On April 26, 2006 United 93, the first movie dealing with the events of September 11th was released to critical acclaim but limited public interest. We're almost a month away from the 5th anniversary of 9/11 and the question still remains. Is America ready for another movie dealing with the events of 9/11? This question will be answered today when Oliver Stone's "World Trade Center" is released nation wide. Initially, my interest was piqued when I heard Oliver Stone would be directing World Trade Center. At first blush it seemed like a volatile combination. Would Stone make a radical movie that would upset many? At the very least I expected him to tell a story in a way only Oliver Stone could tell. Based on reviews, Oliver didn't deliver the goods. I can't comment on the movie because I haven't seen it but let's take a look at the rather tepid reviews.
In an interesting review for Alternet, Anthony Kaufman writes:
"A celebration of authority, God, and president Bush, "World Trade Center" doesn't feel like an Oliver Stone movie. If conservatives were worried that Stone, the director of anti-establishment touchstones "Platoon," "Born on the Fourth of July," and "JFK," would turn this 9/11 movie into a platform for personal politics, he has proved them resoundingly wrong. Instead, Stone delivers the Bush base a jingoistic, All-American all-you-can-eat buffet on a silver platter."
Ouch. He ripped Oliver with that one, but don't shed a tear. If Kaufman's take is too radical for you, read what the Wall Street Journal had to say:
"World Trade Center shows us many things we already know, though with impressive flair, then plunges underground for an unconvincing drama based on a multitude of facts. It's upbeat, all right, but badly off kilter.
New York Magazine, Los Angeles Times, Washington Post and the San Francisco Chronicle weren't thrilled with the movie either. Check out all the reviews at metacritic.
Comments