Oliver Stone making a 9/11 movie...

[arto_j]

From comingsoon :

"Paramount Pictures will finance and distribute an untitled feature about the rescue of two Port Authority police officers from the rubble of the World Trade Center, says Variety. Oliver Stone will direct the film and Nicolas Cage will star.

Andrea Berloff, who recently signed to write Paramount's remake of Don't Look Now, has written the script. The Stone project is on a fast track with pre-production already started in New York.

The Stone-directed project will focus on a much smaller story from the fateful day. Cage will portray one of the two Port Authority police officers, Will Jimeno and John McLoughlin, who were among the many rescuers who risked their lives by rushing into the smoking buildings; the duo were among the very few who survived the fall of the towers, thanks to the frantic rescue efforts of other rescuers who pulled them from the rubble before their oxygen ran out."

How's everyone feel about this? Nutjob Stone being the director certainly should make some people a bit...iffy on this.

[HM Murdock]

Since all the trouble around this matter is not cleared up yet, I'd say this is a bad idea. It's only a few years since it happended and I think it's wrong to make money off a disaster like that. Sure the stories that came from the event were stuff of movies (the book The Last Man Down was unblievable) but compasion for those who were effected by this thing should stop anyone making a movie of it. If this does go ahead it's asking for trouble. It may ensite people involved to protest against it and even worse ensite the people behind the attacks to strike again. This movie shouldn't even be considered even if it is done with sensitivity. In 10 years, maybe but not know. The events in London say this mess isn't over yet so they should stay well clear from this for the time being, 1000's of people lost their lives on that day and nobody should make any money from that!

[Mr-Blonde]

Originally posted by HM Murdock
The events in London say this mess isn't over yet so they should stay well clear from this for the time being, 1000's of people lost their lives on that day and nobody should make any money from that!

Why not? That's basically what the Bush Administration is doing.

[LordSimen]

Somehow I have a feeling that Oliver Stone directing would be worse than someone like Michael Moore...


But hey, I'll give it a chance.

[outsyder]

Originally posted by Mr-Blonde
Why not? That's basically what the Bush Administration is doing.


No, that's what Michael Moore is doing.



As for this movie, I'm not gettin a good feeling. With Stone at the helm, I expect it to be completely bullshit ridden. The man completely tore up the JFK assassination.

[Mr-Blonde]

Bush engineers a war on false pretenses and makes tons o money for his Halliburton buddies and he isn't profiting from it?

[Joshmo]

No..what Michael Moore is doing is trying to wake up America as to what is going on. God Bless him.. a true Patriot.

[LegionX]

I think it could be a very interesting project if it is well written. The screenplay better be on point otherwise he could destroy the entire story of what was 9/11 and the true bravery of those poilce officers and fire department workers. I hope he doesnt mess this up.

[the humble narrator]

I think if they were going to do a movie now, Oliver Stone is the right choice. He happens to be one of my favorite directors, if not the favorite, and he has a great record. All that matters is the script, and as political as Oliver Stone is, I thiink he'll be very careful with the subject.

I think the backdrop is 9/11 and they don't even try to show who did or how. It should be people doing extrodinary things when they aren't aware what the fuck is going on. Or maybe the film could follow the Nic Cage character and his day. I'm reminded of the tagline for Elephant: An ordinary high school day. Except that it's not. Just subsitute the high school part.

And if they make it, do you guys think people would go see it? How the fuck would they market it even? Lots of questions...

In general I think it's a bad idea, but if they are going ahead with it, they should go with a director who knows what he is doing. But I also read that this is not the only project, that there are numerous underway.

[Dead Halloween]

This has "Bad Idea" writen all over it.

[Tayzlor]

There's no way Stone can make this movie without sentimentalizing the whole affair. If he's to do this movie, 9/11 should only be the backdrop for characters. But since he's dealing with the actual rescuers, what is he going to do show the horrors of 9/11 or how ordinary men became heroes? We know this.

[GoldenGhost]

...Plus, something tells me there will be a stall on the production with the terrorist attacks over here in London. I can't particulary say Stone is a good/bad choice for a 9/11 subject because I've never seen any of his work concerning war or political themes. But, Im still not sure if the world is ready for a 9/11 film.

[thedudeman69]

It is way too early to make such a movie about a travesty to our great nation. I am entirely against this film and will not see it because Olver Stone can take some horrible event and make a mockery of it.

[APzombie]

This sounds awful. Oliver Stone is the absolute worse choice for project dealing with the terrorist attacks. The project should not even happen to begin with.

[outsyder]

Originally posted by Mr-Blonde
Bush engineers a war on false pretenses and makes tons o money for his Halliburton buddies and he isn't profiting from it?


If anything, the war has had a detrimental effect on Bush, as his public approval has taken a dive. And last time I checked, he was still making the same amount of cash every year.

Moore however, has played to the popular theories and opinions of left wing America to make millions at the box office, with the truth being merely convenient should it appear.

[thedudeman69]

Originally posted by outsyder
If anything, the war has had a detrimental effect on Bush, as his public approval has taken a dive. And last time I checked, he was still making the same amount of cash every year.

Moore however, has played to the popular theories and opinions of left wing America to make millions at the box office, with the truth being merely convenient should it appear.

Micheal Moore basically crams alot of half assed bullshit into his so called "documentaries" and ends up turning out like Stone with his alterations of historical figures.

[Mr-Blonde]

Originally posted by outsyder
If anything, the war has had a detrimental effect on Bush, as his public approval has taken a dive. And last time I checked, he was still making the same amount of cash every year.

I suppose next you'll tell me that Bush has recieved no monies from them for his campaign financing either.

And even if the call to war only actually stemmed from faulty intelligence, Bush should still be brought up on charges.

[PogueMC]

This movie is ill timed. The brutal terrorist attacks of September 11 are still too near and even then now the bastards have struck London, our closest ally in the war on terror. With Stone behind the wheel and Cage in the movie it is hard to make a call on how this will turn out. This is due to both making movies that have been ignorant of blatant facts or a really crappy southern accent, and at the same time have made movies that I have really enjoyed. I reserve judgement on this film until more comes out.


Now to address anyone calling Michael Moore a patriot! Mr Moore let his film be toted as a documentary by the left for way too long and then just recently stated that it was more of an op ed than a documentary. Not to add in that the man has been proliferating for the terrorsts passing out statements saying there is no terrorist threat, and many others that I will not drudge up here. Mr. Moore belongs in France where they still will not side with hunting down the bastards that struck London this week!

As for the war on terror being about making money or based on a lie.

1 every elected Democrat in office from Hillary Clinton, Senator Byrd, Senator Kennedy, and Senator Kerry to the overstated pompous William Jefferson Clinton and his shadow Al Gore have stated that Iraq was harboring terrorst, in possesion of WMD, and a threat to our national security at one time or another. So if Bush is lying so are all of them.

2 If it is indeed about making money than I suggest you travel to Afghanistan or Iraq and look at the people living free. Women holding a protest in a land they were at one time no more than slaves or possesions. A protest that would have had them all killed and slain by men and their fellows would have cheered them for keeping the women under control. You look at the images of thousands of Iraqis, Saddam's own people that were either subjects of testing chemical weapons, or slaughtered for political dissent and thrown into mass graves. Our soldiers are not hated in the streets of these cities the people want freedom and they will have it! LET FREEDOM RING!!!!

3 Never forget 9/11! I was able to travel to NYC on business recently and while there went to ground zero and looked into what is left of the mighty WTC. Standing at street level and realizing the ground I was standing on was the same people where slamming into as they lept to escape the only alternative of burning alive, and seeing the buildings still damaged to this day nearly made me sick from the grief I felt for those directly affected by this most violent act of terrorism ever on American soil. Never forget those images of the towers afire and crashing to the ground killing the innocent and rescue workers performing triage in make shift facilities in the plaza below! Never, never, NEVER, NEVER forget!

For those unaffected by 9/11 or those who think the terrorist attacks in London were brought about by our going to war in the middle east let me remind you that before we went to war not only did 9/11 happen but so did the following, the USS Cole, US Embassy's in two foreign nations, and two other bombings on the World Trade Center in previous years. And even more than those could be listed here and more than triple that number on English soil. All before the War on Terror ever started. And my God, Allah, Muhammed, Jahova, Rev Moonie, or whoever your choose to pray to have mercy on your soul.

Sorry for being a bit long winded on this and if my stating the truth on this from the standpoint of an independant (Yes I have voted for both Democrats and Republicans in elections) is unfitting for this board so is blustering comments like those above.

Again I await the movie to make judgement on this film.

One man's opinion based on much reading and truth seeking,

Pogue

[William Munny]

Pogue, while I don't necessarily agree with you, I'd like to congratulate you on a strong post.

As for me, I can't be happier to see Stone at the helm of this film. What people don't understand about Stone is that his message is intentionally a thousand times stronger than his opinion. With "JFK", his goal was not to riddle the minds of audiences with his personal conspiracy theories. His goal was to remind citizens and government officials of their duty to seek out the truth at all costs. Given the implementation of the JFK Assassination Records Collection Act in 1992 (as a result of the film), it is clear that Stone was successful.

I have no doubt in my mind that Stone will use his new film as an opportunity to honor those brave men and women who were in the eye of the storm on September 11. What I absolutely hope Stone will do with this project is remind America of how Bush continually exploits the tragedy of 9/11 to gain public support for his unjusitified war in Iraq.

Americans will never, ever forget 9/11. What we desprately need (and what I know Stone will deliver) is a hard slap in the face for allowing our collective emotions to get in the way of our better judgement as a nation.

The phrase, ". . . slaughtered for political dissent and thrown into mass graves . . ." can be applied to plenty of troubled situations worldwide, namely in Darfur and other parts of Africa. The only reason the Bush adminstration does not act in these areas is because they do not see the opportunity to make money from such liberation on a mass scale.

The conflict in Iraq is little more than a war of profit which continues to expend the lives of our courageous soldiers so that the elite can stuff their bloodied pocketbooks. The only reason we, as a nation, allow this war to rage on is because we have been blindsided by the fear which Bush has deliberately mined from 9/11.

I hope that Mr. Stone touches on these issues in his film and I wish him the very best of luck with his effort.

[The Heart Collector]

Originally posted by outsyder
If anything, the war has had a detrimental effect on Bush, as his public approval has taken a dive. And last time I checked, he was still making the same amount of cash every year.

Moore however, has played to the popular theories and opinions of left wing America to make millions at the box office, with the truth being merely convenient should it appear.

Yes, because there is only one source out of which George W. gets his money.

[James Logan]

Well, I personally don't think a movie about 9/11 should be made, and definitely not this early.

But if they are gonna make one, at least it's a good thing it's Oliver Stone directing it -- like the man or not, at least he's got something to say.

[Avid_Fan]

Originally posted by Dead Halloween
This has "Bad Idea" writen all over it.

[KcMsterpce]

Oliver Stone?

This will be one of the most one-sided, ultra-personal, overly-symbolic mess of a movies in the history of Stone's career, and that's saying a hell of a lot.

Fuck this shit. I don't even care about the fact that 9/11 was only four years ago. What gets to me is that Stone will use it as a springboard to further preach about his views, and the drama and storytelling of the horrific event will be a backdrop to his own personal agenda. That's what pisses me off.

[William Munny]

Originally posted by KcMsterpce
Oliver Stone?
What gets to me is that Stone will use it as a springboard to further preach about his views, and the drama and storytelling of the horrific event will be a backdrop to his own personal agenda. That's what pisses me off.

Would you rather the film be jingoistic, formulaic, and routine (in the Hollywood sense), as it would be in the hands of anyone else?

With Stone behind the wheel, we can all take comfort in knowing that the film will serve a historical purpose rather than serving as a guilty voyeuristic pleasure.

[Adornado]

Oliver Stone is a great choice to direct such a controversial project, IMO. And this is not the first film about 9/11 so I don't see why everyone is making such a fuss...does anyone remember The Guys? It came out in 2002 and starred Sigourney Weaver. Also, there's been a bunch of documentaries like 9/11: The Filmmakers' Commemorative Edition, The 11th of September: Bill Moyers In Conversation and America 911: We Will Never Forget. I don't think this is illtimed because let's face it; there's always going to be terrorist attacks somewhere in the world. If we delayed movies everytime something bad happened in the world then we wouldn't be seeing very many movies, would we? Stone has made a career in directing politically charged films...I think we can trust him with this sensitive material.

[Mr.Majestyk]

I seemed to like what Stone did with Platoon and Born on the 4th of July. I think he could make a great 911 movie.


Also, I think the Bush administration has always misled the public. He played on people's emotions and fears after 911 to bring the US into an unnecessary war in Iraq. He was re-elected by invoking 911. Just last week he delivered a speech to try and boost his support by invoking 911. Talk about cashing in on tragedy.

Who here thinks Bush would have been re-elected if there had never been a terrorist attack?

Keep in mind that the economy was dropping like a stone and that his approval rating is in the toilet prior to 911.

[Mr-Blonde]

Originally posted by Mr.Majestyk
IKeep in mind that the economy was dropping like a stone and that his approval rating is in the toilet prior to 911.

And it's in the toilet right now!

I just wish that peopel would wake up to the fact that the Bush administration by inventing reasons to go to war in Iraq has committed a criminal act.

Read the Downing Street Memo for fuck's sake:

http://www.downingstreetmemo.com/

[outsyder]

The economy was dropping before he ever came into office.


And since 1998, documented in the Iraqi Liberation Act, part of US foreign policy was to remove Saddam Hussein as dictator of Iraq. So either way, the goal of the US was made clear long ago.

[Tayzlor]

Originally posted by William Munny

With Stone behind the wheel, we can all take comfort in knowing that the film will serve a historical purpose rather than serving as a guilty voyeuristic pleasure.

That's the sentence.

I'd rather Stone create something ambitious (even if bad) than have some ode to America. Which, in someone else's hands would probably come through even if they tried to avoid.

[PsycoPat]

Wake me when the inevitable, compltely tasteless and insesitive big budget Michael Bay production of "9/11" is made complete with CGI planes crashing into the Towers and an elaborate "let's roll" fight scene with maudlin patriotic propaganda laced throughout...

I give it about another decade...

My guess is THE 9/11 movie will come out September 11th 2015...

[Mr-Blonde]

Originally posted by outsyder
The economy was dropping before he ever came into office.


And since 1998, documented in the Iraqi Liberation Act, part of US foreign policy was to remove Saddam Hussein as dictator of Iraq. So either way, the goal of the US was made clear long ago.

So just cause the administration wants to go to war it is acceptable for them to drum up the war march by ineptly and falsely claiming that Iraq was a immediate and nuclear theat?!

Do you really think that they'd have had any substantial support to go to war if they hadn't lied about the "imminent threat" and the suppossed WMDs that Iraq was said to have possessed?

[outsyder]

Originally posted by Mr-Blonde
So just cause the administration wants to go to war it is acceptable for them to drum up the war march by ineptly and falsely claiming that Iraq was a immediate and nuclear theat?!

Do you really think that they'd have had any substantial support to go to war if they hadn't lied about the "imminent threat" and the suppossed WMDs that Iraq was said to have possessed?


They never said there was a "nuclear" threat.

And as for WMD's, there was heavy activity in an around certain Iraqi factories documented (by satellites) before the arrival of the UN inspection team. While at some of these factories, empty chemical weapon warheads were found among many forms of explosives and other very dangerous substances. Considering many chemical weapons have been used against the Kurds (such as nerve gas, mustard gas, and chlorine gas), there was no reason to suspect Saddam did not possess them. It's most likely he did until they were hidden or relocated.

[Mr-Blonde]

Originally posted by outsyder
They never said there was a "nuclear" threat.

And as for WMD's, there was heavy activity in an around certain Iraqi factories documented (by satellites) before the arrival of the UN inspection team. While at some of these factories, empty chemical weapon warheads were found among many forms of explosives and other very dangerous substances. Considering many chemical weapons have been used against the Kurds (such as nerve gas, mustard gas, and chlorine gas), there was no reason to suspect Saddam did not possess them. It's most likely he did until they were hidden or relocated.

Actually the Bush administration did make allegations that Saddam was busy with a nuclear program and that was just one way that they played on America's fears.

As for them managing to dispose of all traces of WMDs I don't believe it for a minute. It's highly improbable that nothing would be found if any ever existed.

And many other evil-doing countries have chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons but we don't lift a finger against them do we? This war is a fucking sham!

[outsyder]

Originally posted by Mr-Blonde
Actually the Bush administration did make allegations that Saddam was busy with a nuclear program and that was just one way that they played on America's fears.

As for them managing to dispose of all traces of WMDs I don't believe it for a minute. It's highly improbable that nothing would be found if any ever existed.

And many other evil-doing countries have chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons but we don't lift a finger against them do we? This war is a fucking sham!

http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/06/25/sprj.irq.centrifuge/

How's that for 'playing'?

They obviously did not have nuclear weapons (which would not constitute an immediate nuclear threat), but it looks as though Iraq had full intention of restarting he program later.

What I don't believe for a minute is that Iraq would allow UN inspectors to walk wherever they pleased and without armed escort. To this day, there are still thousands upon thousands of tons of chemical agents unaccounted for. Gaps in accounting irregular numbers point to the fact that many hazardous materials were in production during the UN sanctions against such things.

[HM Murdock]

One thing I'm a little worried about is that the people who were behind these attacks were to see this movie as a sort of goad. The attackers may think we are becoming complacent with what is going on and in their warped minds, they don't want that. They want the western world scared of them and this movie may insight another attack. Sure we need to strike back against those assholes but exploiting a tradigy just to make some money is not the way to do it. This project is a heartless money maker hiding behind a "informative" cover.

[PogueMC]

Originally posted by Mr-Blonde
Actually the Bush administration did make allegations that Saddam was busy with a nuclear program and that was just one way that they played on America's fears.

As for them managing to dispose of all traces of WMDs I don't believe it for a minute. It's highly improbable that nothing would be found if any ever existed.

And many other evil-doing countries have chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons but we don't lift a finger against them do we? This war is a fucking sham!

You must remember that Saddam did have chemical weapons and ordered the firing of such on his own precious Iraqi people and the invaders from Iran. Saddam had a history of using these weapons and not only for military defense but on his own people.

Over a decade of UN resolution after resolution and no one acted. If Saddam had turned over all chemical weapons and had the UN inspectors witness the distruction of such no invasion would have ever been made. The weapons did exist and to think that he honorably got rid of them by hiding such and wheeling away massive ammounts of material(whether it was against UN policy for him to have or not) as the inspectors approached it not the way to gain trust.

I am not saying that the US is completely blameless, but the was in Iraq I feel is. Further there are other countries openly harboring and endorsing terrorists around the globe that should also be "dealt" with. Does that mean invade and stop on everyone's parade, I pray not. Several people I am close to and even one family member all have gone or are going to Iraq for this fight, and each of them say it is what must be done.

For a moment let us turn to the nation of France and look at how they had backdoored every nation in the UN with the oil for food program from which the proceeds being paid to Iraq lines Saddam's government's pockets and was used to purchase military weapons and not the food it was intended. France even knowing this it's own president was implicated as being involved. No wonder they were against the war. Payoffs for cheaper oil... Now you can't tell me that French government officials had the worlds best interest at heart.



However back to the movie. I still think that if it is a documentary that is one thing. I think the news reports of that day should be put on a channel on cable/satellite for everyone to see not 24/7 as most would become desensitized, but people do need a reminder. Again it is one man making a movie how it turns out will have to wait to be seen.

[NuclearMisfit]

I think its a tacky idea. Just think about how many people lost their family and friends that day. I dont think anyone wants to relive that

[HM Murdock]

Originally posted by NuclearMisfit
I dont think anyone wants to relive that

Oliver "Heart of" Stone seems to want to, not for the honor of the people who were involved but for $,$ and more $ with some £ and ¥ thrown in. If alot of the movie's the proceeds went to a charity based on the 9/11 attacks then that would be a good move but I doubt that will happen.

[ukcats]

Actually, what I read in variety said that some of the profits will go to charity. People need to get facts straight before getting all upset. This movie is also not going to be a re-make of what happened on that day - it is going to be the story of 2 people during that day. It will be more of a story of human triumph ( for surviving)- not the devestation of the event itself.

[AJAX]

Stone is responsible for the biggest bombing on U.S. soil since 9/11/01 with Alexander.

Sorry I couldn't resist, and besides someone had to lighten the mood in here.

[wheresdonnie?]

I believe that a good film could be made of the 9/11 events as long as the director is someone without a political agenda. Stone is not the right person to make this movie, although I do like many of his films.

[SkyNet]

i personally do not think this is ahorrible idea. For 1 huge reason 9and a few smaller ones)

That reason being... if big wigs can pay out half a million dollars to that fucking nut job Wilbanks m(runaway Bride bitch) so that we can hear the full story.. than why do these 2 guys not get to have their fucking truly worth while and heroic story told???? We pay so much $ to watch stories based on stupid movie of the week stories.. but when genuine heroes come along, we say the events surrounding their heroisms is too fresh to be made. These people deserve their stories told.

And even though Alexander tanked at the box office (havnt seen it yet) Oliver Stone is still one kick ass fucking filmmaker!

I just hopes this doesnt step on the toes of a 9/11 film i have had thought up and down on paper for a very long time now (to be made of course when i finally get into the business... written to tell a story, and nothing else.. no exploitation i guarantee)

[mrsfuz]

Well, judging from the press release, this doesn't seem like its going to be a film about 9/11 but moreso within the 9/11 context.

i don't forsee there being any footage of the towers falling or anything like that.