am

Post 73 of 196

averagejoe

Force: 3592 | Joined: 31st Mar 2001 | Posts: 710

VisionLab User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXpreset Maker Windows User

SuperUser

The problem with the US at the moment is everyone has a cause they are are fighting for and pay little attention to everything else. The one track thoughts that arise among fellow patriots is down right annoying. The fact that no two groups really care what the other is doing is causing the idea of America to fade. We can't seem to see the forest because of the trees.

Now to attempt to un-Jack the topic. I saw the trailer and look forward to the movie. IF you would take time to see the interviews with the two guys the story is about. One would change thier view on the movie as a whole. The events that played out for those men deserves a bit of mythos with it. Just like Flight 93 did. Those type of feel good slogans and unifying ideals are what America is supposed to be about. If everyone would stop playing thier Game consoles and posting on forums and playing with their Myspace sites America would be back on the path to being upright and respectable. That cute-sie propoganda helps in times of need. wink

Last edited Sat, 20th May 2006, 1:36am; edited 4 times in total.

Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 1:22am

Post 74 of 196

the new godfather

Force: 130 | Joined: 10th Oct 2005 | Posts: 476

Windows User MacOS User

Member

im sry, sometimes i get ahead of myself
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 1:24am

Post 75 of 196

A Pickle

Force: 1235 | Joined: 7th Sep 2004 | Posts: 1280

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

What I'm somewhat frustrated by, as an American, is how our entire population is stereotyped and marked as ignorant, violent, and a general nuisance upon the world. I'd like to take this time to remind people that there are 300 million people living in this country, many of whom (hell, most of whom) don't concur with the philosophies put forth by the actions of our government (EDIT: Which, we are in part responsible for).

That said... I feel inclined to say something to the Godfather.

I agree that the attacks on September 11th were horrible, and that they were a terrible method to put forth an ideal. Defenseless people were killed that day in a single act of hate. Those branded by the West as "terrorists" rejoiced at what, from their point of view, was a victory for the good guys. Considering they voluntarily attacked civilians, I cannot say they were even slightly justified.

However, it would be a grave mistake on our part as both American citizens and citizens of the world to let our nations transgressions evade the scales of justice. We are the only nation in the world to have ever used nuclear weapons in a time of war (weak ones, fortunately). Our nation has done some dark deeds, and as American citizens, we above all have a responsibility to remember them (Just as we have a responsibility not to forget the events of 9/11/2001). Shall the German people forget the Holocaust? No, I daresay they won't. Well, it's our turn to stand and admit our flaws. No one, no country, no race is perfect... they're human.

Sollthar wrote:

Unfortunately, there many people like him.
They are not in the majority, and as a democratic and free-thinking society, we are encouraged to accept his opinions on the matter with an open-mind.

Sollthar wrote:

But instead my first reaction goes towards the "America is great, everyone who disagrees is evil" attitude.
This is a philosophy that is quickly in retreat. While I feel America has the power and resources available to it to do great things for the world, we haven't always excercised this power and these resources in that fashion. It is at this time, however, that I'd like to make a point that many individuals who judge America tend to do so based solely on our country's negative actions, rather than even taking so much as a moment to see what good this country and it's enterprising people have done.

I also feel it necessary to add that the notion that, "nations are good or evil" is flatly untrue. Nations are made up of millions of people, and human beings cannot often be flagged as "good" or "evil," let alone a system of millions of them.

Last edited Sat, 20th May 2006, 1:32am; edited 2 times in total.

Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 1:28am

Post 76 of 196

averagejoe

Force: 3592 | Joined: 31st Mar 2001 | Posts: 710

VisionLab User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXpreset Maker Windows User

SuperUser

Pickle, good points. Ladies and Gentleman, lets try to steer this topic back on track. Did you see the trailer and what respose did it invoke? Or is it evoke? confused

Last edited Sat, 20th May 2006, 1:38am; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 1:31am

Post 77 of 196

the new godfather

Force: 130 | Joined: 10th Oct 2005 | Posts: 476

Windows User MacOS User

Member

Rating: +1

i liked how they filmed the building falling from inside and the people running out. i think the film could be an story about the two policemen.


im sry for my posts, they came off a lil harsh and i am sad that they have been taken the way they have.
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 1:33am

Post 78 of 196

A Pickle

Force: 1235 | Joined: 7th Sep 2004 | Posts: 1280

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

It quickly evoked an emotional response in me, I have to say. The trailer itself was... eh... a trailer, but the music behind it really made me think about what those people went through in 9/11. I dunno... I just... I couldn't even imagine what it was like...
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 1:35am

Post 79 of 196

the new godfather

Force: 130 | Joined: 10th Oct 2005 | Posts: 476

Windows User MacOS User

Member

good insight
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 6:33am

Post 80 of 196

EVW2K

Force: 20 | Joined: 16th May 2006 | Posts: 121

Windows User

Member

Personally, I think that capitalism is the best thing in America, it pretty much is the driving force of our daily lives. I know it leaves a lot of people in the dust, but I really like the sort of 'competitive' twist it puts on the world. At the moment, I am in high school and i like the idea that i am training now to be successful later. I would hate to try so hard to get a good education now so that later everyone is equal and I am just as successful as the mechanic dropout stoner. (communism) A lot of the big companies are corrupt and I understand that they may need change, but I think without capitalism, the purpose of living would crumble away. Life revolves around accomplishment and working up the 'corporate lader', and it is sort of exciting. (for me at least). One of my favorite pastimes is thinking of corporations and ideas I can develop to make money for myself in the future in our system. Our country also gives many rights and is just to all people. The people who attacked our country on 9/11 stood for a group of extremists who believe that Islam is the only true religion to rule the world, a society in which almost no rights are given to women. I don't believe that what they believe in or what they did is morally right, but i can understand that they did it because it is what they believe. As for the argument about communism, i'm pretty sure that the islamic fundamentalists aren't communists, but they have some other beliefs that are far more horrifying. I also think that this forum is predominantly Europeans, and that the magnitude of 9/11 was not experienced in the same way for them as it was in america. I also knew some people who died in the crash, and it saddens me to see so many americans forget about that day, or blow it off like it was no big deal. A movie like this coming out I think is just the thing to serve as a reminder to how that day affected the nation.

I went to see United 93, and I don't want to spoil the ending confused , but the plane crashes at the end and everyone dies. It was a very dramatic sequence, and many people in the theatre were crying. After the plane crashes, it flashes to a black screen with some facts about 9/11 for a couple of minutes with a child singing in the background. Behind me during this scene, a group of teenage girls started laughing and one said quite loudly to her mother " wow, if this is the end of the movie, this sucked. What a crappy story, why would they try to take the plane back from the terrorists if they didn't know how to fly." How can you say something like this, its based on true events and on a very touchy poignant ,sp?, subject. I almost turned around and screamed and the stupid (profanity) but decided not to as it was a very quiet part of the movie.
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 6:39am

Post 81 of 196

the new godfather

Force: 130 | Joined: 10th Oct 2005 | Posts: 476

Windows User MacOS User

Member

great points


if i could give u points i would, i to feel the same way about school and education, that gives people a will to do better than others.



cheers
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 6:45am

Post 82 of 196

ProFilms17

Force: 10 | Joined: 17th May 2006 | Posts: 42

Member

back to the topic, i think that communism is a scary thought and i just saw a play called laughter on the 23rd floor, great performance, they have six shows goin, its french everyone loves it. anyway it was describing the red scare and black lists and i think that to a point those were a good idea. kinda like the patriot act we got in the good ol US of A.

FOR FILM!!!
FOR FREEDOM!!!
FOR AMERICA!!!
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 6:47am

Post 83 of 196

the new godfather

Force: 130 | Joined: 10th Oct 2005 | Posts: 476

Windows User MacOS User

Member

i thinks thats more showing how foolish the americans were back in the col war day.... that play is olde right? well based on older times 50's? we went over in act class, u should watch dr strangelove


cheers
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 6:47am

Post 84 of 196

EVW2K

Force: 20 | Joined: 16th May 2006 | Posts: 121

Windows User

Member

Actually, the UK has been pretty stable in their system for a pretty long time. Its been working out for them fine, and I'm pretty sure they really like their rulers (at least Tom Clancy says so cool ). But i guess thats fiction and i never hear any news about uk on ktvu mornings on fox.
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 6:48am

Post 85 of 196

the new godfather

Force: 130 | Joined: 10th Oct 2005 | Posts: 476

Windows User MacOS User

Member

i would not base my world knowledge on fictional books....


i watch bbc....
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 7:44am

Post 86 of 196

Bryce007

Force: 1910 | Joined: 5th Apr 2003 | Posts: 2609

VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

(pooky)

Okay, I just have to comment on this. Communism is BETTER than capitalism? please tell me you aren't serious..I mean..Really..

Communism would work Really, really great If it weren't for one simple hangup "Human nature"


And it's starting to sound like this discussion is headed for the "Absolute right and wrong" debate, but i'm pretty sure this is a WtC films discussion...


I still say it's not going to do it justice..I get the feeling it's going to be a Flagwaving tearjerker with heavy Patriotic overtones. And by-the-books in ever department. Also, I just realized, WHY did they get an actor that epitomised Evil as "Castor troy" to play the good guy?
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 1:43pm

Post 87 of 196

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

No, that's not what I said. Democracy is the worst system EXCEPT for the other ones. That means it's the best that we have but is still no good.

As for the conversation before Bryce.... Oh my god. I hope you were joking. Just the fact that you think they elect a Queen in the UK is enough to take away any validity your might have had.

The Queen is only there as a tradition, she doesn't have any powers. There is in fact a full democratic system in the UK. I thought everybody knew this, or at least anybody that thought they knew anything about politics. And good god, no, there aren't any more redcoats. The USA isn't the only modern country in the world you know.

Anyway, I suggest you start watching the news, or at least the real news (that means no Fox or CNN) to actually understand what is going on in the world (don't mean this as a personal attack, just a suggestion). Communism is an attempt to form a better system where everybody is happy, but it pretty much always turns into a dictatorship every time. Not sure where you guys got the idea that communism is evil, except cold war propaganda.

As for capitalism being good, I understand that you think that competition is fun, but what you don't understand is that you and I are a minority. There are far more poor people in the world than there are rich-ish people. You're essentially taking advantage of them to be happier, and I don't see how that can be good.
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 2:28pm

Post 88 of 196

JackPot

Force: 10109 | Joined: 3rd Oct 2005 | Posts: 384

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

You can find 'red coats' in butlins - the wonderful UK holiday parks which eveyone in the UK must have been to at least once in there lives



Fantastic
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 2:47pm

Post 89 of 196

ashman

Force: 4913 | Joined: 10th Sep 2005 | Posts: 904

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

lol that would make an easy target in battle, anyway enough of the semantics. but if they still do i would recommend camoflague, thats how we won the Revolutionary War.
yes we have redcoats, espeacially in iraq where its cold
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 3:17pm

Post 90 of 196

EVW2K

Force: 20 | Joined: 16th May 2006 | Posts: 121

Windows User

Member

Actually, I go to a private Christian school, and it is mandatory that we have to take religion class each year. Its sort of annoying because the religion teachers are basically teaching us that we should all practice socialism, and give to the poor even if that may not be a safe financial desicion. Honestly, teaching that to kids is a little stupid. We learn that people like Bill Gates are 'bad' even though he continually donates billions of dollars to the poor, because he isn't giving everything so that he is equal. I personally believe you have to have money before you just give it to people. When you are on the level of the poor because you gave it all away, we will soon have a country of people living in the shanties. Also, the art teachers are even worse. They seem to be a bunch of left over vegan hippies who don't understand how the world really works. We have a town in the area I live, east bay, called Berkeley. I have been there a handful of times, and it is probably the scariest and weirdest places ever. The streets in the rich section is populated by gypsies and cults regularly have parades through the streets. A majority of these people believe socialism is the only way. Personally i don't want to parade through the streets, juggling hackysacks, with a hairdo like bob marley. It doesn't appeal to me. Its pretty sad and I hope the public schools aren't the same way.
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 3:27pm

Post 91 of 196

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

If everybody gives to everybody else, then everybody has everybody else's stuff. If nobody gives to anybody, then a few have everything and the rest have nothing.

Although this is only theoretically. In practice, I understand why someone wouldn't want to give his hard-earned money to a guy that dropped out of school because he was too lazy.
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 4:50pm

Post 92 of 196

ProFilms17

Force: 10 | Joined: 17th May 2006 | Posts: 42

Member

evw3k,
they never said to give all your money to the poor or else your bad. they also never said bill gates is bad. try to be more open minded to their opinions. its dangerous to never take a look from the other point of view. you need to cheer up

cheerios
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 5:14pm

Post 93 of 196

NickD

Force: 2163 | Joined: 10th Sep 2003 | Posts: 1224

EffectsLab Lite User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

ProFilms17 wrote:

you need to cheer up
Uh-oh. Looks like we have a new "cheer up" member wink
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 5:21pm

Post 94 of 196

the new godfather

Force: 130 | Joined: 10th Oct 2005 | Posts: 476

Windows User MacOS User

Member

evw has very good points....u should listen to him



...and u say capitalism leaves people in the dust....well then work...go to school...work hard....u cant jsut have everything given to u....



anywho back to the film for the normal people here.... i was studying the shots and noticed the billboards in the shot of the shadow of the plane on the building...check em out...
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 6:07pm

Post 95 of 196

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Er, is it just me or does the smoke from the towers float sideways when they're in the firetruck, while in real life the smoke was going up?
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 6:28pm

Post 96 of 196

Waser

Force: 4731 | Joined: 7th Sep 2003 | Posts: 3111

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

SuperUser

That did happen in real life
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 7:02pm

Post 97 of 196

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

ashman wrote:

lol that would make an easy target in battle, anyway enough of the semantics. but if they still do i would recommend camoflague, thats how we won the Revolutionary War.
yes we have redcoats, espeacially in iraq where its cold
I was looking to find who posted what you quoted but couldn't find it, so do me a favour and slap whoever wrote it with a history book. Camoflages was first implemented into the western militia by the british, by a regiment named "The Royal Green Jackets".

Also, I just realized, WHY did they get an actor that epitomised Evil as "Castor troy" to play the good guy?
Because he's an actor and you know... they play different roles.
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 7:13pm

Post 98 of 196

A Pickle

Force: 1235 | Joined: 7th Sep 2004 | Posts: 1280

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Pooky wrote:

Communism is an attempt to form a better system where everybody is happy, but it pretty much always turns into a dictatorship every time. Not sure where you guys got the idea that communism is evil, except cold war propaganda.
Bryce007 is right in mentioning the fact that human nature tends to get in the way of that. Also, I'm hard pressed to agree with an ideal that thinks a fast-food worker should get paid as much as a brain surgeon.

Pooky wrote:

As for capitalism being good, I understand that you think that competition is fun, but what you don't understand is that you and I are a minority. There are far more poor people in the world than there are rich-ish people. You're essentially taking advantage of them to be happier, and I don't see how that can be good.
The theoretically perfect Capitalism doesn't take advantage of poor people. I don't see how we can compare an idealistic version of a social structure and compare it against a realistic version of another.

I would vouch for the theoretically ideal capitalism before I would vouch for the theoretically ideal communism because I feel that economy, technology, industry and innovation are really catalyzed by capitalism. Additionally, it's like I said before: I don't think a McDonald's worker should get paid as much as a Ph.D'd brain surgeon.

With that said, I suppose it's also time for me to say that in real life, I would vouch for capitalism ahead of communism. Why? Because in actual practice, capitalism has had a much better track record.
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 7:13pm

Post 99 of 196

Fill

Force: 1257 | Joined: 1st Jul 2005 | Posts: 1652

CompositeLab Lite User EffectsLab Lite User Windows User

Gold Member

Seeing the trailer I don't think it will be some mockery. It doesn't look like they took false information or drowned it in actoin. I was expecting some type of action packed trailer but I think they did a good job of keeping it mild.

You also have to keep in mind how careful they have to be not to offend people. (Obviously the fimmakers of the Da Vince Code didn't think twice)
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 7:17pm

Post 100 of 196

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

swg33k wrote:

You also have to keep in mind how careful they have to be not to offend people. (Obviously the fimmakers of the Da Vince Code didn't think twice)
Because the Da Vinci code is a work of fiction.
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 7:19pm

Post 101 of 196

JohnCarter

Force: 3295 | Joined: 11th Mar 2003 | Posts: 1078

VisionLab User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Sollthar wrote:

The simplicity of a "the world saw evil that day" should belong to silly action films and brainless video games, but not in a film about the real world. The real world is a bit more complicated then that.
Unfortunately, it seems that the current US government thinks it's that easy and has reduced the whole situation to a US VS THEM scenario which they enforce daily in every communications emanating from the White House.

And while I totally agree with A Pickle:

A Pickle wrote:

What I'm somewhat frustrated by, as an American, is how our entire population is stereotyped and marked as ignorant, violent, and a general nuisance upon the world. I'd like to take this time to remind people that there are 300 million people living in this country, many of whom (hell, most of whom) don't concur with the philosophies put forth by the actions of our government (EDIT: Which, we are in part responsible for).
Unfortunately for him and everybody else, since the Government always has the biggest voice of all, real people get drowned in it. When you are on the receiving end of a grenade, of course you think the one who threw it at you is bad. It goes both ways. But it appears to me that 9/11 happened because for years the US government has had its fingers in places it didn't belong to satisfy its own interest, economic, political or otherwise, and washed it's hands whenever the deed was done. People seem to have forgotten that Saddam used to be a VERY good friend of the US when he was kicking Iran's ass and generally doing Washington's bidding... The USA gave him his so-called WMDs (most likely why they knew so well what to look for!)... And Saddam used in on his own innocent civilian population... Washington didn't even blink. Heck, he didn't even get a reprimand. Funny how the wind turns when things don't go the Washington way... Things like that are what gives America a bad rep overseas. The bad unfortunately usually overshadows the good for some reason, the bad is always more memorable.

And then there is this:

http://www.americawestandasone.com/

You gotta watch the video. You will not believe your eyes... Countries have been carpet bombed for less. Just kidding for those who do not get sarcasm.

As for the trailer, well... Nic Cage seems to let his moustache do the acting and that does not bode well for a film on such a sensitive subject matter.

Then there is a lot of corny lines for such a short trailers, and stuff that people whould say after the fact, not during it, that seriously undermines credibility for me.

That and the fact that Cage has a hard time getting volonteers to evacuate the towers. If memory serves me well, nobody feared that they would collapse until they did... The usual brochettes of "pseudo-experts" were falling over themselves on TV while the towers were burning to comment on how well constructed and nearly indestructible they were...

Funnily enough, we never saw those guys again when the towers fell down. But I digress.

Those cops are all looking as if they know that the darn thing will fall on their face... From what I have seen and know, it looks to me that the fireman and policeman of New York did a little better than that, considering the sheer insanity of the situation.

Last edited Sat, 20th May 2006, 7:28pm; edited 4 times in total.

Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 7:24pm

Post 102 of 196

Waser

Force: 4731 | Joined: 7th Sep 2003 | Posts: 3111

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

SuperUser

Hybrid-Halo wrote:

swg33k wrote:

You also have to keep in mind how careful they have to be not to offend people. (Obviously the fimmakers of the Da Vince Code didn't think twice)
Because the Da Vinci code is a work of fiction.
OR IS IT???!?
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 7:25pm

Post 103 of 196

the new godfather

Force: 130 | Joined: 10th Oct 2005 | Posts: 476

Windows User MacOS User

Member

JohnCarter wrote:

The USA gave him his so-called WMDs in exchange for oil...



are u insane, we didnt give him nucular weapons......
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 7:27pm

Post 104 of 196

Fill

Force: 1257 | Joined: 1st Jul 2005 | Posts: 1652

CompositeLab Lite User EffectsLab Lite User Windows User

Gold Member

Hybrid-Halo wrote:

swg33k wrote:

You also have to keep in mind how careful they have to be not to offend people. (Obviously the fimmakers of the Da Vince Code didn't think twice)
Because the Da Vinci code is a work of fiction.
Yes, where they literally kick Christianity in the face. But unfortunately that's in the "religous" topic category and is restricted.
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 7:29pm

Post 105 of 196

JohnCarter

Force: 3295 | Joined: 11th Mar 2003 | Posts: 1078

VisionLab User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

the godfather wrote:

JohnCarter wrote:

The USA gave him his so-called WMDs in exchange for oil...



are u insane, we didnt give him nucular weapons......
No nuclear weapons but they gave him Anthrax, Mustard Gas, VX and God knows what else. Do a little research dude, it'll do you much good. Not to mention it might improve your spelling, grammar and hopefully your manners as well...

the godfather wrote:

are u insane
Look who's talking... wink
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 7:36pm

Post 106 of 196

the new godfather

Force: 130 | Joined: 10th Oct 2005 | Posts: 476

Windows User MacOS User

Member

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_Revolution


maybe u should read this...
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 7:46pm

Post 107 of 196

JohnCarter

Force: 3295 | Joined: 11th Mar 2003 | Posts: 1078

VisionLab User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Dude, I'm talking about REAL research.

Not the online Cliff Notes...

As you are so fond of saying:

Cheer up!
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 8:05pm

Post 108 of 196

ProFilms17

Force: 10 | Joined: 17th May 2006 | Posts: 42

Member

White House knew there were no WMD CIA - The CIA had evidence Iraq possessed no weapons of mass destruction six months before the 2003 US-led invasion but was ignored by a White House intent on ousting Saddam Hussein, a former senior CIA official said, according to CBS. - "The (White House) group that was dealing with preparation for the Iraq war came back and said they were no longer interested." - "We said: 'Well, what about the intel?' And they said: 'Well, this isn't about intel anymore. This is about regime change'," added Drumheller, whose CIA operation was assigned the task of debriefing the Iraqi official. - "The policy was set. The war in Iraq was coming and they were looking for intelligence to fit into the policy," the former CIA agent told CBS.

get ur facts straight, we went in there knowing no weapons were present, we didnt give them to him. we created an excuse to go there so we could spread democracy
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 8:10pm

Post 109 of 196

JohnCarter

Force: 3295 | Joined: 11th Mar 2003 | Posts: 1078

VisionLab User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Man, are you sure you kids are really going to school?

I was talking about the WMDs used on the Kurds amongst others in the 80s. They were given to Saddam with the blessings of Reagan.

Funny too that your government told the WORLD that the war in IRAK had to happen BECAUSE of WMDs... So you are basically saying it is OK for America to lie to get what it wants but not for other countries... The US currently refuses that right to Iran (about their Uranium enrichment - yes, everybody knows Iran wants nuclear weapons - but they say they don't!) because it does not suit America's interests.

The whole 9/11 fiasco is indirectly linked to the American Government. The CIA trained Ben Laden to fight the Russians in Afghanistan because God forbid Afghanistan ever became Communist. When the Russians where kicked out after a long, bloody war that left the whole country in shambles, the Americans went back home and left the people who fought for them (because sending American soldiers whould have been impopular so soon after the Vietnam debacle not too mention politically delicate in an era of Cold War), die in their misery with the very dangerous knowledge brought by years of training with the top secret service in the world... Smart move if you ask me... And now they can't even find him while he keeps transmitting that knowledge to thousands of lunatics... LMAO!

I can see the trailer for this:

Trained by the CIA to be their ultimate weapon...

They abandoned him behind enemy lines...

But now he's back with a vengeance...

And the World will see EVIL that day...

But yeah, you're right, everybody knew that your government was lying for the sake of a regime change... The US wants a regime change because Saddam was no longer doing their bidding and made it difficult to get access to the second biggest oil reserve on the planet... Proving exactly my point.

Go back to school, you bums!

Get a grip and Cheer up: http://www.americawestandasone.com/awsao.html

Last edited Sat, 20th May 2006, 8:37pm; edited 11 times in total.

Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 8:11pm

Post 110 of 196

Jrad

Force: 230 | Joined: 30th Apr 2005 | Posts: 478

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

You can't base the whole American population as single minded. I am personally upset at what McDonalds and Burger does to other countrys. However, do you stand aside and let a dictator kill his people? NO! Also, don't base your views off of the news. They only show you the bare minimum/top layer of what is going on. There is SO MUCH that goes on in the world that we don't even know about, and probably don't have the stomach to handle. What does Washington and the people want? A fast inexpenisve war, but as we all know, that doesn't work. This war are America is fighting is against a whole new enemy, who dress as civilians then run up to convoys and blow themselves up. Also, during the invasion, Iraqi troops brought women and children into their ranks. They also would hide in their religious palaces and then bring in random people off of the streets. So when people attack us for killing civilians, its not like we're trying to. You'd be pretty paranoid too if people were killing your friends by running up to trucks.


You also get into the debate of what we're doing seems good, but what they're doing seems good to them. Well, all that I have to say about that is, "Only the dead have seen the end of war" -Plato

*That was a whole lot of rambling, so please excuse me for any bad grammer or statements.*
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 9:05pm

Post 111 of 196

A Pickle

Force: 1235 | Joined: 7th Sep 2004 | Posts: 1280

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

The whole 9/11 fiasco is indirectly linked to the American Government. The CIA trained Ben Laden to fight the Russians in Afghanistan because God forbid Afghanistan ever became Communist.
Yeah, those poor Russians. They would have let a democracy in over there any time, wouldn't they have?

And now they can't even find him while he keeps transmitting that knowledge to thousands of lunatics... LMAO!
Yeah, "Laugh My Ass Off!" That's hilarious how he transmitted that information to people who became fanatically loyal to him so that he could hijack four planes and kill over 2,000 people! That's hilarious, isn't it?

Oh well. Since the American government was in some shady dealings in 30 years ago (but nobody else was... nope) against an equally if not more repressive and covert regime, I guess it's okay for a fundamentalist and his minions to kill thousands of defenseless civilians. Because... they were... responsible. I guess it's also completely okay for the United States to stand by and do nothing after an attack like that. Yup.

Hell, why not stereotype all 300 million Americans as single-minded, ignorant, gun-toting capitalists as well?

But yeah, you're right, everybody knew that your government was lying for the sake of a regime change... The US wants a regime change because Saddam was no longer doing their bidding and made it difficult to get access to the second biggest oil reserve on the planet... Proving exactly my point.
Yeah. There was also this guy who found a piece of tin foil at Roswell. He called it a piece of the alien spaceship... which also proved his point.
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 9:06pm

Post 112 of 196

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Rating: +1

JohnCarter wrote:

...
11 edits later and you're still spelling Iraq "Irak". Not massively clever, especially when you're asking if people are really going to school if you ask me...

I raised the point of the chemical weaponry used in the Kurd attacks already too. It just seems that profilms, godfather and evw (the three amigos) managed to ignore the point entirely by concentrating on being superficial.

And who the hell is Ben Laden?

I think you're also forgetting that all governments lie in order to get their people to believe what they want. I'm not totally convinced that the truth actually exists as everything seems to be a myraid of misunderstandings in the first place.

I also dislike the implications of the "us and them" mindset that some people seem to have. All of our countries are involved in the shady dealings which have been underground for the past x amount of years. Singling out America as a scapegoat is as irrational as saying all terrorists are evil.

As I said previously, the truth is long, long gone.

Last edited Sat, 20th May 2006, 9:09pm; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 9:07pm

Post 113 of 196

the new godfather

Force: 130 | Joined: 10th Oct 2005 | Posts: 476

Windows User MacOS User

Member

so u think we ahould have let russia take over afghanistan and done nothing about it...okay


but no we butt into to other countries problems....



this is great how people are saying cheer up
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 9:10pm

Post 114 of 196

A Pickle

Force: 1235 | Joined: 7th Sep 2004 | Posts: 1280

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

11 edits later and you're still spelling Iraq "Irak". Not massively clever, especially when you're asking if people are really going to school if you ask me...
I LOLed. smile

I think you're also forgetting that all governments lie in order to get their people to believe what they want. I'm not totally convinced that the truth actually exists as everything seems to be a myraid of misunderstandings in the first place.
Well said.
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 9:10pm

Post 115 of 196

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

the godfather wrote:

this is great how people are saying cheer up
Totally, they're not ridiculing you or anything!
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 9:11pm

Post 116 of 196

the new godfather

Force: 130 | Joined: 10th Oct 2005 | Posts: 476

Windows User MacOS User

Member

Hybrid-Halo wrote:

the godfather wrote:

this is great how people are saying cheer up
Totally, they're not ridiculing you or anything!
cool


and hey


cheer up a lil
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 9:12pm

Post 117 of 196

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

the godfather wrote:

Hybrid-Halo wrote:

the godfather wrote:

this is great how people are saying cheer up
Totally, they're not ridiculing you or anything!
cool
Perhaps I need to go and add the <sarcasm> tags.
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 9:12pm

Post 118 of 196

the new godfather

Force: 130 | Joined: 10th Oct 2005 | Posts: 476

Windows User MacOS User

Member

cheer up a lil

Last edited Sat, 20th May 2006, 9:13pm; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 9:12pm

Post 119 of 196

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

I couldn't be laughing harder, believe me.

p.s. Editing your posts to make it appear as though you're conveying a different message isn't a good idea.

I'm slowly getting tired of the whole world vs America theme that seems to populate any thread which borderlines political discussion. I'm also bored of mis-educated, propoganda fed children chirping off ill informed rants of patriotism which involve the word "we" alot.

You didn't do anything buddy, your government did.
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 9:25pm

Post 120 of 196

Fill

Force: 1257 | Joined: 1st Jul 2005 | Posts: 1652

CompositeLab Lite User EffectsLab Lite User Windows User

Gold Member

Hybrid-Halo wrote:

I couldn't be laughing harder, believe me.
Wow really? I thought you were mad or something!

(I might have to add <sarcasm> tags here...)
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 9:27pm

Post 121 of 196

JohnCarter

Force: 3295 | Joined: 11th Mar 2003 | Posts: 1078

VisionLab User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

There are two ways to spell Irak. And believe it or not, the most common one is with a K... Except on CNN I guess...

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.globaldefence.net/karten/irak.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.globaldefence.net/deutsch/nahost/irak/irak.htm&h=965&w=800&sz=106&tbnid=aYaChr6g7fm7WM:&tbnh=148&tbnw=122&hl=en&start=10&prev=/images%3Fq%3DIrak%26svnum%3D10%26hl%3Den%26lr%3D%26safe%3Doff%26client%3Dsafari%26rls%3Den%26sa%3DN

Clever boys.

And for everybody else that bothered to read properly, I was talking about the Amercian GOVERNMENT, not the American POPULATION.
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 9:32pm

Post 122 of 196

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

More common... In germany.

"There are several suggestions for the origin of the name of Iraq; one dates back to the Sumerian city of Uruk (or Erech). Another suggestion is that Iraq comes from the Aramaic language, meaning "the land along the banks of the rivers."

Under the Sassanid dynasty, there was a region called "Iraq Arabi" which referred to the southern part of modern Iraq. Al-Iraq was the name used by the Arabs themselves for the land since the 6th century."

I see no mention of Irak yet. Though I won't rule that out as a possibility. You still definetly dubbed Bin Laden "Ben" which is unforgiveable really..

My latter comment wasn't aimed at you, and rather the godfather.
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 9:36pm

Post 123 of 196

JohnCarter

Force: 3295 | Joined: 11th Mar 2003 | Posts: 1078

VisionLab User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Both spellings are still in use in many countries. It is considered rarely used in English but that doesn't make it wrong.

To go with the Cliff Notes version:
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Irak

The Ben Ladden thing is the French spelling - that's my first language. Slip ups happen.

Last edited Sat, 20th May 2006, 9:42pm; edited 2 times in total.

Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 9:39pm

Post 124 of 196

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

JohnCarter wrote:

There are two ways to spell Irak. And believe it or not, the most common one is with a K... Except on CNN I guess...

wikipedia link you provided wrote:

Irak.
Noun
1. older and rarely used, alternate spelling of Iraq
Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 9:40pm

Post 125 of 196

JohnCarter

Force: 3295 | Joined: 11th Mar 2003 | Posts: 1078

VisionLab User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Hybrid-Halo wrote:

JohnCarter wrote:

There are two ways to spell Irak. And believe it or not, the most common one is with a K... Except on CNN I guess...

wikipedia link you provided wrote:

Irak.
Noun
1. older and rarely used, alternate spelling of Iraq
As I said, rarely used does not make it wrong...

wink

But back to the trailer. I didn't particularly care for it. Looks heavy handed as opposed to United 93, which seemed to have taken a more grounded approach. Having seen neither, it's hard to judge but from the trailer, it looks like it has an overdramatized approach to the whole thing.

Last edited Sat, 20th May 2006, 9:43pm; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Sat, 20th May 2006, 9:42pm

Post 126 of 196

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

JohnCarter wrote:

Hybrid-Halo wrote:

JohnCarter wrote:

There are two ways to spell Irak. And believe it or not, the most common one is with a K... Except on CNN I guess...

wikipedia link you provided wrote:

Irak.
Noun
1. older and rarely used, alternate spelling of Iraq
As I said, rarely used does not make it wrong...

wink
Though it does make it distinctly NOT the most common one, contrasting what you said entirely. Perhaps you were exaggerating it to backup your point, either way - gotcha wink

Barring that section of my post, as to some extents you've justified your bad labelling habits. Read what I said about countries and their people. It applies to France as much as it does the US.

JohnCarter wrote:


But back to the trailer. I didn't aprticularly care for it. Looks heavy handed as opposed to United 93, which seemed to have taken a more grounded approach. Having seen neither, it's hard to judge but from the trailer, it looks like it has an overdramatized approach to the whole thing.
I agree, I've been meaning to watch united 93 since I watched the trailer but the WTC movie just appears to be poor. I'd like to hear what people thought of it after they've seen it.
Posted: Sun, 21st May 2006, 2:31am

Post 127 of 196

Frozenpede

Force: 630 | Joined: 28th Jan 2004 | Posts: 1113

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User

Gold Member

hmmm I held of watching this for a while because well Oliver Stone hasnt been the best reteller of history with some of his movies haha. Watching it I have to say it caught me, much the same as the Alamo did or the trailers for United 93 (which I have yet to see the actual movie) however emotional appeal aside I want to hear how this movie adds up to fact....anyone able to do that for me?
Posted: Sun, 21st May 2006, 2:48am

Post 128 of 196

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Pickle - Hmm, that's exactly my opinion, I just worded it wrong. But I agree entirely.
Posted: Sun, 21st May 2006, 3:20am

Post 129 of 196

Kid

Force: 4177 | Joined: 1st Apr 2001 | Posts: 1876

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

JohnCarter wrote:

Both spellings are still in use in many countries. It is considered rarely used in English but that doesn't make it wrong.

To go with the Cliff Notes version:
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Irak

The Ben Ladden thing is the French spelling - that's my first language. Slip ups happen.
Irak is the French spelling. For the rest of the world, the country themselves and the internationally recognised spelling for maps is Iraq. The name might be quite common because before the second gulf war France was very chummy with Iraq and their main oil exporter. Little surprise then that they were opposed to it.

Unfortunately the French simply wont accept international standards or face the fact that everyone uses english and greenwich mean time. I found it quite amusing that on eurovision everyone gave their votes in in english apart from the french and their 2 closest allied countries. Also in the French bits of Canada they are worse and are positively rude and descriminatory about english.

I think it is a shame that they spout a lot of good multicultural values and yet even if you try and make the effort to speak their language (which people from most countries take as a complement) they are still hostile.

Last edited Sun, 21st May 2006, 3:51am; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Sun, 21st May 2006, 3:34am

Post 130 of 196

Frozenpede

Force: 630 | Joined: 28th Jan 2004 | Posts: 1113

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User

Gold Member

oh now you did it Kid *ducks and waits for the explosion*
Posted: Sun, 21st May 2006, 3:50am

Post 131 of 196

Kid

Force: 4177 | Joined: 1st Apr 2001 | Posts: 1876

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

Hybrid-Halo wrote:

I couldn't be laughing harder, believe me.

p.s. Editing your posts to make it appear as though you're conveying a different message isn't a good idea.

I'm slowly getting tired of the whole world vs America theme that seems to populate any thread which borderlines political discussion. I'm also bored of mis-educated, propoganda fed children chirping off ill informed rants of patriotism which involve the word "we" alot.

You didn't do anything buddy, your government did.
Well the government took the war to iraq, but I would say that american public opinion and 'patriotism' turned the situation bad. I don't think going was a bad thing even if the motive was to give stability to the area and as a consequence aid the american economy.

What started as a liberation of the country was easily turned to an occupation by terrorists because american soldiers were too busy sticking the american flag on stuff and forcing american style democracy down peoples throats. Also I dont think the media helped because the american media was laughably biased and patriotic which just made them look gung-ho and a bit rasist really, and the rest of the worlds media sensationalised any action and never stopped trying to go for the controvertial story that the war was wrong in the first place.

Its interesting to note that the areas policed by other allied forces, including but not just the british, were the last to turn.

Now they are really in a hard place because they have lost the propoganda war and are seen as an occupying force that must be resisted. They can not fight that, the only way to deal with it would be to leave. However if they do that they will be seen as abandoning the place. I think maybe the best idea would be to pull the current troops and and move in a UN peacekeeping force. The same troops would be there really but it might turn around public opinion there and bring everyone together against the trouble makers.

The media is still critisising in hindsight as if they knew better all along and saying that what has happened was inevitable but in fact we bombed the crap out of bosnia and liberated them and it all went very smoothly. Those countries are much better for it.

The world vs america bandwagon is a very easy one to jump onto because most americans are very arrogant of not only other countries but also their own history. Most don't realise that the US hasnt been a superpower for that long and think it is just the way things are rather than a phase they are going through. Its gonna be quite a shock to them when they realise they are second to france/china.

The way countries act is lot like a playground. I see the middle eastern countries as bickering children, the usa is the big kid who likes to throw their weight around and think they are in charge. Britain is the one who has been there and done that and knows how to sort stuff out but generally keeps their head down. Russia is the big dumb one who isnt really bad but gets talked into doing the wrong thing by some of the others. France and China are the weird ones who generally keep to themselves but are getting fed up with USA and are gonna sort him out sooner or later. smile
Posted: Sun, 21st May 2006, 2:33pm

Post 132 of 196

Frozenpede

Force: 630 | Joined: 28th Jan 2004 | Posts: 1113

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User

Gold Member

Alright I debated posting anything for a while because I really dont want to get into another one of our debates but since no one seams willing to make the argument so I will. Hybrid-Halo your statement about brainwashed children is a statement I've heard a million times so I put some thought into it and Ive come up with a theory of where this statement may be coming from. Europe has a long history of kings and nobles, practically every war you learn about within the past 400 years has had something to do with a few men making decisions for the rest. There has been a long history of one class leading and another following even the Magna Carta was just a move by the nobles for more power. Naturally in this atmosphere of political games people will come to see the government as one entity and the people as another.....thats Europe, something you have to realise is that America has very different roots. When the colonies revolted against England there was no high archy making the plans, no kings or nobles fighting for a personal gain for which the rest of the colonists followed blindly. There were people who led the organization but even they did so only to a certain extent, for example George Washington didnt get the back country men to charge Kings Mountain. America's very creation was as a "we" because citizens created this country for themselves not for noble and this heritage helped to shape and mold modern America, it was the citizens that fought the Texan Revolution and subsequently the Mexican American War. It was the citizens that fought the American Civil War, the war that put the U.S. on the road to becoming a super-power the same was true through virtually every war America has fought up till Vietnam and Korea and even then there was a group of citizens giving to the cause. America has a heritage of "we" while Europe has a heritage of nobility and I think thats the source of some of our most common differences in opinion and thats why you see all these "brainwashed" children talking about "we"
Posted: Sun, 21st May 2006, 3:11pm

Post 133 of 196

Kid

Force: 4177 | Joined: 1st Apr 2001 | Posts: 1876

EffectsLab Lite User VideoWrap User Windows User

Gold Member

Well I think what you are saying is kind of true except that the concept of 'we' and patriotism is used by american politicians to make the american public think what they want them to think. Its still a few men making the decisions and the rest just thinking that its what they want.
Posted: Sun, 21st May 2006, 4:35pm

Post 134 of 196

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Also, don't forget how young the US are, and how old certain euope countries are. Many european countries have had the time to develop, to grow older, calmer, settled, less "in your face".

There's many explanations for that "we" feeling or the patriotism. A lot of countries have many patriots and feel very "we". While other countries have very little of them (my own for example, "patriotism" here is considered downright stupid, because it makes you question things less - To even hiss a swiss flag is an idea unheard of for most citizens).
Allthough where Frozenpede isn't right is with making the US sound like the only country that was made by citizens for themselves. There's other countries with similar histories.


@ Pooky

Democracy is a questionable form, agreed. But also, be aware that there's very little countries are actually fully democratic in the strictest sense. Most democracies are basicly weakend dictatorships where you can choose who you'd like to dictate you - You vote a congress, senators, president, king etc and they decide for the people, until someone new is chosen.

The swiss system might be the closest in the world to what democracy is intended to be. Our government has only the power to make suggestions, and the citizens decide: We decide over new laws, where we spend our money, who we make what contract with. And every citizen has the right to make a suggestion to the people too.
Guess that's why switzerland is so "neutral" and "average" and has never been famous for hot heading into anything, because this whole process takes time. And by the time we've made a decision, the question isn't even relevant anymore, but that's another issue. smile
And I guess that's also the reason we're like the only european country not in the european union, because we're still at the "hmm, let's think about this" phase. smile
Posted: Sun, 21st May 2006, 5:19pm

Post 135 of 196

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Irak is the French spelling. For the rest of the world, the country themselves and the internationally recognised spelling for maps is Iraq.
Not sure why we're even discussing this, as honestly it seems rather hypocrite to even bring it up.

But to correct you Kid, "the rest of the world" doesn't entirely agree. Irak is also the german spelling, which includes at least germany, switzerland and austria.
Posted: Sun, 21st May 2006, 6:08pm

Post 136 of 196

Frozenpede

Force: 630 | Joined: 28th Jan 2004 | Posts: 1113

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User

Gold Member

I'm aware the U.S. isnt the only country but for the sake of making my point I neaded to only mention one nation.

as far as kids statement about the government still leading anyway...well yes and no. Many of the largest events in the U.S. during the 1800's were started by the civilians, for example the liberation of Texas which led to the Mexican American War, the American Civil War was also very much a civilian issue as well as the overthrow of the Hawaiian government. Now as the U.S. gets bigger and more concrete the government has become more and more the leader in events but as we've seen in Vietnam the civilians can still cause us to win or lose a war via democracy and now with gay marriage in certain states where the civilians wanted it and by the way...the idea to go into Iraq a second time was first brought into the government NOT by Bush but by a senator......I wanna say Bob Barr...dont quote me on the name though, I also remmember the talk on the streets around the time of Operation Desert Fox in 1998 and many people I talked to were hoping for a regime change in Iraq...Bush wasnt even running yet.
Posted: Sun, 21st May 2006, 8:49pm

Post 137 of 196

DigiSm89

Force: 815 | Joined: 2nd Jun 2002 | Posts: 1898

Windows User

Member

Frozenpede wrote:

as far as kids statement about the government still leading anyway...well yes and no. Many of the largest events in the U.S. during the 1800's were started by the civilians, for example the liberation of Texas which led to the Mexican American War, the American Civil War was also very much a civilian issue ...
The push to annex states from the west into the Union was a government decision in the name of manifest destiny. The Mexican American War was a result of the US government's intention to take control of all of North America.

While yes, war with Mexico had very much to do with "civilians" and their conflict, the roots of the war started within the US government's initial intentions to "take the west".

The American Civil War was not a battle between the northern citizens and the southern citizens, for it wasn't even a civil war. The American Civil War was a fight between two nations, the Confederate States, which contained the initial southern states that had seceded from the Union, and the United States. Therefore, the individual governments of the two opposing sides were the main influences in the war. The US was led by Abraham Lincoln, and in fact Lincoln alone slowly changed the war from a fight against secession to a fight against slavery. The Confederates did not have solid leadership, which contributed to why they lost.

So I guess you can say at that point, it was more or less the civilians of the Confederate States vs the US Government. That would perhaps be where the truth in your argument presents itself. But then, if you take a good look at the war tactics of the goverment, you'll realize that at one point, they tried to enlist help from Britain in the war in an effort to make the war a Confederates and British vs the United States battle. Hence, some sort of government will inevitably control/lead its civilians during the time of war (surprise, surpise).


Actually, now that I think of it...I'm not even sure why I bothered to reply to this. The government is always involved in national wars. PERIOD.

Buh. razz
Posted: Sun, 21st May 2006, 11:47pm

Post 138 of 196

Hendo

Force: 13107 | Joined: 16th Sep 2004 | Posts: 848

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

FXhome Team Member

Rating: +1

Sollthar wrote:

Guess that's why switzerland is so "neutral" and "average" and has never been famous for hot heading into anything, because this whole process takes time. And by the time we've made a decision, the question isn't even relevant anymore, but that's another issue. smile
So... the Swiss are like the Ent tree dudes in Lord of the Rings? biggrin
Posted: Mon, 22nd May 2006, 1:08am

Post 139 of 196

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Hendo wrote:

Sollthar wrote:

Guess that's why switzerland is so "neutral" and "average" and has never been famous for hot heading into anything, because this whole process takes time. And by the time we've made a decision, the question isn't even relevant anymore, but that's another issue. smile
So... the Swiss are like the Ent tree dudes in Lord of the Rings? biggrin
The ents were spurred into action though, something which will never happen to Switzerland. razz
Posted: Mon, 22nd May 2006, 1:20am

Post 140 of 196

Pooky

Force: 4834 | Joined: 8th Jul 2003 | Posts: 5913

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User FXhome Movie Maker

Gold Member

Yeah like how in World War Two they were in the middle of it yet never got invaded or attacked or involved in anything razz
Posted: Mon, 22nd May 2006, 1:25am

Post 141 of 196

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Pooky wrote:

Yeah like how in World War Two they were in the middle of it yet never got invaded or attacked or involved in anything razz
their tunnel walls are packed with explosives afterall... (Switzerland is almost entirely made of tunnels.) smile
Posted: Mon, 22nd May 2006, 1:47am

Post 142 of 196

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

So... the Swiss are like the Ent tree dudes in Lord of the Rings
lol, yeah. I think that comparison isn't too far from the truth. We talk a bit faster though. smile

Switzerland is almost entirely made of tunnels.
...and bridges. And we can nuke em all with our glorious and insanely clever defense plan of "if we ever get attacked, we'll blow everything up"! smile
Terrorists don't even need to place explosives anywhere here, they just need to press the button. The rest is all done for them. wink

like how in World War Two they were in the middle of it yet never got invaded or attacked or involved in anything
Switzerland was "involved" in the 2nd world war though, just not in any sort of direct warfare, neither attacking nor defending - war just isn't the swiss way. But as little as every other country in the world, we didn't came out of WW2 exactly "clean" - We did sell stuff to both sides and took a lot of Nazi money for it.
And I think someone did drop some bombs on our soil thinking we're germans. Or maybe just aiming really really badly. smile
Posted: Mon, 22nd May 2006, 4:17am

Post 143 of 196

Frozenpede

Force: 630 | Joined: 28th Jan 2004 | Posts: 1113

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User

Gold Member

haha mVPstar. Of course the governments were involved in both wars, youve missed the point, the point being that the creation of these conflicts were very much based on everyday life and not the personal bettering of a few faceless official like it would have been in a world controlled by nobles or kings. In the case of the War of Northern Aggression (as some here call it) it was caused by a series of tensions stretching back practically to the founding of the nation, part of it being the tarrifs supported by northern businesses and seen as harmful to southern citizens that would see only the rise in prices and little benefit in their economy, other things of course that could take up pages but as time went by angry citizens to their cases around, some ran for office and got elected. It may surprise you to know that the state legislatures do not make enough money for the job to really be attractive to people who dont have a cause that they want to support and those angry citizens and those citizens on the legislature (because many times they are better classified as that then as politicians) started this war....heck...ever heard of John Brown? or how about bushwackers? all citizens, then the war begins and the south is mobilised for independence. The issues they (southernors) fought over effected virtually everyone and was not just a border dispute or a war between one man wanting to be king and another also wanting to be king, people felt like they personally had something up at stake. Same was true in the Mexican American War. James K. Polk even ran on the issue of Texas and the citizens wanted it....now I know youll bring in that the northern states werent for it and that Abraham Lincoln himself campaigned against it but there was section of the population mobilised for it, and I said before it was the common citizen that started that mess to begin with.

The way our government is designed....and this is true for almost any nation that has a truly functioning democratic republic or anything close to it, it is almost impossible for the government not to mimik the will of the people...at the same time its also set up to be potentially a few years behind the will of the people which allows for a bit of consistency and of course time for people to debate and think through their positions.
Posted: Mon, 22nd May 2006, 11:56am

Post 144 of 196

DigiSm89

Force: 815 | Joined: 2nd Jun 2002 | Posts: 1898

Windows User

Member

You are right that the Civil War spawned out of civilian conflict but, Kid's point was that the government ends up leading wars eventually. In the Civil war, the US government was highly present in the war.

Again, I'm not sure why I responded because you kind of didn't refute the role of governments in war. razz
Posted: Mon, 22nd May 2006, 5:55pm

Post 145 of 196

Frozenpede

Force: 630 | Joined: 28th Jan 2004 | Posts: 1113

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User

Gold Member

haha I think we are confused about each others points....my original argument was not whether or not the government plays a role but whether or not the people are simply followers. This all comes from hybrids statement about people being brainwashed by government and my argument is that the government truly not that seperate from the people, that the people manipulate the government as well and are not simply pawns following after some distant and far removed government.....I dont think that so far you have really disputed my point.
Posted: Mon, 22nd May 2006, 5:56pm

Post 146 of 196

Hybrid-Halo

Force: 9315 | Joined: 7th Feb 2003 | Posts: 3367

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Frozenpede wrote:

hybrids statement about people being brainwashed by government and my argument is that the government truly not that seperate from the people, that the people manipulate the government as well and are not simply pawns following after some distant and far removed government.....I dont think that so far you have really disputed my point.
Because you misinterpreted mine. My 'propoganda fed children' statement was referring to the godfather directly rather than the entire american populous. Making sweeping statements like that would be a little ignorant don't you think?

If you'd like to argue that the godfather is a well informed individual who makes educated decisions to help change his countries political movements... go ahead. razz
Posted: Wed, 24th May 2006, 10:20am

Post 147 of 196

Z28Jerry

Force: 700 | Joined: 15th Jun 2004 | Posts: 141

EffectsLab Pro User

Gold Member

Great topic here. Your all wrong, but great topic wink
Posted: Wed, 24th May 2006, 11:28am

Post 148 of 196

A Pickle

Force: 1235 | Joined: 7th Sep 2004 | Posts: 1280

EffectsLab Lite User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User

Gold Member

Z28Jerry wrote:

Great topic here. Your all wrong, but great topic wink
People who talk high and mighty in political conversations are fairly irritating, if I do say so myself. I might add, you misspelled, "You're."
Posted: Wed, 24th May 2006, 1:53pm

Post 149 of 196

Redhawksrymmer

Force: 18442 | Joined: 19th Aug 2002 | Posts: 2620

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

It's intresting that this topic has transformed from being a discussion about the movie into a discussion if the Swiss are like "Ent tree dudes"...biggrin
Posted: Thu, 25th May 2006, 9:32am

Post 150 of 196

SyroVision

Force: 2130 | Joined: 1st Dec 2005 | Posts: 478

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Hybrid-Halo wrote:

Pooky wrote:

Yeah like how in World War Two they were in the middle of it yet never got invaded or attacked or involved in anything razz
their tunnel walls are packed with explosives afterall... (Switzerland is almost entirely made of tunnels.) smile
And explosive barrels, anyone who has played any of the James Bond FPS games knows that.
Posted: Thu, 25th May 2006, 9:37am

Post 151 of 196

SyroVision

Force: 2130 | Joined: 1st Dec 2005 | Posts: 478

VisionLab User FXpreset Maker FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Rating: +1

Redhawksrymmer wrote:

It's interesting that this topic has transformed from being a discussion about the movie into a discussion if the Swiss are like "Ent tree dudes"...biggrin
Seems like a logical step to me, where else could it have gone? wink

My favourite thing in the whole world are those topics about Christianity VS <insert any other religion here> where they go on and on for 300 pages and all that ends up happening is one word posts along the lines of :

JesusRocks06 says :
"I'm right and your wrong, jerk"

SatanFreak says :
"no your the jerk, fag"
Those are soooo hilarious to read, they always start so calm and passive then BOOM... The bible hits the fan. razz
Posted: Thu, 25th May 2006, 9:39am

Post 152 of 196

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

You saying anything about switzerland, swede? Eh? smile
Posted: Thu, 25th May 2006, 7:49pm

Post 153 of 196

Garrison

Force: 5404 | Joined: 9th Mar 2006 | Posts: 1530

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Speaking of Sweden...

http://www.aintitcool.com/display.cgi?id=23408
Posted: Sat, 27th May 2006, 2:43am

Post 154 of 196

er-no

Force: 9531 | Joined: 24th Sep 2002 | Posts: 3964

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

JackPot wrote:

You can find 'red coats' in butlins - the wonderful UK holiday parks which eveyone in the UK must have been to at least once in there lives

Fantastic
Never.
Posted: Sat, 27th May 2006, 6:58pm

Post 155 of 196

the new godfather

Force: 130 | Joined: 10th Oct 2005 | Posts: 476

Windows User MacOS User

Member

Rating: -4

lol look at what i have done...




settle settle




cheer up.
Posted: Sun, 28th May 2006, 4:19pm

Post 156 of 196

Frozenpede

Force: 630 | Joined: 28th Jan 2004 | Posts: 1113

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User

Gold Member

sooo....the godfather says "cheer up" and you give him negatives....
Posted: Sun, 28th May 2006, 4:41pm

Post 157 of 196

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

"negatives" is a suggest for user to skip this post.

Yes, I'd advise to skip the post. It doesn't contribute anything to the subject or is interesting in any other matter. smile

Or why do you think "This post contains information that you thought was worth reading and you are sure other users will also want to read."?


I have the impression you misunderstand the voting point Frozenpede.
Posted: Sun, 28th May 2006, 6:12pm

Post 158 of 196

Mellifluous

Force: 5604 | Joined: 6th Oct 2002 | Posts: 3782

EffectsLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

Pooky wrote:

No, that's not what I said. Democracy is the worst system EXCEPT for the other ones. That means it's the best that we have but is still no good.
Wha - ? How can you imply democracy is a bad thing?

Whether the actual application of democracy is good in particular cases is another story, but it's the best political structure we're ever going to get. Would you rather live in an authoritarian country?

The trailer is an interesting one. I can't be sure whether the phrase "the world saw evil that day" has been misinterpreted. It was certainly emotive and cheesy in places, especially because of the music. But this movie seems to be about people directly involved, not the world, or America's viewpoint. Coupled with the fact that Oliver Stone is (usually) quite hard hitting, Nicolas Cage is an intelligent actor, and it has the very liberal Maggie Gylenhaal in it, I really doubt that this movie is a patriotism-fest. Cheesy perhaps about the characters, but not about America.

I don't really see a problem with the movie being made. There was always going to be one made about 9/11 anyway, and I think it being now is possibly a good thing. People are going to see it and it might give them a different perspective on current events to basically "relive" what happened 5 years ago, to compare their feelings then and now, and contemplate what all this ensuing bloodshed has accomplished.

As for evil, I see thousands of people being killed evil, don't you? Just as I see the people killed in Afghanistan, Iraq, Serbia, Germany etc as evil. But people do need to have the ability to change their perspective and get out of their government worshipping, rose-tinted spectacled patriotic bubbles. All governments commit and authorise bad things and sometimes these are reactions against things that have already happened, be it recently or hundreds of years ago. History is not clear cut - otherwise Robin Hood would be labelled as a terrorist.

/end high and mighty rant
Posted: Sun, 28th May 2006, 7:14pm

Post 159 of 196

NickD

Force: 2163 | Joined: 10th Sep 2003 | Posts: 1224

EffectsLab Lite User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Wow, this topic has grown quickly into a fully fledged debate.

Still, for those of you who remember, it doesn't come close to the Vladkob rant from a couple years ago:

http://fxhome.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=161030&highlight=&sid=#161030

That was just hilarious. Especially when Tarn resurrected the topic at the beginning of this year I think it was biggrin

That was totally awesome!!! -45 on his first post!!
Posted: Tue, 30th May 2006, 10:50pm

Post 160 of 196

pcremag

Force: 470 | Joined: 7th Nov 2005 | Posts: 173

EffectsLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

I don't like how people say the movie is "too soon". It wouldn't matter if it happend 2 years ago or 62 years ago. Those same emotions would still be there when watching it. I am kinda excited to see how they are gonna film it all smile
Posted: Tue, 30th May 2006, 11:54pm

Post 161 of 196

DigiSm89

Force: 815 | Joined: 2nd Jun 2002 | Posts: 1898

Windows User

Member

Heh, I was at the movie theater yesterday, about to get my tickets, when I noticed a sign at the ticket booth for the DaVinci Code:

"Please note, during some showings of the DaVinci Code, there is a brief trailer for the upcoming World Trade Center movie. This trailer is known to contain some violent scenes. For your concern, the trailer will be shown at the beginning of the movie and will last for approximately 2 1/2 minutes."
Posted: Wed, 31st May 2006, 3:51am

Post 162 of 196

ProFilms17

Force: 10 | Joined: 17th May 2006 | Posts: 42

Member

[quote="EVW2K"]Actually, I go to a private Christian school,

you mean a private "Catholic" school, a private Christian school is not that common, tell me if im wrong. know your religion.

mvp, thanks for the "hot tip" on that, i know i dont want to relive the experience...tramatic
Posted: Wed, 31st May 2006, 9:53pm

Post 163 of 196

DigiSm89

Force: 815 | Joined: 2nd Jun 2002 | Posts: 1898

Windows User

Member

Just a note, I live in the US and most likely that note only applied for that particular theater.
Posted: Thu, 1st Jun 2006, 6:01pm

Post 164 of 196

NickD

Force: 2163 | Joined: 10th Sep 2003 | Posts: 1224

EffectsLab Lite User FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Well, my opinion is this:

1) It'll be interesting to see how this film turns out, but I'm not all that excited about it.
2) This was an "interesting" thread, but comes nowhere close to the Vladkob rant biggrin

NickD
Posted: Wed, 30th Aug 2006, 1:47am

Post 165 of 196

Garrison

Force: 5404 | Joined: 9th Mar 2006 | Posts: 1530

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060829/ap_on_re_us/sept11_movie
Posted: Wed, 30th Aug 2006, 9:21pm

Post 166 of 196

Fill

Force: 1257 | Joined: 1st Jul 2005 | Posts: 1652

CompositeLab Lite User EffectsLab Lite User Windows User

Gold Member

Garrison wrote:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060829/ap_on_re_us/sept11_movie
That's cool.

This movie looks like it'll be a good dramatic presentation. Be glad they didn't make it look like another Mission Impossible. smile
Posted: Thu, 31st Aug 2006, 8:39pm

Post 167 of 196

Zea

Force: 1773 | Joined: 20th Feb 2005 | Posts: 742

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

This film is only about two men. Thousands died that day...not two. This movie should be called "Two Men," and Hollywood should find a different way to make money, than capitalize a tragedy for entertainment.

Just my two-cents.

Zea
Posted: Thu, 31st Aug 2006, 8:47pm

Post 168 of 196

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

So you also dislike films about WW2 / WW1 / Desasters / Storms / Historic Battles / Sicknesses / Accidents etc?
Unless they're fully fictional like Star Wars or Lord of the Rings?
Posted: Thu, 31st Aug 2006, 9:16pm

Post 169 of 196

Garrison

Force: 5404 | Joined: 9th Mar 2006 | Posts: 1530

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Zea wrote:

This film is only about two men. Thousands died that day...not two. This movie should be called "Two Men," and Hollywood should find a different way to make money, than capitalize a tragedy for entertainment.
So any movie about Hitler and the Nazi's are off limits by your argument? Where thousands more were murdered?

Schindler's List
Conspiracy
Nuremburg
Posted: Thu, 31st Aug 2006, 10:16pm

Post 170 of 196

Zea

Force: 1773 | Joined: 20th Feb 2005 | Posts: 742

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Garrison wrote:

Zea wrote:

This film is only about two men. Thousands died that day...not two. This movie should be called "Two Men," and Hollywood should find a different way to make money, than capitalize a tragedy for entertainment.
So any movie about Hitler and the Nazi's are off limits by your argument? Where thousands more were murdered?

Schindler's List
Conspiracy
Nuremburg
These films show hundreds of people being killed, and the story is about them. WTC makes it sound like the whole day was revolved around two souls, and not thousands.

I'm just saying naming a movie "World Trade Center" should be a movie educating people about the thousands of deaths, not just entertaining people about two men. Basically my point is that that the name for this movie is inappropriate.

Last edited Thu, 31st Aug 2006, 10:22pm; edited 1 times in total.

Posted: Thu, 31st Aug 2006, 10:21pm

Post 171 of 196

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

I'm just saying naming a movie "World Trade Center" should be a movie educating people about the thousands of deaths
Huh? Who are you to decide what a movie SHOULD be about?

Can't you tell a story about friendship of two people happening WITHIN the second World war, without focusing on 40 million dead people? Could you not write a story about love on a sinking ship without focusing on everyone who died? Can you not tell a story about the courage of few within a sad event that affected more?

I seriously don't get your argument... sad
Posted: Thu, 31st Aug 2006, 10:26pm

Post 172 of 196

Zea

Force: 1773 | Joined: 20th Feb 2005 | Posts: 742

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Sollthar wrote:

I'm just saying naming a movie "World Trade Center" should be a movie educating people about the thousands of deaths
Huh? Who are you to decide what a movie SHOULD be about?

Can't you tell a story about friendship of two people happening WITHIN the second World war, without focusing on 40 million dead people? Could you not write a story about love on a sinking ship without focusing on everyone who died? Can you not tell a story about the courage of few within a sad event that affected more?

I seriously don't get your argument... sad
First of all I am human, and I am granted the right to have an opinion.

Second of all, the answers to your question are yes, yes, and yes. You can make a movie about Bozo's love affair with Tom Cruise if you wanted, but naming a movie about something so controversial should be thought of intensely before it's release.

Naming a movie "Titanic," and having a couple tell each other how much they love each other for 2 hours is inappropriate. That's why the movie "Titanic," showed the deaths of hundreds of people; because that is what really happened.

Other World War movies have long intense battle scenes, showing the deaths of everyone who died; thus showing the brutal reality of the World Wars. I mean, what is LOTR without the intense war scenes?

Making a movie about 9/11, involving the deaths and lives of EVERYONE, could appropriately be called World Trade Center. Making a movie about two men, signaling out everyone else, should not be called World Trade Center.
Posted: Thu, 31st Aug 2006, 10:36pm

Post 173 of 196

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

First of all I am human, and I am granted the right to have an opinion.
What does that have to do with anything? sad


So, if I'm understanding you correctly, your whole argument bases on the fact that you have your own personal expectations of what "World Trade Center" is all about and you disagree with the filmmakers because they focused on something you wouldn't have or think is less important?

Seems a bit narrow-minded to me if I understand it correctly. Especially concerning the views on an artists right (since you brought up rights in your post) to focus on a storyelement he choses and dismiss it as "inappropriate" and even state it "should not be done" his way, but rather the way you'd have wished it was.


Maybe I misunderstand you completely though, as I'm honestly unsure about the point you were trying to make.
Posted: Thu, 31st Aug 2006, 10:55pm

Post 174 of 196

Zea

Force: 1773 | Joined: 20th Feb 2005 | Posts: 742

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Sollthar wrote:

First of all I am human, and I am granted the right to have an opinion.
What does that have to do with anything? sad

So, if I'm understanding you correctly, your whole argument bases on the fact that you have your own personal expectations of what "World Trade Center" is all about and you disagree with the filmmakers because they focused on something you wouldn't have or think is less important?

Seems a bit narrow-minded to me if I understand it correctly. Especially concerning the views on an artists right (since you brought up rights in your post) to focus on a storyelement he choses and dismiss it as "inappropriate" and even state it "should not be done" his way, but rather the way you'd have wished it was.

Maybe I misunderstand you completely though, as I'm honestly unsure about the point you were trying to make.
Maybe I'm crazy, but:

zea wrote:

"Making a movie about two men, signaling out everyone else, should not be called World Trade Center."
Pretty much sums up my only point I am trying to make.

The reason I called myself human with opinions is because you said:

Sollthar wrote:

Who are you to decide what a movie SHOULD be about?
And I basically have an opinion, as do you.

I don't have expectations about what a movie is about, because once you watch it, your expectations are either correct, or false. Mine were correct. It is a movie about the lives of two men, not anyone else who died during that day. You don't see people jumping out of buildings and screaming for their lives, as an intense replication of 9/11 should be about. I think everyone's life is equally important, especially on that day. That is why making a movie about two men, signaling out the rest, is totally absurd when you call it "World Trade Center." If they didn't call it that, there would be nothing wrong with the movie.

An "artist," (is that what we still call most Hollywood directors these days?) has every right granted that he or she wants, to make the movie. The specific project is their sandbox, and they can do what they feel. Naming a movie "World Trade Center," that is only about two men on that day, is inappropriate. I'm glad they made the movie, and I'm glad people can watch it. I am not glad they they used that name to make it sound more intense and to sell more movie tickets; because the movie itself is not about the World Trade Centers, its about the lives of two men; which I'm sure I'll have to say over and over again. That's the reality of the movie, and that is my point.
Posted: Thu, 31st Aug 2006, 11:10pm

Post 175 of 196

Garrison

Force: 5404 | Joined: 9th Mar 2006 | Posts: 1530

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Zea wrote:

These films show hundreds of people being killed, and the story is about them. WTC makes it sound like the whole day was revolved around two souls, and not thousands.
But Conspiracy was not REALLY about the Jews, but the German Nazi's that decided the fate of the Jews. So was Nuremberg for that matter.

Also, my question to you Zea is are you against those Nazi movies since they made money off the subject like you stated earlier? I don't care if that's your opinion, I care about if you are consistent in your argument.
Posted: Thu, 31st Aug 2006, 11:18pm

Post 176 of 196

Zea

Force: 1773 | Joined: 20th Feb 2005 | Posts: 742

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Those movies were still not called "The Holocaust," or specifically named after the event. My whole point is that they named the movie, "World Trade Center," when it is about only the two men.

I have been consistent the whole time, my friend. I believe that you are not the consistent one, as you took out "Schindler's List" of your supporting details, because that movie totally contradicts you there.
Posted: Thu, 31st Aug 2006, 11:19pm

Post 177 of 196

Alex Reeve

Force: 470 | Joined: 3rd Oct 2005 | Posts: 364

MacOS User

Member

Zea wrote:

You don't see people jumping out of buildings and screaming for their lives, as an intense replication of 9/11 should be about. I think everyone's life is equally important, especially on that day. That is why making a movie about two men, signaling out the rest, is totally absurd when you call it "World Trade Center." If they didn't call it that, there would be nothing wrong with the movie.
I think you're thinking far too literally. I've no interest in seeing those images recreated on the movie screen. The original news footage is firmly ingrained in most peoples minds; any attempt to recreate it would be in poor taste and couldn't hope to compare. Calling the film "World Trade Center" seems artistically valid to me. It simply chooses to focus on the 2 men as a microcosm for the experiences of the day.

I'm more concerned with the glossy Hollywood aesthetic Stone has used, but as I haven't seen it yet, I won't pass full judgement.
Posted: Thu, 31st Aug 2006, 11:25pm

Post 178 of 196

Garrison

Force: 5404 | Joined: 9th Mar 2006 | Posts: 1530

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

Zea wrote:

I have been consistent the whole time, my friend. I believe that you are not the consistent one, as you took out "Schindler's List" of your supporting details, because that movie totally contradicts you there.
Firstly I didn't accuse of not being consistent. I was asking if you felt that those movies capitalized on the subject matter as you said...

Zea wrote:

and Hollywood should find a different way to make money, than capitalize a tragedy for entertainment.
So are you against those Nazi/Jew movies for the same reason?

That's a "yes" or a "no" by the way.
Posted: Thu, 31st Aug 2006, 11:38pm

Post 179 of 196

Zea

Force: 1773 | Joined: 20th Feb 2005 | Posts: 742

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Garrison wrote:

Zea wrote:

I have been consistent the whole time, my friend. I believe that you are not the consistent one, as you took out "Schindler's List" of your supporting details, because that movie totally contradicts you there.
Firstly I didn't accuse of not being consistent. I was asking if you felt that those movies capitalized on the subject matter as you said...

Zea wrote:

and Hollywood should find a different way to make money, than capitalize a tragedy for entertainment.
So are you against those Nazi/Jew movies for the same reason?

That's a "yes" or a "no" by the way.
No.

And to avoid forum rules, I'll finish what I have to say in this same post. What a movie is about, or what it capitalizes or contradicts, is the own movie's content, and that is perfectly fine.

I told you that I wasn't against those movies you listed, as they have valid "names." I don't see where you feel like you can ask that question, it's like calling me racist.

I have nothing against World Trade Center as a whole, just the name. I already told you I was glad they made it, and I'm glad people could watch it. My only point is that I feel that the name is a little inappropriate, and that is my own opinion, as you have yours.

It seems like you are now accusing me of opinions that I haven't even expressed, though this has been quite fun. Thanks. cool
Posted: Thu, 31st Aug 2006, 11:55pm

Post 180 of 196

Arktic

Force: 9977 | Joined: 10th Nov 2003 | Posts: 2785

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

My only point is that I feel that the name is a little inappropriate, and that is my own opinion, as you have yours.
Zea - what you say would make sense, if you'd only implied that you had an issue with the name of the film.

But... you also said "and Hollywood should find a different way to make money, than capitalize a tragedy for entertainment" - which is a different thing altogether to taking issue with the name of the film. Surely you can see that the statements "this film's name is wrong" and "hollywood shouldn't capitalise on a tragedy" are not the same?

Arktic.
Posted: Fri, 1st Sep 2006, 12:01am

Post 181 of 196

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Ah, alright, I see what you meant now.

Well finding a descriptive title is always a difficult thing and I expect "World Trade Center" is an appropriate title for these men, since it's about what they experienced within that World Trade Center - Seeing people associate very different things with words or names. Obviously it's different from what you associate with it, but that doesn't mean it's inappropriate (Which was what disturbed my in your original statement).

Plus, no doubt "World Trade Center" is also a name that attracts more viewers to the film then if they called it "two men". smile

An "artist," (is that what we still call most Hollywood directors these days?)
Heh, the old, tired and overused "BAD HOLLYWOOD IS ALL ABOUT MONEY" doesn't work with me, it's a simplistic bandwagon I refuse to jump on. Yes, I don't hesitate to call Hollywood people artists.
Every successful filmmaker has to find a good way between art and business, and Hollywood is a master at doing so, even if they are an easy goal for stating different. wink


Oh, and on a sidenote... Opinions can be wrong. So stating something as your opinion doesn't help your point nor make your point any more or less valid.
Posted: Fri, 1st Sep 2006, 12:10am

Post 182 of 196

Garrison

Force: 5404 | Joined: 9th Mar 2006 | Posts: 1530

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker MacOS User

Gold Member

So Zea, just to be clear, when you say that Hollywood should not capitalize on a tragedy, are you saying something like:

"They shouldn't use the WTC tragedy (in the title) as a net to grab viewers about these two heroic men trying to save lives?"

If you are saying that, then I can see what you mean. I took the two points as separate arguments. My apologies if I misunderstood.....

That's why I was trying to make my point... I took them separately.
Posted: Fri, 1st Sep 2006, 1:52am

Post 183 of 196

Zea

Force: 1773 | Joined: 20th Feb 2005 | Posts: 742

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Garrison wrote:



"They shouldn't use the WTC tragedy (in the title) as a net to grab viewers about these two heroic men trying to save lives?"
That is my point. And I am not saying that WTC is a capitalized version of 9/11, I'm saying Hollywood does that sometimes to make money on a film, rather than making it an art.

For example, just the title, "Collateral Damage," was released after Mcveigh called what he did "Collateral Damage," even though the Hollywood movie had nothing to do with the crime that he committed.

I hope they continue to make movies like World Trade Center, but a few minor altercations would make me accept them even more.
Posted: Fri, 1st Sep 2006, 10:55am

Post 184 of 196

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

I'm saying Hollywood does that sometimes to make money on a film, rather than making it an art.
These two don't contradict each other though. You can make something artful AND financially successful from a marketing point of view. I never understood why people try so hard to seperate these two things and act as if they couldn't stand next to each other.

Seeing filmmaking is an art millions of people need to make a living from, it would be irresponsible and absolutely stupid NOT to take necessary steps to make it financially successfull too and "make money on it".
Posted: Fri, 1st Sep 2006, 11:58am

Post 185 of 196

Zea

Force: 1773 | Joined: 20th Feb 2005 | Posts: 742

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

Yes, but there is a difference of:

Making a movie only for it's revenue.

And.

Making a movie for artful purposes, and it possibly being successful.
Posted: Fri, 1st Sep 2006, 12:24pm

Post 186 of 196

Nutbar

Force: 530 | Joined: 13th Aug 2006 | Posts: 373

CompositeLab Pro User EffectsLab Pro User Windows User

Gold Member

Arktic wrote:


Are you also opposed to commercial news and doccumentary TV chanels covering events such as these? Surely they are just out to make money too? The bosses at CNN didn't cover 9/11 out of the good of their hearts. They show news, so people watch, so they can make money. But people don't complain about news or documentaries about the event....
You can't really compare documentaries and films in the same way, they are both designed to do different things, documentaries are designed to be infomative and mildly educational whereas films are designed purely for entertainment.

I also disagree that filmmaking is about expressing ones feelings and opinions, while in some cases it is, in hollywood it isnt, hollywood is about making money, alot of money, and films are made with that in mind, what would make money. The amount of films i've seen that are "based on real events" which usually consist of about 5 minutes of real events and the rest is made up because it sells better than the real story.

Im going to reserve judgement at this point, and make my mind up when i can see how tasteful they do it.
Posted: Fri, 1st Sep 2006, 12:42pm

Post 187 of 196

Simon K Jones

Force: 27955 | Joined: 1st Jan 2002 | Posts: 11683

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 5 Pro User MuzzlePlug User PowerPlug User PhotoKey 3 Plug-in User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User

FXhome Team Member

Nutbar wrote:

whereas films are designed purely for entertainment.
That's a gross generalisation that clearly isn't true. Fiction can be every bit as informative and educational as a factual documentary.

I also disagree that filmmaking is about expressing ones feelings and opinions, while in some cases it is
Make your mind up. smile

in hollywood it isnt, hollywood is about making money, alot of money, and films are made with that in mind, what would make money.
Again, a gross generalisation. Hundreds of people are involved in the making of a movie. Are you talking about the studio executives, the producers, the directors, the actors? Who are you referring to exactly? Sure, the studio execs' primary function is to make money.

Are you seriously trying to argue that films such as (to pick two obvious and mainstream examples - but this list could be endless if I had the time) Spielberg's Munich and Schindler's List were made purely for profit? And that there's none of Spielberg's feelings or opinions in them?

That's clearly a fallacy.

The amount of films i've seen that are "based on real events" which usually consist of about 5 minutes of real events and the rest is made up because it sells better than the real story.
It's not necessarily because it sells better. It could also be because it works better as a narrative. Unaltered real life very rarely works successfully as a narrative - it's too fractured and random.

Just because there are a lot of crappy 'based on real events' TV movies out there, and just because Hollywood does produce a lot of silly, bombastic, blockbuster content doesn't mean you can tar the entire industry and every single filmmaker that works within that system with the same brush.
Posted: Fri, 1st Sep 2006, 1:57pm

Post 188 of 196

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Making a movie only for it's revenue.
Yes, and I'd like to ever see ONE SINGLE FILM which was mady ONLY for it's revenue.

You're thinking in faaaaaar too simple ways there Zea. You seem to forget that a film is a sum of different arts, created and crafted by hundreds, even thousands of people. And you throw them all in the same bag because MAYBE a producer cares mostly about him getting his money back?

hollywood it isnt, hollywood is about making money, alot of money, and films are made with that in mind, what would make money.
This comparison might be strong, but this shares the same logic as making sweeping statements about minorities or specific nationaities. It's an overgeneralisation which has NO actual ground to stand on.
Posted: Fri, 1st Sep 2006, 2:46pm

Post 189 of 196

Xcession

Force: 42802 | Joined: 21st Mar 2001 | Posts: 1964

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 3 Pro User Windows User

SuperUser

If you go high enough up the chain of command, someone, somewhere, will always be rubbing their hands going "BU-HAHAHAAAAA, thats more money for meeeee!!!" - but thats the same with every film whether its "artistic" or "for the money".

At roughly the same level, there are also bound to be the people with vito power. They couldn't care less about any film, whether its "artistic" or "for the money". They just look at the proposal, assign it a dollar value, then either fund it or don't based on the projected ROI.

This practice is the foundation of capitalism and most of western society. It is not specific to any industry. Business is about making money: every business, therefore, has someone who will be looking - at least in part, if not completely - at the money.

This entire discussion is moot.
Posted: Fri, 1st Sep 2006, 3:02pm

Post 190 of 196

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Of course, yeah. And in every film, beneath them are a number of people who do it for an ideal, not for the money.


Besides, what do you think finances all the "art-movies" that are not financially successful? Yes, Blockbusters...
If Blockbusters suddenly don't make money either, the "Art-movies" would suffer first, since suddenly they'd run out of money. Because yes, they cost money too... and someone has to pay for that.
Posted: Fri, 1st Sep 2006, 4:17pm

Post 191 of 196

Zea

Force: 1773 | Joined: 20th Feb 2005 | Posts: 742

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

I'm not sure who those quotes were from attacking Hollywood, that kinda confused me, because they weren't mine and they weren't labeled correctly.

Any business is in business for one reason, and that is to make money. Hollywood is Hollywood because they want to make money. There isn't a special person that feels bad because a B-Rated movie which isn't artful makes money, they are happy because it actually made money.

It is up to the team, director, and producer to make an artful film, and if that artful film becomes successful, that is wonderful.

Truthfully, I'm not sure WTC was. The premises seemed like it was an artful movie, but then giving it the name, "World Trade Center" kind of throws it off because of reasons listed in previous posts.
Posted: Fri, 1st Sep 2006, 4:27pm

Post 192 of 196

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

So you're dismissing the work of the director Oliver Stone, the composer Craid Armstrong, Editor David Brenner and cinematographer McGarvey - just to name a few of the artists working on it - because you dislike the title???



Never said the quotes were all yours.

It is up to the team, director, and producer to make an artful film, and if that artful film becomes successful, that is wonderful.
It's also a PART of filmmaking to ensure your film is successful, so more artists are allowed to express their art, because this utterly costs money.

You simply can't devide an "artful" movie from a "moneymaker", if there's even these two kind of movies, which I absolutely don't believe in. Besides, even if there was, do you really know enough about every films production, the motivations of everyone involved to even judge it in such a way? I'd seriously doubt you do.
Posted: Fri, 1st Sep 2006, 4:46pm

Post 193 of 196

Zea

Force: 1773 | Joined: 20th Feb 2005 | Posts: 742

EffectsLab Lite User Windows User MacOS User

Gold Member

I also seriously doubt that you have a clue what is going on here, and what I'm trying to say. Others in this post have already understood where I'm coming from.

Sollthar wrote:

So you're dismissing the work of the director Oliver Stone, the composer Craid Armstrong, Editor David Brenner and cinematographer McGarvey - just to name a few of the artists working on it - because you dislike the title???
And it's not that I dislike the title, it's that I disagree with it on account of what the movie is relative of.

You keep making me look like I'm attacking good filmmakers and films just for the sake of the argument. I have not attacked ONE film as a whole in this whole debate. The only thing I have said is that sometimes a movie company uses a name to sell more tickets. I have also said that I disagree with the name "World Trade Center" because of what that film was actually about. I have also stated that Hollywood is a business, and just like every other business it is there to make money.


Anything else that you bring up is coming from you. Now stop turning this into a flame war, as it used to be an entertaining, intelligent debate.
Posted: Fri, 1st Sep 2006, 4:58pm

Post 194 of 196

Sollthar

Force: 13360 | Joined: 30th Oct 2001 | Posts: 6094

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

I'm not turning this into a flamewar, I just really really don't get where you're coming from - as you have correctly stated. (Plus some of points aren't aimed at you or your posts, as you have also correctly pointed out beforehand.)

I'm merely asking questions to get answers which will hopefully help me to understand your point, that is all.

The only thing I have said is that sometimes a movie company uses a name to sell more tickets.
Well, if that's all you said, then we entirely agree. I've said the same about 4 posts back. Surely, you chose a title for many reasons and one of them is definately a "what sells tickets" view.

I have also said that I disagree with the name "World Trade Center" because of what that film was actually about.
Yeah, this is the part where we look at this differently. "World Trade Center" isn't objectively about anything. You assert certain ideas, expectations and assumptions to that name - for you, WTC is about the death of thousands, for others, it's a bout the courage of few, for others, it's about the loss of someone specifc, for others, it's about love, for me for example, it's about my camera (cause yeah, 9/11 was the day someone stole my camera, which is the first thought that always comes up in my mind when I hear that date. So my "WTC" would maybe be about someone who watches a tragedy on TV, and then gets his camera stolen and has a hard time flying back to his own country because he was in spain at the time being and every airport went nuts).

There's no objetive rule as to what a film called "World Trade Center" HAS to be about, that's why I suggested, and still do, you simply "dislike" the title - which is in fact your right - but can't state an objective argument as that it IS an inappropriate title.


Maybe you're seeing what I tried to get across, maybe I'm still misunderstanding your point entirely. I don't know.

So I'm absolutely not turning this into a flamewar, I just debate and raise my points and counterpoints to what I believe to understand from posts, regardless of "someone's opinion". smile
Posted: Fri, 1st Sep 2006, 5:49pm

Post 195 of 196

Arktic

Force: 9977 | Joined: 10th Nov 2003 | Posts: 2785

VisionLab User VideoWrap User PhotoKey 2 Pro User FXhome Movie Maker FXpreset Maker Windows User MacOS User

SuperUser

Nutbar wrote:


You can't really compare documentaries and films in the same way, they are both designed to do different things, documentaries are designed to be infomative and mildly educational whereas films are designed purely for entertainment.
I wish I lived in your world, where everything is perfectly black and white...

Regards,
Arktic.
Posted: Fri, 1st Sep 2006, 7:42pm

Post 196 of 196

Fill

Force: 1257 | Joined: 1st Jul 2005 | Posts: 1652

CompositeLab Lite User EffectsLab Lite User Windows User

Gold Member

Nutbar wrote:

I also disagree that filmmaking is about expressing ones feelings and opinions, while in some cases it is, in hollywood it isnt, hollywood is about making money, alot of money, and films are made with that in mind, what would make money.
Wrong.