Images of Destruction
September 03, 2005Like many of those reading this column, I have been glued to the television this week watching coverage of Hurricane Katrina and its aftermath. The images are stunning, like something out of a Hollywood blockbuster. This is reality but, in a way, it's difficult to grasp as reality, especially for those far away from Katrina's path. Similar comments were made after 9/11/2001, when people distant from New York had trouble connecting with the tragedy of the day because it seemed surreal.
But this column isn't really about Katrina; it's about Warner Brother's unintentionally bad timing. There are scenes of mass destruction in A Sound of Thunder that look eerily like some of the aerial photographs we have seen of the Gulf Coast disaster areas. When a city has been smashed, it doesn't matter if it's Chicago in 2055 or New Orleans in 2005. It's not a good connection to make.
Should Warner Brothers pull the movie? I don't know. But how many people are going to be in the mood for a science fiction disaster movie in the wake of such real-life devastation? After 9/11, the Arnold Schwarzenegger thriller Collateral Damage was pushed back by four months because of concerns that it came too close to reality.
I had my own uncomfortable post-9/11 experience. On September 14, while I was still at the Toronto Film Festival, I saw a screening of the movie Serendipity. The original cut, which was shown at the festival, showed the New York skyline, including the World Trade Center (the shot was subsequently removed for the theatrical and home video releases). That was not the way to start a lightweight romantic comedy. The movie didn't have anything to do with terrorism or the attacks, but that single shot - as innocent as it had originally been - impacted the viewer's mindset.
A Sound of Thunder has nothing to do with flooding or hurricanes, but helicopter shots of a ruined city will trigger a connection for anyone who has been watching the TV news coverage. This isn't Warner Brothers' fault, but it will make some viewers uncomfortable. (The film is probably too close to its distribution date for WB to pull the plug now. The prints have been shipped and the publicity machine is in full gear.)
There are times when we can view fictional disasters comfortably. This is not one of those times.
-
Plane Movies
Three of the movies I saw on planes during my marathon 44-hours in the air during the last week of May have now reached U.S. theaters. One of the benefits of flying Singapore Air is that each passenger has his/her own personal entertainment center, ...
-
Meet the Host
Last year, Chris Rock. This year, Jon Stewart. Next year, who knows? (I'm still hoping for John Cleese.) There's prestige in hosting the Oscars, that's for sure. But once you've done it once, what's the incentive to return? For a while, the ...
-
Turning the Page
At the risk of sounding like I have my priorities reversed, I'm going to look ahead before looking backward. By "ahead," I'm referring to early 2009 - specifically, where the website is going in the near future. Next month, ReelViews will turn 13 ...
Comments